Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Characterize & Quantify Residual Steelhead in Clearwater River, Idaho |
| Proposal ID | 9011 |
| Organization | U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Idaho Fishery Resource Office (USFWS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Patricia E. Bigelow |
| Mailing address | P.O. Box 18 Ahsahka, ID 83520 |
| Phone / email | 2084767242 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Lower Snake / Clearwater |
| Short description | Data characterizing unsuccessful smolts will enable us to modify hatchery practices, such as size at release, rearing strategy, or release site, to rear a more effective smolt and reduce negative interactions with wild steelhead produced in the subbasin. |
| Target species | Dworshak B-run summer 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 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 |
|
$34,300 |
| Fringe |
|
$4,400 |
| Supplies |
|
$1,000 |
| Operating |
|
$3,800 |
| Capital |
|
$40,000 |
| Tag |
|
$17,400 |
| Travel |
|
$500 |
| Indirect |
|
$31,900 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$0 |
| $133,300 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $133,300 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $133,300 |
| 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: Major milestones: Annual reports describing information obtained and data analysis will be distributed early each fiscal year following data collection. Annual reports will contain, at a minimum, emigration success, estimate of residual steelhead, and a summary of characteristics and capture time of residual steelhead. Final project report will include analysis of relations between residualism rate, persistence of residuals, hatchery practices, and in-river conditions. If possible, we will report changes in hatchery practices which can be used to reduce residualism of steelhead smolts.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Criteria 1: Technical Criteria - Yes
Criteria 2: Objectives Criteria - Yes
Criteria 3: Milestones Criteria - Yes
Criteria 4: Resources Criteria - Yes:
Recommendation:
Fund
Date:
May 13, 1998
Comment:
Recommendation:
Inadequate, perhaps technically sound if coordinated with proposal 9082 (below)
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
This proposal is generally well written; however, there is not adequate justification of the need for the work. The problem to be studied is not clearly described and the proposal does not show how the study addresses programmatic needs. The question to be addressed appears to be of interest but not of high importance. The proposal also does not show that the goals of the study are reachable with the study described. The proposal does not identify the treatments and controls for the experiment. How many "treatments" (differing in hatchery or release regimens) are there? Exactly what hatchery practices will be tested? How was it determined that the sampling effort would be sufficient? The experimental design is probably adequate if coordinated with proposal 9082, but the proposal does not detail its connection with proposal 9082, although the principal investigators have the same address, and the subjects seem related.