 |
 |
|
Some
resources on this page require Adobe Acrobat Reader. Get
Adobe Acrobat Reader.
Special
thanks to Rio Grande Restoration for compiling the majority
of this book listAcequia
Culture, Jose A. Rivera (UNM Press) - Examines the historic
and contemporary significance of Acequia communities
Cadillac
Desert, Mark Reisner (Penguin Books) - "The definitive
work on the West's water crisis" (Newsweek)
Great
River, Paul Horgan (Texas Monthly
Press) - The history of the Rio Grande
In
the Service of the Wild, Stephanie Mills (Beacon Press)
- About grassroots efforts to help restore and heal the natural
world
Pillar
of Sand, Sandra Postel (WW Norton) - Examines global water
limits and irrigation challenges
Rio
del Norte, Carroll L. Riley (Univ. of Utah Press) - History
of the Pueblo cultures of the Upper Rio Grande
Searching
Out the Headwaters, Bates et al (Island
Press) - Context and history of western water issues
The
Upper Rio Grande: A Guide to Decision Making, S. Shupe
and J. Folk-Williams (Western Network)
Western
Water Law Made Simple, Marston et al (Island Press)
Auble, G. T., J. M. Friedman, et al. 1994.
"Relating Riparian Vegetation to Present and Future Streamflows."
Ecological Applications 4(3): 544-554.
deBuys, W. 2001. "Navigating the
river of our future: The Rio Poco-Grande." Natural Resources
Journal 41(2): 265-281.
Baird, D. C. 2001. Downstream Effects
of Dams on the Middle Rio Grande. New Mexican Decision-Makers
Field Guide No. 1: Water, Watersheds, and Land Use in New
Mexico - Impacts of Population Growth on Natural Resources,
Santa Fe Region. P. S. Johnson. Socorro, New Mexico Bureau
of Mines and Mineral Resources: 106-107.
Baird, D. C. 2001. Santa Ana River Rehabilitation
Project Along the Middle Rio Grande. New Mexican Decision-Makers
Field Guide No. 1: Water, Watersheds, and Land Use in New
Mexico - Impacts of Population Growth on Natural Resources,
Santa Fe Region. P. S. Johnson. Socorro, New Mexico Bureau
of Mines and Mineral Resources: 108-109.
Cleverly, J. E., C. N. Dahm, J. R. Thibault,
D. J. Gilroy, and J. E. Allred Coonrod. 2002. Seasonal
estimates of actual evapotranspiration from Tamarix ramosissima
using 3-dimensional eddy covariance. Journal
of Arid Environments. (pdf 708 KB)
Dahm, C. N., J. R. Cleverly, J. E. Allred
Coonrod, J. R. Thibault, D. E. McDonnell, and D. J. Gilroy.
2002. Evapotranspiration at the land/water interface in a
semi-arid drainage basin. Freshwater Biology 47(4): 831-844.
Dahm, C. N., K. W. Cummins, et al. 1995. "An
Ecosystem View of the Restoration of the Kissimmee River."
Restoration Ecology 3(3): 225-238.
Eichorst, K. D., M. C. Stuever, D. C. Shaw,
and C. C. Crawford. 2001. Bosque Ecosystem Monitoring Program
(BEMP): First Report: 1997-2000. Albuquerque, University of
New Mexico: 43.
Ellis, L. M., M. C. Molles, et al. 1999. "Influence
of experimental flooding on litter dynamics in a Rio Grande
riparian forest ; New Mexico." Restoration Ecology 7(2):
193-204.
Ellis, L. M. C. S. Crawford, and M. C. Molles.
2002. The Role of the Flood Pulse in Ecosystem-Level Processes
in Southwestern Riparian Forests: A Case Study from the Middle
Rio Grande. Pages 51-107 in B. A. Middleton (ed.), Flood Pulsing
in Wetlands: Restorting the Natural Hydrological Balance,
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Ellis, L. M. (2001). "Short-term response
of woody plants to fire in a Rio Grande riparian forest ;
Central New Mexico ; USA." Biological Conservation 97(2):
159-170.
Ellis, L. M., C. S. Crawford, et al. 1998. "Comparison
of litter dynamics in native and exotic riparian vegetation
along the Middle Rio Grande of central New Mexico ; USA."
Journal of Arid Environments 38(2): 283-296.
Ellis, L. M., C. S. Crawford, et al. 2001. "Influence
of annual flooding on terrestrial arthropod assemblages of
a Rio Grande riparian forest." Regulated Rivers-Research
& Management 17(1): 1-20.
Gregory, S. V., F. J. Swanson, et al. 1991.
"An Ecosystem Perspective of Riparian Zones." Bioscience
41(8): 540-551.
Milford, E. and E. Muldavin. 2001. River
Bars of the Middle Rio Grande: Progress Report Year III.
New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, Biology Department, University
of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 12 p. (pdf 362 KB)
Milford, E., S. Wood, E. Muldavin, B. Jenkins,
and K. Wild. 2000. River
Bars of the Middle Rio Grande: Progress Report Year II.
New Mexico Natural Heritage Program, Biology Department, University
of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, 30 p. (pdf 3.6 MB)
Molles, M. C., C. S. Crawford, et al. 1998.
"Managed flooding for riparian ecosystem restoration
: Managed flooding reorganizes riparian forest ecosystems
along the middle Rio Grande in New Mexico." Bioscience
48(9): 749-756.
Sparks, R. E. 1995. "Need For Ecosystem
Management of Large Rivers and Their Floodplains." Bioscience
45(3): 168-182.
Stanford, J. A. and G. C. Poole. 1996. "A
protocol for ecosystem management." Ecological Applications
6(3): 741-744.
Stanford, J. A., J. V. Ward, et al. 1996. "A
general protocol for restoration of regulated rivers."
Regulated Rivers-Research & Management 12(4-5): 391-413.
Stromberg, J. C. 2001. "Restoration of
riparian vegetation in the south-western United States: importance
of flow regimes and fluvial dynamism." Journal of Arid
Environments 49(1): 17-34.
Taylor, J. P. and K. C. McDaniel. 1998. "Restoration
of saltcedar (Tamarix sp.)-infested floodplains on
the Bosque del Apache National Wildlife Refuge." Weed
Technology 12(2): 345-352.
Whitney, J. C. 1998. "Observations on Southwestern
Ecosystems." New Mexico Journal of Science 38(November
1998): 233-251.
Draft
Recovery Plan Southwester Willow Flycatcher (Empidonax
traillii extimus), April 2001, U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Southwestern Willow Flycatcher Recovery Team Technical
Subgroup, Albuquerque, NM, 499 p. (pdf)
This document is currently being finalized by the Southwestern
Willow Flycatcher Recovery Team Technical Subgroup, following
closure of the public comment period on the draft plan.
Environmental
Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Rio
Grande Habitat Restoration Project, Los Lunas, New Mexico,
March 2002 (pdf 11.5 MB)
The
Green Paper: a Water Plan for the FutureMiddle
Rio Grande Ecosystem: Bosque Biological Management Plan, 1993,
U.S. Fiish and Wildlife Service, Biological Interagency Team,
Albuquerque, NM, 312 p. (pdf
191 MB)
Middle
Rio Grande Ecosystem: Bosque Biological Management Plan Recommendations
Middle Rio Grande Water Budget, Averages for 1972-1999, Middle
Rio Grande Water Assembly, Inc., October 1999.
Navigating the River of Our Future: The Rio
Poco-Grande, The University of New Mexico School of Law, Natural
Resources Journal, Spring 2001, Vol. 41, No. 2
New Mexico Decision-Makers Field Guide No. 1:
Water, Watersheds, and Land Use in New Mexico - Impacts of
Population Growth on Natural Resources, Santa Fe Region, 2001,
New Mexico Bureau of Mines and Mineral Resources, Socorro.
Proposed
Rule to Designate Critical Habitat for the Rio Grande Silvery
Minnow, Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and Draft Economic
Analysis (zip 5.1 MB)
The
Rio Grande Compact (1939) (pdf 163 KB)
Rio
Grande Silvery Minnow (Hybognathus amarus) Recovery
Plan, 1999, U.S. Fish and Wildllife Service, Albuquerque,
NM, 141 p.
The
State of the Environment, 2001, New Mexico Environment
Department, 64 p.
