Here's info from DFW's site describing the types of projects that the fund is supposed to support. If you look at Fish and Game Code Section 3683 which defines upland birds you'll find Collard Doves on the list. When I worked for a public agency I always found it easy to make us look foolish using our own regulations.
It boils down to setting priorities as far as which animal to benefit by which project to fund. Why they use grants seems unusual because they have to pitch the benefits and compete for the money as opposed to the fund being allocated in a pro rata way to all areas. On its face it makes sense but in practice I'm not sure. Look at the goals and it looks like things should be good as far as habitat. The makeup of the committee which reviews spending for projects may be interesting.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/grants/ugma/
It boils down to setting priorities as far as which animal to benefit by which project to fund. Why they use grants seems unusual because they have to pitch the benefits and compete for the money as opposed to the fund being allocated in a pro rata way to all areas. On its face it makes sense but in practice I'm not sure. Look at the goals and it looks like things should be good as far as habitat. The makeup of the committee which reviews spending for projects may be interesting.
http://www.dfg.ca.gov/wildlife/grants/ugma/
Last edited: