FY 2000 proposal 20105
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Develop New Feeds for Fish Used in Recovery and Restoration Efforts |
| Proposal ID | 20105 |
| Organization | Abernathy Salmon Culture Technology Center (USFWS/SCTC) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Ann Gannam |
| Mailing address | 1440 Abernathy Creek Rd. Longview, WA 98632 |
| Phone / email | 3604256072 / Ann_Gannam@mail.fws.gov |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Formulate new diets to improve the health and condition of propagated salmonids |
| Target species | Spring chinook, coho, steelhead |
Project location
| Latitude | Longitude | Description |
|---|
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)
Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:
| Reviewing agency | Action # | BiOp Agency | Description |
|---|
Section 2. Past accomplishments
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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 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 2000 cost |
|---|
| Personnel |
WG-7 Extruder Operator/Fish Culturist |
$31,180 |
| Fringe |
|
$9,354 |
| Supplies |
Feed ingredients, chemicals, lab supplies for fish and feed analyses |
$32,500 |
| Operating |
Operating well, maintenance of equipment |
$4,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$22,427 |
| Other |
uniform allowance |
$300 |
| $99,761 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $99,761 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $99,761 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: Availability of fish needed for the studies may cause a time constraint
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Do not fund. There may be a need for this research but the proposal is technically inadequate and the programmatic value is not justified.
Comments:
The proposal does not make a convincing case for funding. It's not clear that this isn't a private sector activity. The proposal doesn't have sufficient technical detail. Objectives are poorly specified. According to the proposer, successful supplementation requires best nutrition. So present diets, by implication, are not best. Therefore nutritional research leading to open formula semi-moist diets is required. The applicability of this proposed research to the FWP is not made clear. Furthermore, it seems to reviewers that commercial manufacturers have produced a number of new dry diets recently that are well received. Semi-moist Biodiet is well accepted as a standard smolt diet and produces healthy fish. Overweight fish are probably more a product of over feeding than of diet composition. The proposer doesn't present evidence that presently available diets are inadequate, only that diet formulations are important. The proposer's own research on the subject is not summarized and has not been peer-reviewed and published. There's no evidence of knowledge of 9305600, in which nutritional physiologists have been working on diet formulations.
Objective/Method. Proposed are straight-ahead dietary requirement trials. But aren't mineral requirements, etc., long since known? Why is new a diet needed? Disease challenges are not described. No production scale evaluations are proposed? The project is vague and reviewers find it difficult to determine exactly how the research will be conducted. For example, the duration of feeding trials is not stated and disease challenge tests follow "standard protocols". The proposal provides no additional information.
While the qualifications of the proposer give the reviewers some confidence in the competency of the methods, the proposer lists no recent peer reviewed publications. Therefore it's difficult for reviewers to have full confidence in the quality of the proposed research.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Criteria all: Met? yes - Question how this project relates to ongoing NATURES. Potential overlap.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Proposal doesn't specify investigation into the precise diet of wild fish in order to determine a new diet for recovery populations.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];