FY 2000 proposal 199902400
Section 1. Administrative
| Proposal title | Bull Trout Population Assessment in the Columbia River Gorge, WA |
| Proposal ID | 199902400 |
| Organization | Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) |
| Proposal contact person or principal investigator |
| Name | Bob Gibbons |
| Mailing address | 600 Capitol Way N Olympia, WA 98501-1091 |
| Phone / email | 3609022329 / [email protected] |
| Manager authorizing this project | |
| Review cycle | FY 2000 |
| Province / Subbasin | Columbia Gorge / Wind |
| Short description | This project will provide critical information to determine status of bull trout populations in the Wind, Little White Salmon, White Salmon, and Klikitat subbasins and to develop and implement required mgmt actions to restore & maintain healthy population |
| Target species | Bull trout |
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 |
|
$90,000 |
| Fringe |
|
$28,800 |
| Supplies |
|
$11,000 |
| Operating |
|
$7,000 |
| Capital |
|
$15,000 |
| Travel |
|
$8,000 |
| Indirect |
|
$30,960 |
| Other |
|
$9,240 |
| $200,000 |
Total estimated budget
| Total FY 2000 cost | $200,000 |
| Amount anticipated from previously committed BPA funds | $0 |
| Total FY 2000 budget request | $200,000 |
| FY 2000 forecast from 1999 | $0 |
| % change from forecast | 0.0% |
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.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Jun 15, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Do not fund. Proposal was technically inadequate and lacking in detail.
Comments:
This proposal is wholly lacking in detail, and hence cannot be said to be based on sound science principles. There is no mention of the status of their management plan. The proponents do not describe who would perform the genetic analysis and how. In addition, the proposal is lacking in methodological details. CBFWA notes that bull trout are not known to exist in two of the four watersheds, and that the area is managed for anadromous, not resident fish. For each of the five objectives in section 8.f. there is no description of methods and, at best, a reference to another report. This does not provide the information needed to properly evaluate the proposal. In addition, sections 8.b., 8.c., 8.d. (which was completely blank), 8.g., 8.h., section 9, and section 10 contained inadequate detail for evaluation. How will snorkeling, foot surveys, and electrofishing be combined and used for statistical purposes? This proposal and 9802600, both ongoing, have broad overlap of subject matter but seem totally oblivious of one another. In contrast, project 9405400 is an example of how research efforts should be coordinated. Even if they have been on the ground for two months or waiting for initial funding, at a minimum they should have explained this, listed personnel, and described relation to and coordination with other bull trout studies. This proposal appears to be last year's proposal.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Recommendation:
Date:
Aug 20, 1999
Comment:
Screening Criteria: yesTechnical Criteria: no-The current info suggests bulltrout does not exist in two of the four watersheds. It doesn't meet criteria 2,6,7,9. This area is managed for Anadromous not Resident fish. The method section lacks detail.
Programmatic Criteria: no-It does not meet criteria 12,13,16. This is not urgent or a high priority for this budget. The inventory does not meet sustainable process. There is no demonstrated collaboration with Anadromous work.
Milestone Criteria: no- It's a short lived assessment project.
General Comments: This project should absorb 9802600 without an increase in budget.
Recommendation:
Do Not Fund
Date:
Mar 1, 2000
Comment:
[Decision made in 10-13-99 Council Meeting];
REVIEW:
NW Power and Conservation Council's FY 2006 Project Funding Review
Funding category:
expense
Date:
May 2005
| FY05 NPCC start of year: | FY06 NPCC staff preliminary: | FY06 NPCC July draft start of year: |
| $159,000 |
$159,000 |
$159,000 |
Sponsor comments: See comment at Council's website