Water
Issues in New Mexico and the Middle Rio Grande, UNM Institute
for Public Policy, Summer 2000 (pdf
101 KB)
New Mexico Water Dialogue (call 505-421-2856
to order a subscription)
Rio Grande Restoration's River Song
(call 505-266-3609 to be added to the mailing list)
WRRI's
Divining Rod
Dams
and Diversions of the Middle Rio Grande
(Bullard and Wells 1992, U.S. Bureau
of Reclamation Operations Fact Sheets)
Cottonwood
(by Dr. James Cleverly)
Salt
Cedar (by Dr. James Cleverly)
Seedballs:
a New Tool for Revegetation
(Adobe Seedball Consortium)
2002 Conference Agenda (pdf
38 KB)
|
|
Agency
|
Program
Name
|
Purpose
|
Support
Type
|
Eligibility
|
| U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Albuquerque District Office) |
Planning
Assistance (Section 22) to States |
To
develop plans for the development, utilization, and conservation
of water and related land resources.
|
Financial
assistance up to $500,000. 50% match required.
|
State,
county, local, and tribal governments.
|
|
Support
for Others Program |
To
provide technical support for projects including those related
to environmental protection and restoration.
|
Technical
assistance on a paid contractual basis.
|
State,
county, local, and tribal governments; federal agencies
|
|
|
Aquatic
Ecosystem Restoration Program
|
To
restore, improve, and protect aquatic habitat for plants, fish,
and wildlife.
|
Financial
and technical assistance up to $5 million. 35% match required. |
State,
county, local, and tribal governments; nonprofit conservation
organizations
|
| Natural
Resources Conservation Service |
Emergency
Watershed Protection (EWP) |
To
undertake emergency measures, including the purchase of flood
plain easements, for runoff retardation and soil erosion prevention
to safeguard lives and property from floods, drought, and the
products of erosion on any watershed whenever fire, flood or
any other natural occurrence is causing or has caused a sudden
impairment of the watershed.
|
Financial
assistance of up to 100% of the restoration costs. |
Owners,
managers, and users of public, private, or tribal lands that
have been affected by a natural disaster. |
|
|
Environmental
Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) |
To
provide technical and financial assistance to address soil,
water, and related natural resource concerns in an environmentally
beneficial manner. |
|
Farmers
and ranchers. |
|
|
Resource
Conservation and Development (RC&D) |
To
accelerate the conservation, development and utilization of
natural resources, improve the general level of economic activity,
and to enhance the environment and standard of living in designated
RC&D areas. |
Helps
applicants obtain financial assistance.
|
State,
tribal and local units of government and local nonprofit organizations
in rural areas. |
|
|
Soil
and Water Conservation Assistance (SWCA) |
To
provide cost share and incentive payments to voluntarily address
threats to soil, water, and related natural resources, including
grazing land, wetlands, and wildlife habitat.
|
Financial
assistance. 25% match required. |
Landowners who wish to make changes to cropping systems, grazing
management, nutrient management, and irrigation. Land may not
be a part of CRP, EQIP, or WRP priority areas. |
|
|
Wetlands
Reserve Program |
To
achieve the greatest wetland functions and values, along with
optimum wildlife habitat, on every acre enrolled in the program.
|
USDA
will pay up to 100% of restoration cost for permanent easments
and 75% of 30-year easements or restoration-cost share agreements. |
Landowners
wishing to establish long-term habitat conservation and wildlife
practices and protection.
|
|
|
Wildlife
Habitat Incentives Program (WHIP) |
To
develop and improve fish and wildlife habitat primarily on private
land. |
Technical
assistance and up to 75 percent cost-share assistance. |
All
private landowners not currently enrolled in the Water Bank
Program, CRP, WRP, or EWP. |
|
|
Conservation
Technical Assistance (CTA) |
For
planning and implementing conservation practices that address
natural resource issues. |
Technical
assistance. |
Land-users,
communities, units of state and local government, and other
federal agencies in planning and implementing conservation systems.
|
| U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service |
Partners
for Fish and Wildlife |
To
restore wetlands, stream and river corridors, and other fish
and wildlife habitats important for Federal trust species (threatened
and endangered species, anadromous fish, and some marine mammals)
; to develop partnerships to implement these habitat restoration
projects; to demonstrate applied technology for habitat restoration
projects to help the public understand and participate in fish
and wildlife resource conservation.
|
Financial
assistance up to $25,000 (which may be exceeded in certain circumstances).
Cost-share percentage varies. In-kind donations may be considered
cost-sharing. |
Private
landowners, schools, farmers and ranchers, Native American Nations,
state and local agencies, municipalities. |
| U.S.
