FY 1999 proposal 199007800
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Evaluate Predator Control and Provide Technical Support For PATH |
| Proposal ID | 199007800 |
| Organization | U.S. Geological Survey, Columbia River Research Laboratory (USGS) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | James H. Petersen |
| Mailing address | 5501A Cook-Underwood Rd. Cook, WA 98605 |
| Phone / email | 5095382299 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 1999 |
| Province / Subbasin | Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Examine existing data to test the hypothesis that compensatory predation on juvenile salmon is not occurring in response to northern squawfish removals. Provide analyses and technical support for PATH . |
| Target species | |
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 |
|---|
| 9007700 |
Northern Squawfish Management Program |
Provide supporting analyses to cooperating agencies. |
| 9600600 |
PATH - Facilitation and Technical Assistance; ESSA Technologies |
Provide analyses, data, reports, etc. for the PATH group. Attend meetings and workshops. |
| 9601700 |
Technical Support for PATH; Don Chapman Consulting |
Provide assistance with fall chinook salmon analyses |
| 9600800 |
PATH - Participation by state and tribal agencies; ODFW |
Provide assistance with fall chinook salmon and steelhead analyses |
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 |
Primarily J. H. Petersen |
$29,030 |
| Fringe |
28% of personnel costs |
$8,124 |
| Supplies |
Software |
$500 |
| Travel |
Workshops, non-local meetings |
$2,000 |
| Indirect |
Agency rate: 38% of direct costs |
$15,069 |
| Subcontractor |
|
$0 |
| $54,723 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 1999 cost | $54,723 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 1999 budget request | $54,723 |
| 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: No constraints foreseeable.
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:
Low participation
Recommendation:
Adequate
Date:
Jun 18, 1998
Comment:
Methods are well described. This study may suggest the direction in which predator control proposal number 9007700 should proceed, whether or not that proposal is funded. ISRP reviewers note that the proposal has two components: predator control and PATH meeting attendance, and that while the former is rated in the proposal, the proposal for the latter activity is marginal. The reviewers would prefer that requests for funds to attend PATH meetings be justified in a separate proposal and in an overall umbrella proposal for all PATH components.