1 / 10

Analyzing Wildlife Management Costs with Pisces Data

This presentation discusses the analysis of costs associated with wildlife projects using Pisces data and highlights the need for further analysis to determine variations and optimize work elements.

edwardsjoseph
Download Presentation

Analyzing Wildlife Management Costs with Pisces Data

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. BPA Fish and Wildlife DivisionUsing Pisces Data to Analyze Wildlife Management CostsDecember 2006 Portland, Oregon

  2. Introduction • Tom Karier asked BPA to provide an analysis of the costs associated with the operations and maintenance (O&M) of wildlife projects. • This presentation will discuss our efforts to date to meet Dr. Karier’s request. • This was initially an informal exercise designed to provide information to support the FY07 – FY09 selection process.

  3. Layers of Data

  4. WE Hub

  5. WE Budget Estimates • WE Budgets are estimates provided by the contractor. They are not based on invoiced actuals, but rather the contractors professional opinion. Pisces provides some guidance on what to include in these estimates but is not overly prescriptive. • Planned WE Budgets are the contractors’ best estimates of the costs associated with a given WE at the time of SOW development. • Updated WE Budgets are the contractors’ best estimates of the costs associated with a given WE at the time the work is completed.

  6. WE Duration

  7. Project Performance Period

  8. Discussions/conclusions • This analysis is not intended to provide a definitive answer to any specific management question. • There is substantial variation amongst wildlife projects with respect to: • Wildlife management costs/acre and • The distribution of funding amongst the work categories • Additional analysis is required to determine the source of the variation. • There is currently overlap between the habitat enhancement and habitat O&M work categories. Work elements in their current form are focused on what the work is and not why we are doing the work.

  9. Next Steps • Optimize Wildlife Enhancement and O&M Work Elements • Improve our ability to differentiate between management phases • Review work element classifications • Which are enhancement? Which are O&M? • Better identify all of the costs associated with each phase • Redistribute foundational work element budget estimates

  10. Next Steps • Incorporate Wildlife Data into Pisces • HU/Crediting Information • Acquisition Level Data • Categorize acquisitions and projects • Use structured data from Pisces (WE information, metrics) to compare “like to like”

More Related