FY 2003 Columbia Cascade proposal 29052

Section 1. Administrative

Project location

Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Section 2. Past accomplishments

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget

Outyear objectives-based budget

Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget

Total estimated budget

Reason for change in estimated budget

N/A

Reason for change in scope

N/A

Cost sharing

Reviews and recommendations

This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.

Comment:

This excellent proposal describes the new technique in appropriate detail to be persuasive that it is something worth pursuing for both its technique development and for the pathogen characterization it would provide. The idea is so new, however, that it is difficult for the ISRP to evaluate its potential importance to fish or its practical implementation until results are seen. It is certainly innovative. The proposal goes through a rationale for regional relevance discussing the FWP (briefly), Subbasin Summaries (briefly), general BPA objectives, the Governor's plan, and specific sections and actions of the BiOp. There is a good attempt to integrate the proposed work with other pathogen projects (few) and other regional assessments. The proposal might have been improved by referencing the several BPA-funded fish-pathogen studies of the 1980s. There are good hypotheses, objectives, tasks, and a good timeline. The presentation noted that initial samples will be taken from hatchery outfalls where pathogens could be expected to be most easily detected. Methods are detailed. Expected benefits overall, and benefits to fish are explicitly described. Facilities appear to be excellent and suitable (since the sort of work has already been done for human pathogens). There is an excellent set of resumes for well-qualified staff. The project meets ISRP evaluation criteria.

This proposal would be acceptable for the innovative solicitation (cost limit is $200,000) as well as the province solicitation.

Comment:

Comment:

This proposal would use innovative DNA-based detection techniques to assay the waters of the upper middle Columbia River basin for presence and relative abundance of several fish pathogens. Synoptic information on the occurrence of pathogens in broad regions has been hampered by lack of rapid detection techniques (reliance on standard culture approaches). This project would develop for fish pathogens a recently developed DNA-based detection system that has already been demonstrated successfully for human pathogens. The technique would then be applied to detection of pathogens in water samples collected from representative sites throughout the upper middle basin. The analyses would be quantitative. They can process great amounts of water and have fine scale detection rate -- 0.002 organisms per liter. They would work with collaborators to quantify the significance of the presence of pathogens in the environment to actual infection of fish. A dose-response relationship would be evaluated to suggest whether the quantities of pathogens per unit of water are sufficient to be an infectious problem for fish. This technique would be useful for such pathogen testing efforts as those proposed in the Skaha Lake sockeye reintroduction program.

This excellent proposal describes the new technique in appropriate detail to be persuasive that it is something worth pursuing for both its technique development and for the pathogen characterization it would provide. The idea is so new, however, that it is difficult for the ISRP to evaluate its potential importance to fish or its practical implementation until results are seen. It is certainly innovative. The proposal goes through a rationale for regional relevance discussing the FWP (briefly), Subbasin Summaries (briefly), general BPA objectives, the Governor's plan, and specific sections and actions of the BiOp. There is a good attempt to integrate the proposed work with other pathogen projects (few) and other regional assessments. The proposal might have been improved by referencing the several BPA-funded fish-pathogen studies of the 1980s. There are good hypotheses, objectives, tasks, and a good timeline. The presentation noted that initial samples will be taken from hatchery outfalls where pathogens could be expected to be most easily detected. Methods are detailed. Expected benefits overall, and benefits to fish are explicitly described. Facilities appear to be excellent and suitable (since the sort of work has already been done for human pathogens). There is an excellent set of resumes for well-qualified staff. The project meets ISRP evaluation criteria.

Comment:

Comments
The methodology is well thought out, can be highly specific and extremely sensitive, and has been used for detection of human pathogens in environmental samples. The method has great advantages over standard microbiological culturing methods, and its multiplex nature is much more flexible than other sample concentration and PCR methods, allowing simultaneous detection of multiple pathogens in a single reaction. The strength of the proposed method and the data to be collected by it lies in the determination of the spatial and temporal relationships between the presence of a particular pathogen in different aquatic habitats, as outlined in Phase 3. Such information, when combined with future epizootilogical data on disease outbreaks in a specific location or habitat, will help in the determination as to whether certain habitat conditions, man-made or natural, contribute to infectious disease outbreaks that impact threatened and endangered salmon runs.

Already ESA Req? No

Biop? No

Comment:

Comment: