No impact to the general fund. A portion of the fines collected from violations of fish and game regulations in the County is deposited in the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund, which has a current balance of approximately $300,000. State law defines how money in this fund may be spent, but the Board of Supervisors is responsible for authorizing specific expenditures. The projects recommended to receive funding are consistent with the expenditure criteria established by State Law.

The FWC developed a grant application packet (attached), which included a cover letter to explain the grant process and funding priorities, an application to solicit relevant information about the project, and a copy of the expenditure criteria established by California law for the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund. In the fall of 2008, application packets were sent to the Fish and Wildlife Committee mailing list and to anyone who requested one. A press release was issued on the availability of funding for fish and wildlife projects. A total of 29 funding applications requesting a total of $523,998.73 were received during the application period, which ended December 31, 2008.   
  
The amount of funds currently in the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund is larger at present than in years past. The increase may be partially due to increased awareness among agencies enforcing fish and game regulations that the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund is an appropriate account to deposit fine monies resulting from negotiated settlements of regulation violations.   
  
The FWC discussed the funding applications at its January, February, and March 2009 meetings. Some applicants came to our meetings to talk about their applications during the public comment section of the agenda. The FWC acknowledged the hard work that went into all of the applications received and appreciates the commitment to improving the fish and wildlife resources of the County demonstrated by these applications.  
  
At the March 2009 meeting, the Committee recommended funding thirteen (13) proposed projects to the County Board of Supervisors. The individual FWC recommendations and the vote of the FWC on these recommendations are listed below; the cover letter for each of these applications is attached (see "Recommended_2009-10"). All recommendations are for full funding of the project as proposed unless noted otherwise.   
  
1) As in previous years, recipients of the Fish and Wildlife Propagation Funds will be required to adhere to three general commitments outlined in a grant approval letter: a) return funds if the project is not performed; b) provide documentation and/or accounting to show that funds were spent for the purpose described in applications; and c) provide a brief summary report on the progress or results of the project by April 21, 2010 [9 ayes/0 noes].  
  
2) Appropriate $9,737 to the Lindsay Wildlife Museum for a Commercial Washing Machine for Wildlife Hospital. [8 ayes/0 noes (1 abstention, Heckly)]  
  
3) Appropriate $9,100 to SPAWNERS for the Castro Creek Habitat & Water Quality Improvement Program, Phase II. The funding is to be used for all requested materials, but the Bioassessment sample analyses are to be used at two sites in one year, rather than two sites in two years. [8 ayes/0 noes (1 abstention, Berthelsen)]  
  
4) Appropriate $17,000 to the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District for the Pinole Creek Steelhead/Rainbow Trout Habitat Mapping Project. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
5) Appropriate $10,000 to Mt. View Sanitary District for the Wetlands Field Trip Program for Contra Costa County Schools. [8 ayes/0 noes (1 abstention, Skinner)]  
  
6) Appropriate $15,525 to the City of Walnut Creek for the Walnut Creek Walk Riparian Habitat Restoration. The funding is to be used exclusively for plant establishment, including purchasing native trees, native ground cover, native shrubs and flowers, and staking materials. [8 ayes/0 noes (1 abstention, Hale)]  
  
7) Appropriate $4,000 to Mt. View Sanitary District for the Wetlands Field Trip Transportation Scholarship Program. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
8) Appropriate $526.87 to the Land for Urban Wildlife Inc. for the Improvement of Fish and Wildlife habitat along Ellinwood Creek in Pleasant Hill. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
9) Appropriate $21,650 to the Muir Heritage Land Trust for the Fernandez Ranch Restoration & Public Access Project - Riparian Habitat Irrigation. The funding is to be used exclusively for the purchase of water tanks. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
10) Appropriate $4,756.61 to the Contra Costa County Department of Agriculture for Raptor Perch Project. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
11) Appropriate $5,400 to the Walnut Creek Open Space Foundation for A Small Native Plant Nursery. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
12) Appropriate $11,000 to Save Mt. Diablo for Riparian Woodland Restoration Project on the Marsh Creek II and IV Properties. This funding is to be used exclusively for materials for the installation of the split-rail fence on the Marsh Creek IV property, tube gates on the Marsh Creek II and IV properties, project management by Nomad Ecology, and native plants. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
13) Appropriate $56,200 to the City of Hercules for the Chelsea Wetlands Restoration Project. This funding is to be used for all requested materials and reflects a miscalculation in the original application, not a reduction by the Committee. The funding is also contingent upon the City’s receipt of funding from additional sources and will be returned if this is not secured. [9 ayes/0 noes]  
  
14) Appropriate $9,000 to Thomas Newcomb for Passive radio telemetry of California red-legged frog populations in Pinole Valley. This funding is contingent on the agreement that following the conclusion of the project, the equipment will be given to the Contra Costa Watershed Forum for use in the Forum's Resource and Monitoring Center and will be made available to any interested party working within Contra Costa County.  
  
