FY 2001 Innovative proposal 22034
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 |
---|---|
22034 Narrative | Narrative |
Section 1. Administrative
Proposal title | Influence of marine-derived nutrients on juvenile salmonid production: a comparison of two nutrient enhancement techniques |
Proposal ID | 22034 |
Organization | U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) |
Proposal contact person or principal investigator | |
Name | Matthew G. Mesa |
Mailing address | Columbia River Research Laboratory 5501A Cook-Underwood Rd. Cook, WA 98605 |
Phone / email | 5095382299 / [email protected] |
Manager authorizing this project | |
Review cycle | FY 2001 Innovative |
Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / Systemwide |
Short description | Evaluate the influence and efficacy of marine-derived nutrient influx via either adult salmonid carcass decomposition or fertilizer media on the productivity of selected Columbia River basin tributaries and stream-rearing salmonids. |
Target species | Various species of Salmonids, including but not limited to, spring chinook salmon, coho salmon, and steelhead. Also Pacific lamprey. |
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 |
---|
Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase
Task-based budget
Objective | Task | Duration in FYs | Estimated 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 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 2001 cost |
---|---|---|
Personnel | FTE: GS-13@2080 h; GS-9@2080 h; GS-5@6864 h | $113,104 |
Fringe | @ 30% of personnel for perms and terms; @ 8% for temps | $23,054 |
Supplies | Electrofishers, field supplies, computer, PIT-tag detectors, laboratory supplies | $16,150 |
Travel | Vehicle rentals (2), vehicle mileage, and travel to meetings | $9,280 |
Indirect | $57,482 | |
PIT tags | 3000 | $7,200 |
Subcontractor | # of tags: Stable isotope analysis | $10,000 |
$236,270 |
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2001 cost | $236,270 |
Total FY 2001 budget request | $236,270 |
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:
This proposal is adequate, but ranks lower than the other nutrient supplementation proposals because it is not fully developed to include a complete study design with selection of study sites. Some aspects of the proposed work repeat efforts of elsewhere and thus may not be required, or may require less effort. The proposal could be improved towards development of a useful project that should commence with pilot experiments and a staircase approach.Comment:
See general nutrient supplementation comments in report.Comment:
See general nutrient supplementation comments in report.