Forest Service |
Collaborative
Forest Restoration Program |
To
reduce wildfire threats, restore ecosystems, reduce non-native
tree proliferation, reestablish historic forest regimes, promote
reforestation, preserve large and old trees, increase utilization
of small diameter trees, and the creation of forest-related
local employment. The fund was established by the Community
Forest Restoration Act of 2000 (Title VI, Public Law 106-393)
and limits projects to four years. The act also requires collaborative
project review and selection, joint monitoring and evaluation,
and reporting. Grant applications are due May 1, 2002. |
The
act authorizes up to $5 million annually. Individual grants
must not exceed $360,000 in Forest Service funding over four
years, and not more than $120,000 in any one year. The applicant
must share a minimum of 20% of the total costs of the project. |
Eligible
applicants include local and tribal governments, educational
institutions, landowners, conservation organizations, and other
interested public and private entities. |
| National
Fish and Wildlife Federation |
General
Challenge Grant |
Challenge
grants are awarded to projects that address priority actions
promoting fish and wildlife conservation and the habitats on
which they depend; work proactively to involve other conservation
and community interests;
leverage available funding; and evaluate project outcomes. Project
proposals are received on a year-round, revolving basis with
two decision cycles per year (Pre-proposals due June 1 and October
15 and full proposals are due July 15 and December 1). |
Grants
typically range from $10,000-$150,000, based upon need. Funded
projects ideally have a 2:1 cost-share ratio ($2 non-federal
for every $1 of challenge grant funding). |
Federal,
tribal, state, and local governments, educational institutions,
and non-profit conservation organizations. |
|
Bring
Back the Natives (BBN) |
Supports on-the-ground habitat restoration projects that benefit
native aquatic species (e.g., native fish, aquatic insects,
mollusks, and amphibians) in their historic range. BBN projects
generally involve riparian habitat restoration, moving streams
towards stability, and supporting native aquatic communities.
BBN will not fund basic research or monitoring. BBN will fund
projects occurring between January 1, 2003, and September 30,
2004. Full proposal due date: July 15, 2002.
|
Award
must be matched with an equal or greater amount of grantee funds;
that is, a minimum ratio of 1:1 is required, but a ratio of
2:1 or higher is preferable. |
Encourages
projects incorporating multiple federal, tribal, state, and
local governments; corporations; private landowners; communities;
and/or non-profit groups that directly benefit fish, wildlife,
and other biotic resources on federal land or land that directly
affects federal land and programs.
|
|
Centennial
Refuge Legacy |
Supports
projects that work to enhance the fish, wildlife, and plant
habitats of the National Wildlife Refuge system country-wide,
allowing the refuge to serve its wildlife and human constituents
for the next 100 years; reach beyond the physical boundaries
of the refuges themselves to engage people in the work of the
refuge through partnerships, new collaborations, and alliances;
work to enhance compatible wildlife-dependent recreation to
include: hunting, fishing, wildlife photography and observation,
and environmental education and interpretation. Full proposal
due August 1, 2002.
|
$939,000
are available. Grant awards should not exceed $100,000. 50%
cost-share required.
|
National
Wildlife Refuges and their partners. Applicant must be a federal,
state, or regional conservation agency, or a 501c(3) organization.
|
|
Five-Star
Restoration Challenge Grants |
Provides
modest financial assistance on a competitive basis to support
community-based wetland, riparian, and coastal habitat restoration
projects that build diverse partnerships and foster local natural
resource stewardship through education, outreach, and training
activities. Projects must include a strong on-the-ground wetland,
riparian, or coastal habitat restoration component and should
also include education, outreach, and community stewardship
components. Projects involving only research, monitoring or
planning are not eligible for funding. Full proposal due March
1, 2002.
|
Awards
are between $5,000 and $20,000; the average grant is $10,000.
|
Schools
or youth organizations;
local or tribal governments;
local businesses or corporations;
conservation organizations or local citizens groups; state and
federal resource management agencies; and
foundations or other funders. |
|
Migratory
Bird Conservancy (MBC) |
The
MBC is a bird conservation grant fund supported by donations
from birding businesses and their customers, and matched by
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation. The MBC will fund projects
that directly address conservation of priority bird habitats
in the Western Hemisphere. Acquisition, restoration, and improved
management of habitats are program priorities. Education, research,
and monitoring will be considered only as components of actual
habitat conservation projects. Deadline for preproposals is
June 1, 2002. Full proposals are due July 15, 2002.
|
Award
must be matched with an equal or greater amount of grantee funds;
that is, a minimum ratio of 1:1 is required, but a ratio of
2:1 or higher is preferable. |
|
|
National
Wildlife Support Group Grant |
Supports
projects that assist organizations to be effective co-stewards
of our Nation’s important natural resources within the
National Wildlife Refuge System. This program provides competitive
seed grants to creative and innovative (start-up, capacity-building,
or project specific) proposals that seek to increase the number
and effectiveness of organizations interested in assisting the
refuge system nationwide. Proposals are due by September 2,
2002. |
$1,500
- $5,000 |
Non-profit
organizations or organizations that have applied for non-profit
status, including "Friends" groups, Cooperative and
Interpretive Associations, Audubon Chapters and other citizen
support organizations interested in assisting a refuge or group
of refuges and the refuge system as a whole. |
|
Native
Plant Conservation Initiative (NPCI) |
Supports
on-the-ground conservation projects that protect, enhance, and/or
restore native plant communities on public and private land.
