FY 2002 Innovative proposal 34037
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 |
|---|---|
| 34037 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Analysis of alternative hatchery and fishery configurations in the Columbia River Basin |
| Proposal ID | 34037 |
| Organization | S.P. Cramer and Associates (SPCA) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
| Name | Ray Beamesderfer |
| Mailing address | 39330 Proctor Blvd. Sandy, OR 97055 |
| Phone / email | 5038269858 / beamesderfer@spcramer.com |
| Manager authorizing this project | Same as above |
| Review cycle | FY 2002 Innovative |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Quantify the potential effects of changes in 1) hatchery number, location, species, production, and marking and 2) fishing methods, closures, or reconfiguration on hatchery salmon returns, harvest benefits, and wild population risks. |
| Target species | All salmon and steelhead species (chinook, coho, steelhead, chum, sockeye) |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|---|---|
| This system-wide project involves no field work. Office work will occur in the Portland area. |
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Sponsor-reported:
| RPA |
|---|
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Quantify potential effects of hatchery & fishery reconfiguration. | 1. Inventory hatchery & fishery data. | 3 (part time) | $16,800 | |
| 2. Organize into a simple model. | 3 (part time) | $16,800 | ||
| 3. Use model to evaluate alternatives | 3 (part time) | $16,800 | ||
| 4. Facilitate model distribution & use | 3 (part time) | $16,800 |
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: 400 hours (200 @ $99/hr, 200 @ $60/hr) | $63,600 |
| Fringe | (included in hourly rate) | $0 |
| Supplies | Misc. office & computer supplies | $2,000 |
| Travel | 8 trips @ $200 ea to obtain information | $1,600 |
| Indirect | (included in hourly rate) | $0 |
| Capital | none | $0 |
| NEPA | none | $0 |
| Subcontractor | none | $0 |
| $67,200 | ||
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2002 cost | $67,200 |
| Total FY 2002 budget request | $67,200 |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Not fundable, the proposal is technically inadequate, and innovation is not demonstrated. While this proposal suggests the work would be innovative, the proposal provides too little detail for reviewers to assess the value of the work or innovative nature. The proposal seems overly simplistic in its interpretation of what would be required to assess alternative hatchery and fishery configurations. The proposal makes no comment on issues of limiting factors to production, environmental trends and issues, estimation methods or modeling procedures, etc. The issue is substantially more complicated than portrayed: how would completeness of release records be evaluated, how will catch for release groups without tag allocations be estimated, how will optimality evaluated and against what standards? Activities proposed appear to be duplicative to some extent of activities already underway on an annual cycle at ODFW, WDFW, IDFG, PSMFC, PFMC, and PSC.It is hard to believe that the 400 hours of time proposed in this project will lead to important new insights on altering how hatcheries and fisheries are regulated in the Columbia River Basin. The current configuration of hatcheries in the Columbia River Basin and of fisheries on Columbia River salmon is a complex mosaic that has been set in concrete by a series of events over the past 147 years. Knowing how to configure hatchery production and fisheries in order to meet any set of arbitrary political and/or biological objectives is a relatively minor task compared to the social and political heavy lifting that has to occur before such objectives can be agreed upon, and the decisions taken to implement the agreements.
The PI has a known track record, as does the firm he works through, which inspires some confidence; however, as stated above, the proposal is technically inadequate.
Comment:
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological BenefitIndirect benefits. Harvest/Hatchery project to develop methods and analytical procedures to evaluate harvest/production scenarios.
Comments
Lacks details needed to evaluate/determine innovation.
Already ESA Required?
No
Biop?
No
Comment:
Statement of Potential Biological Benefit to ESUIndirect benefits. Harvest/Hatchery project to develop methods and analytical procedures to evaluate harvest/production scenarios.
Comments
Lacks details needed to evaluate/determine innovation.
Already ESA Req? No
Biop? No