FY 2000 proposal 20012
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Develop New Technology for Telemetry and Remote Sensing of Fish Quality |
| Proposal ID | 20012 |
| Organization | Oregon Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit (OCFWRU) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Carl B. Schreck |
| Mailing address | Dept. of Fisheries and Wildlife, OSU; 104 Nash Hall Corvallis, OR 97331 |
| Phone / email | 5417371938 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Mainstem/Systemwide / Systemwide |
| Short description | Develop, verify, and field test a new telemetry system (named "FIELD-OP") which is triggered by fixed or mobile transmitter stations to download real-time or stored position, depth, temperature, and fish quality data to receivers. |
| Target species | Adult salmon, though applicable to all mid-sized or larger fish and wildlife species, with miniaturization potential for smolt-sized individuals. |
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 |
Includes a research asst., grad. Student, and fish-culturist; all part-time |
$39,660 |
| Fringe |
Rate ranges from 1-52%, depending on position |
$14,692 |
| Supplies |
Telemetry equipment |
$6,000 |
| Operating |
MicroProbes, sample analysis, fish holding, etc... |
$19,050 |
| Travel |
International and domestic |
$8,500 |
| Indirect |
43%, excluding tuition, equipment, and subcontract >$25,000, for Oregon State University |
$45,968 |
| Other |
Tuition |
$3,820 |
| Subcontractor |
Star Oddi for system development |
$186,000 |
| $323,690 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $323,690 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $323,690 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
Cost sharing
| Organization | Item or service provided | Amount | Cash or in-kind |
|---|
| Star Oddi |
Development Costs (includes other external sources; only FY2000 listed) |
$646,000 |
unknown |
| USGS-Biological Resources Division |
15% PI's time (only FY2000 listed) |
$30,000 |
unknown |
Other budget explanation
Schedule Constraints: ESA permitting may constrain validation and field work.
Reviews and recommendations
This information was not provided on the original proposals, but was generated during the review process.
Recommendation:
Fund (medium priority)
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Fund (medium priority)
Comments:
This innovative system may well have applications to high priority regional programs. At present, it is not directly linked to existing projects. There are many technical problems to be overcome before the worth of the system for examining meaningful research questions is established. The objectives present a clear progression. Tasks are clearly defined but details for monitoring and evaluating results are inadequate. Proposed statistical methods for the example research question are not appropriate. Some of the examples of research questions that are proposed for addressing with the new system ignore confounding factors. The quality of a scientific discipline is directly proportional to the quality of its measurements. Advances in science follow soon after new measurement techniques are developed, as the field of genetics has so often proved in the last ten years. Field studies of the impact of ambient conditions on fish are usually circumstantial. Reliance on statistical inference and speculation about the relations between ambient conditions and fish behavior and physiology can not substitute for direct measurement. The ability to measure ambient conditions with respect to individual fish would be a great breakthrough. The PI and his associates appear well qualified and suited to the tasks. But this is a developmental program, which seeks to make great strides in miniaturization and integration of functions. The exact outcome from the project cannot be predicted with certainty. The breakthrough would be to measure the relation of ambient conditions on stress. To raise the priority of the proposal, they need to address the sensitivity of the microprobe to detect meaningful differences in stress indicators under the conditions of the proposal. There should be a link of this project to survival studies.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Technical Criteria 1: Met? yes - Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? no - Dependent on the ability to develop the prototype. Application will be sample size limited.
Milestone Criteria 3: Met? yes -
Resource Criteria 4: Met? yes -
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
#1-research on this topic is not a priority. #2-basic research. #3-in-kind. #5-other alternatives were not adequate. #6-but possible in the future. New & innovative research.
Recommendation:
Rank 24
Date:
Oct 8, 1999
Comment:
Rank Comments:
This important proposal has the potential for systemwide significance and to improve existing monitoring projects for migration depth, water temperature, and fish quality.
Recommendation:
Rank 24
Date:
Oct 8, 1999
Comment:
This important proposal has the potential for systemwide significance and to improve existing monitoring projects for migration depth, water temperature, and fish quality.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 2-2-00 Council Meeting];