FY 1999 proposal 198812005
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 |
---|---|
198812005 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Video Fish Monitoring Project |
Proposal ID | 198812005 |
Organization | Yakama Indian Nation (YIN) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Melvin Sampson |
Mailing address | P.O. Box 151 Toppenish, WA 98948 |
Phone / email | 5098656262 / yinfish@yakama.com |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 1999 |
Province / Subbasin | Lower Mid-Columbia / Yakima |
Short description | Monitor/evaluate (M/E) adult fish passage at Prosser and Roza dams in the Yakima basin. This project is one of several M/E componets of the Yakima/Klickitat Fisheries Project (YKFP). Key objectives are to enumerate and record life history type data for |
Target species |
Project location
Latitude | Longitude | Description |
---|
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 |
---|---|---|
8812001 | Core management/admin. Support services for all YIN’s YKFP tasks. | |
8811500 | Yakima Hatchery Construction | Final design/construction of needed acclimation facilities/wells for YFP. |
9701300 | Yakima Cle Elum Hatchery O & M | O & M costs for Cle Elum Supple. and Research Facilities. Core facility for the Yakima Fisheries Project. |
9506300 | Yakima/Klickitat M&E Program | Covers the diverse M&E needs for the target species which are essential for the success of the YKFP. |
8811500 | Fisheries Technician Field Activities | Provides essential technical support to fulfill the diverse needs of the YKFP (ie., M&E support, surveys, juvenile facilities operations, marking.). |
9706200 | Objectives & Strategies for Yakima | Represents the modeling process for iterative planning for species consistent with the RASP. |
963301 | Yakima River Fall Chinook Suppl- O&M | Essential for YKFP’s all stock initiative for experimental purposes for supplementation. |
9603302 | Yakima River Coho Suppl- O&M | Essential for YKFP’s all stock initiative for experimental purposes for supplementation. |
9506404 | Policy/Tech Involvement/Planning- YKFP | Supports the required co-manager process for the YKFP. |
9506406 | Monitoring of Supplementation Response Variables for YKFP | Essential for adequate M&E planning and technical participation as co-manager of the YKFP. |
9506402 | Upper Yakima Species Interaction Studies | Vital M&E function relative to behavior of multi-species within the Yakima Basin for the YKFP. Defines competitive/ecological interactions. |
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 1999 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 1999 cost | Subcontractor |
---|
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 1999 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 1999 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 1999 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | $89,250 | |
Fringe | $16,500 | |
Supplies | $19,400 | |
Operating | $2,000 | |
Capital | $18,000 | |
Travel | $1,000 | |
Indirect | $29,900 | |
Subcontractor | $0 | |
Other | $3,950 | |
$180,000 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 1999 cost | $180,000 |
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
Total FY 1999 budget request | $180,000 |
FY 1999 forecast from 1998 | $0 |
% change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: The inability to develop the fish image editor would require modification to how data is processed. Essentially we would continue to manually play-back the tapes as is currently done.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Incomplete: To help define the scientific validity of this technique add a reference to Hatch et al. (1994). The proposal also needs to draw on data and results from previous years' monitoring to use as justification for continuing and expanding. Especially refer to the successes and limitations in annual reports.
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Yes
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Incomplete: Since your annual reports are 4 years behind, you need to provide explanation as to how you will better meet objectives in a more timely manner.
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Incomplete: See no.3 above.
Comment:
ISRP Review (ISRP 1998-1)
[YKFP] Inadequate proposal, adequate purpose
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
This proposal provides good descriptions of objectives, tasks and project history. The need to use video could be better explained.