The Fish and Wildlife Committee did not recommend funding the following applications (a brief, partial explanation is provided below - cover letters attached, see "Not_recommended_2009-10"):   
  
• Terrestrial Insect Collection & Guide, proposed by the Contra Costa Mosquito & Vector Control District. The project only produced four sets of didactic materials, which the Committee did not find cost-effective. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/8 noes (1 abstention, Pellegrini)]   
  
• CCC Eco-Stewards Watershed Education and Restoration Program, proposed by Earth Team Environmental Network for Educators and Teens. The Committee has funded this program in the past. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Public Awareness Proposal to Avoid Potential Extinctions of Salmon and Steelhead Fisheries proposed by Water4Fish. Much of the requested funding was for data entry and celebrity endorsements in a Public Service Announcement. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to the fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]  
  
• Prioritizing Sites for Urban Creek Restoration, proposed by the Urban Creeks Council. While the Committee found this to be a good project and encouraged the group to reapply in another grant cycle, they felt the proposals chosen for funding would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]  
  
• Los Vaqueros Grassland Restoration Project, proposed by the Contra Costa Water District. The Committee felt that, while beneficial, the cost of the study was very high. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]  
  
• Storage Shed, proposed by the Contra Costa Squad of the Department of Fish & Game. Due to size requirements, the originally proposed amount of $9,620 was increased to over $30,000. The Committee felt that the proposal should be resubmitted after researching alternate solutions. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• The Martinez Beavers Public Outreach Project, proposed by Worth a Dam. The cost for interpretive panels and printing brochures was deemed high. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]  
  
• San Pablo & Moraga Creeks Habitat & Resource Monitoring & Mapping Program, proposed by Friends of Orinda Creeks. The requested equipment is available at no cost to community groups or individuals through the Contra Costa Watershed Forum’s Monitoring Assistance and Resource Center. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Native Oyster Monitoring Program, proposed by The Watershed Project. The proposal did not clearly present the qualifications of the responsible parties at the organization nor the benefit to the fish and wildlife in the County. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/8 noes (1 abstention, Berthelsen)]   
  
• Adopt the Creek Program for Marsh Creek Watershed, proposed by the Contra Costa Resource Conservation District. While the Committee found the project to be a good idea, the associated administrative costs were quite high. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Flood Control Facility Raptor Perch Installation, proposed by the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. While the Committee supports the use of raptor predation as an alternative to poisoning ground-dwelling mammals, the implementation strategy and measures of effectiveness were not well-represented in the proposal. The applicant was encouraged to reapply in a subsequent grant cycle once these recommendations were included in the study design. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Reducing CCC Public Works Herbicide use along Creeks, proposed by Parents for a Safer Environment. The CA Department of Fish and Game did not support this project, which is a requirement for the Committee to approve a project that falls under the research category of the Fish and Game Code. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Elkhorn Creek Restoration Planting, proposed by the Carquinez Regional Environmental Education Center. The Committee had concerns about location of the project and whether the organization had obtained the necessary permits. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Movement patterns and habitat use by western pond turtles in eastern CCC, proposed by Jeff Alvarez. A similar project was funded during the last grant cycle and has not yet been completed. The Committee felt other proposals would provide more benefit to fish and wildlife resources in the County. [0 ayes/9 noes]   
  
• Effects of Seasonal Changes in the Physical and Chemical Environment of Phyoplankton Community Structure in CCC, proposed by Diablo Valley College. The CA Department of Fish and Game did not support this project, which is a requirement for the Committee to approve a project that falls under the research category of the Fish and Game Code. [0 ayes/9 noes]  
  
The FWC did not consider the following proposal for the 2008/2009 Fish and Wildlife Propagation Fund grant program (a brief, partial explanation is provided below):   
  
• Rheem Creek Restoration& Watershed Education Project, Phase II, proposed by the Urban Creeks Council. The original application was withdrawn due to the State’s freeze on Proposition funds and resubmitted out-of-cycle to reflect a difference in administrative needs.