FY 2000 proposal 20098

Additional documents

TitleType
20098 Narrative Narrative
20098 Sponsor Response to the ISRP Response

Section 1. Administrative

Proposal titleDevelop and Evaluate Selective Commercial Fishing Gear: Tangle Nets
Proposal ID20098
OrganizationWashington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)
Proposal contact person or principal investigator
NameGeraldine Vander Haegen
Mailing address600 Capitol Way N Olympia, WA 98501-1091
Phone / email3609022793 / [email protected]
Manager authorizing this project
Review cycleFY 2000
Province / SubbasinLower Columbia / Columbia Lower
Short descriptionOperate no-take selective fisheries using a tangle net to exploit strong stocks of anadromous fish while allowing live-release of non-target fish on the Columbia River. Evaluate the post-release survival of all species caught, and compare to gill nets.
Target speciesSalmonids in the lower Columbia River.
Project location
LatitudeLongitudeDescription
Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives (RPAs)

Sponsor-reported:

RPA

Relevant RPAs based on NMFS/BPA review:

Reviewing agencyAction #BiOp AgencyDescription

Section 2. Past accomplishments

YearAccomplishment

Section 3. Relationships to other projects

Project IDTitleDescription

Section 4. Budget for Planning and Design phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Planning and Design phase

Section 5. Budget for Construction and Implementation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Construction and Implementation phase

Section 6. Budget for Operations and Maintenance phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Operations and Maintenance phase

Section 7. Budget for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Task-based budget
ObjectiveTaskDuration in FYsEstimated 2000 costSubcontractor
Outyear objectives-based budget
ObjectiveStarting FYEnding FYEstimated cost
Outyear budgets for Monitoring and Evaluation phase

Section 8. Estimated budget summary

Itemized budget
ItemNoteFY 2000 cost
Personnel 5 months + 1 week Biologist 4, 14 months Scientific Technician 3, 2 months Research Scientist 2 $70,647
Fringe For above $19,270
Supplies Tangle net, pump, hose, safety equipment, raingear, portable computer, tags, etc. $23,850
Travel Conferences, community meetings, field sites $13,000
Indirect WDFW Admin. support $26,863
Subcontractor Gill netter, consulting $31,043
$184,673
Total estimated budget
Total FY 2000 cost$184,673
Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds$0
Total FY 2000 budget request$184,673
FY 2000 forecast from 1999$0
% change from forecast0.0%
Cost sharing
OrganizationItem or service providedAmountCash or in-kind
WDFW 1 month Biologist 4 and benefits $5,033 unknown
WDFW 1 month Research Scientist 2 and benefits $5,909 unknown
WDFW Ground and aerial tracking of radiotags $10,000 unknown
WDFW Boat and motor rental for checking fish held 24 hours $3,500 unknown
Other budget explanation

Schedule Constraints: Fishing may be restricted by the Columbia River managers, and by the weather. Insufficient tags released for the 1999 brood may inhibit completion of objectives 2, 3, 4, and 5 in FY1999, and 2000 brood tagged in late FY2000 will be recovered in FY2001.


Reviews and recommendations

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

Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999

Comment:

Recommendation: Do not fund.

Comments: This is considered interesting and potentially worthwhile, but it is predicated on the limited experience of the use of tangle nets in British Columbia. There is inadequate discussion of the extent or results of that practice, however, and too many questions remain unanswered to justify the proposal for the benefit of the target fish species. The project would directly engage the commercial fishing industry and hence involve policy issues. The questions arise, then, to what extent that industry is willing to participate, what care commercial fishermen would pledge to assure safe catch and release, to what extent they may be expected to adhere to handling and release procedures for non-target fish, and whether benefits would extend beyond the commercial fisheries to the fishery resource itself.

Specific questions and comments that should also be addressed: include whether the Tribes and commercial fishing organizations, as principal beneficiaries, might (should) be expected to fund the proposal. Greater detail should be provided for some areas of the proposal. For example, (Objective No. 4), are fish that are held for 24 hours (for short-term survival estimates) and radio-tagged (for longer survival estimates) from different batches? How are fish to be tracked, and what are the potential pitfalls of this approach in assessing long-term survival? Will only tagged males be used to fertilize the eggs of tagged females (Task No. 5b)? If not, will that make a difference? Will the number of surviving eggs be related to the age or biomass of the female (Task No. 5c)?


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:


Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Consider as "Innovative Research" as a part of selective fisheries generally.
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999

Comment:

Technical Criteria 1: Met? Yes -

Programmatic Criteria 2: Met? Yes -

Milestone Criteria 3: Met? Yes - Need greater resolution for Objective 4.

Resource Criteria 4: Met? Yes -


Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000

Comment:

[Decision made in 9-22-99 Council Meeting];