FY 2002 Innovative proposal 34021
Contents
Section 1. General administrative information
Section 2. Past accomplishments
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
Section 4. Budgets for planning/design phase
Section 5. Budgets for construction/implementation phase
Section 6. Budgets for operations/maintenance phase
Section 7. Budgets for monitoring/evaluation phase
Section 8. Budget summary
Reviews and Recommendations
Additional documents
| Title | Type |
|---|---|
| 34021 Narrative | Narrative |
| American Shad in the Columbia River | Narrative Attachment |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Using stable isotope ratios to explore positive or negative impacts of American shad on salmon and the aquatic community in the Columbia River |
| Proposal ID | 34021 |
| Organization | U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | James H. Petersen, Ph. D. |
| Mailing address | 5501A Cook-Underwood Road Cook, WA 98605 |
| Phone / email | 5095382299 / jim_petersen@usgs.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | James Seelye |
| Review cycle | FY 2002 Innovative |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Columbia / Columbia Lower |
| Short description | |
| Target species | Fall chinook salmon American shad Northern pikeminnow Smallmouth bass |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 46.1378 | -122.9528 | Lower Columbia River, below Bonneville Dam (estuary) |
| 45.7207 | -120.1855 | John Day Reservoir |
| 44.7707 | -117.1705 | Hanford Reach |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| NMFS | Action 190 | NMFS | The Action Agencies shall continue to fund studies that monitor survival, growth, and other early life history attributes of Snake River wild juvenile fall chinook. |
| BPA | FWS11(4) | USFWS | Based on research conducted above, and in coordination with the Service, implement any interim and long term measures found to be needed to provide suitable up- and downstream passage conditions for bull trout at FCRPS dams. If necessary to implement these measures, the action agencies may reinitiate consultation with the Service. |
Section 2. Past accomplishments
| Year | Accomplishment |
|---|
Section 3. Relationships to other projects
| Project ID | Title | Description |
|---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase
Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Objective 1. Energy sources for the top piscivores within the Columbia River have/have not been altered by invasion of American shad and the resulting high densities of juvenile American shad. | a. Task 1.1 Collect predators and associated prey | 2 | $20,000 | |
| b. Task 1.2 Pre-process samples | 1 | $5,000 | ||
| c. Task 1.3 Determine stable isotopes; 375 samples | 2 | $3,000 | Yes | |
| d. Tasks 1.4 Data analysis | 2 | $10,000 | ||
| e. Task 1.5 Modeling | 1 | $3,849 | ||
| f. Task 1.6 Report preparation | 5 | $5,000 | ||
| Objective 2. Juvenile salmonids, particularly fall chinook salmon, compete/do not compete directly or indirectly with abundant American shad in the Columbia River. | a. Task 2.1 Collect juvenile shad, salmon, etc. | 3 | $30,000 | |
| b. Task 2.2 Pre-process samples | 1 | $5,000 | ||
| c. Task 2.3 Determine stable isotopes; 900 samples | 2 | $7,200 | Yes | |
| d. Task 2.4 Data analysis | 2 | $10,000 | ||
| e. Task Modeling | 2 | $5,000 | ||
| f. Report preparation | 5 | $10,000 | ||
| Objective 3. Juvenile salmonids, particularly fall chinook salmon, use/do not use larval or early juvenile American shad as a significant source of energy in the lower Columbia River.. | a. Task 3.1 Collect samples | 3 | $30,000 | |
| b. Task 3.2 Pre-process samles | 1 | $5,000 | ||
| c. Task 3.3 Determine stable isotopes; 900 samples | 2 | $7,200 | Yes | |
| d. Task 3.4 Data analysis, modeling, writeup | 8 | $10,000 | ||
| e. Task 3.5 Modeling | 2 | $5,000 | ||
| d. Task 3.6 Report preparation | 5 | $10,000 |
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase
Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase
Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Task-based budget
| Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2002 cost | Subcontractor |
|---|
Outyear objectives-based budget
| Objective | Starting FY | Ending FY | Estimated cost |
|---|
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase
Section 8. Estimated budget summary
Itemized budget
| Item | Note | FY 2002 cost |
|---|---|---|
| Personnel | FTE: 2 total FTE | $75,307 |
| Fringe | 30% of salary | $21,551 |
| Supplies | Field and lab equipment | $4,500 |
| Travel | Per diem, meetings, vehicles, boats | $16,208 |
| Indirect | 37% on USGS costs; 16% for contracting | $46,283 |
| Subcontractor | University of California-Davis Stable Isotope Lab | $17,400 |
| $181,249 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $181,249 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $181,249 |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| U.S. Geological Survey | Boats, field equipment, laboratory equipment | $25,000 | in-kind |
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
This fourth ranked proposal addresses a long-standing question that has not attracted the attention it deserves. The proposal is very well written and the study seems scientifically sound in design. While the basic methods are not truly innovative, they would be applied in an innovative and potentially important manner, and thus meet the innovative criteria. The ISRP and ISAB have frequently commented on the ecological impact of invasives and, in particular, the abundance of American Shad. To successfully manage Columbia basin salmon in the long term, it is essential that the region secure basic physical-chemical data that advances the understanding of the trophic dynamics of the freshwater food web that contains juvenile salmon.This project has the potential to address several important questions concerning the level of concern managers should have about shad and the impact of shad on juvenile fall chinook salmon. The hypotheses are explicitly stated and highly relevant to the Fish and Wildlife Program. Whether the hypotheses are retained or rejected, the information gathered will be important to understanding sources of food and mortality in juvenile salmon in the Columbia River.
However, the uncertainty in the application of these methods seems to be that the isotope profile of the prey and predators is unknown; consequently, we do not know what the practical limitations of this technique will be. Given the short duration of these studies and that the proponents have met the requirements of the Innovative Solicitation, reviewers recommend investing in this proposal to collect the basic information and pilot analyses.
Comment:
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitPotential indirect benefits. Use stable isotope ratios to examine American shad and salmon interactions (predation and competition).
Comments
Well-conceived, well-written and worthy of funding. It will quantitatively address the role of the invasive American shad in Columbia River food webs, which is important because juvenile shad are highly abundant and energy rich fish that have received little attention because of the timing of their emergence and migration through the river. The methods reflect the current state of knowledge for use of stable isotope analysis in ecological studies. Objective 2 will probably be the most difficult to achieve, owing to the diversity of potential sources and signals in the estuarine food web, but it should nonetheless improve our understanding of shad and fall chinook feeding ecology in the Columbia River. In summary, this is a very important set of questions, and the project is an excellent approach by respected scientists that should go a long way toward answering these questions.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
Yes
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUPotential indirect benefits. Use stable isotope ratios to examine American shad and salmon interactions (predation and competition).
Comments
Well-conceived, well-written and worthy of funding. It will quantitatively address the role of the invasive American shad in Columbia River food webs, which is important because juvenile shad are highly abundant and energy rich fish that have received little attention because of the timing of their emergence and migration through the river. The methods reflect the current state of knowledge for use of stable isotope analysis in ecological studies. Objective 2 will probably be the most difficult to achieve, owing to the diversity of potential sources and signals in the estuarine food web, but it should nonetheless improve our understanding of shad and fall chinook feeding ecology in the Columbia River. In summary, this is a very important set of questions, and the project is an excellent approach by respected scientists that should go a long way toward answering these questions.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? Yes
Comment:
Recommend. Concur with ISRP comments.