Projects typically fall into one of three categories and may
contain elements of each: protection and restoration, information
and education, and inventory and assessment. Applicants are
encouraged, when appropriate, to include a pollinator component
in their project. NPCI will fund projects occurring between
November 1, 2002, and September 30, 2004.
|
Award
must be matched with an equal or greater amount of grantee funds;
that is, a minimum ratio of 1:1 is required, but a ratio of
2:1 or higher is preferable. |
Encourages
projects incorporating multiple federal, tribal, state, and
local governments; corporations; private landowners; communities;
and/or non-profit groups that directly benefit fish, wildlife,
and other biotic resources on federal land or land that directly
affects federal land and programs.
|
|
NRCS:
Conservation on Private Land |
The
highest priority is placed on innovative projects that integrate
conservation practices in ongoing agriculture, ranching and
forestry operations. We will also seek projects that link our
effort to larger NRCS programs such as the Wetlands Reserve
Program (WRP), the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), and the
Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). Project proponents
must clearly define the conservation problem they are seeking
to address and explain how their project will provide measurable
benefits for fish and wildlife. Proposals are due May 17, 2001.
|
The
Foundation has received $3 million from the NRCS in support
of this part-nership. Award must be match-ed with an equal or
greater amount of grantee funds; that is, a min-imum ratio of
1:1 is required, but a ratio of 2:1 or higher is pre-ferable.
|
|
|
Partnership
with the Army Corps of Engineers |
To
foster cooperation on projects of mutual interest (between the
NFWF and the Army Corps of Engineers), such as fish and wildlife
habitat restoration, non-structural flood control opportunities,
wetlands restoration, and endangered species protection. Full
proposal due July 15, 2001. |
|
The
Foundation can partner with local sponsors by awarding grants
and by assisting in the local sponsor's fund-raising efforts
to meet the Corps' requirements. |
|
Pathways
to Nature Conservation Fund |
Offers
grants to enhance environmental education activities and bird
and wildlife viewing opportunities at significant nature tourism
destinations in the United States and Canada. Projects of interest
include, but are not limited to, boardwalks, viewing platforms
and blinds, educational displays, and interactive exhibits.
Deadlines for submissions are July 15 and December 1, 2002. |
Approximately
$100,000 is available. Grant requests should not exceed $50,000.
Minimum 1:1 ratio of third party cash or contributed goods and
services.
|
|
|
Pulling
Together Initative (PTI) |
To
prevent, manage, or eradicate invasive and noxious plants through
a coordinated program of public/private partnerships; and to
increase public awareness of the adverse impacts of invasive
and noxious plants. PTI will fund projects occurring between
March 1, 2003, and September 30, 2004. Apply by November 6,
2002.
|
Award
must be matched with an equal or greater amount of grantee funds;
that is, a minimum ratio of 1:1 is required, but a ratio of
2:1 or higher is preferable. |
Encourages
projects incorporating multiple federal, tribal, state, and
local governments; corporations; private landowners; communities;
and/or non-profit groups that directly benefit fish, wildlife,
and other biotic resources on federal land or land that directly
affects federal land and programs.
|
| The
Turner Foundation |
Water and Toxics |
To strengthen
the advocacy, outreach and technical capabilities of organizations
addressing the protection of water systems; to stop the further
degradation of water-dependent habitats from new dams, diversions
and other large infrastructure projects; to reduce wasteful
water use via conservation; to promote allocation of water specifically
for environmental purposes, including habitat restoration and
fish and wildlife protection; to support efforts to improve
public policies affecting water protection, including initiatives
to secure pollution prevention and habitat protection; to reduce
pesticide use; to strengthen the advocacy, outreach and technical
capabilities of organizations addressing the disproportionate
use and locating of toxic materials in poor and rural areas.
The Foundation awards both general support and project-specific
grants. See The Foundation website for limitations. Grant proposals
are reviewed four times per year. See The Foundation website
for proposal review dates and deadlnes.
|
Fiancial
assistance. No cost sharing required. |
501(c)3
organizations or projects with a 501(c)3 fiscal sponsor are
eligible. Although The Foundation considers programs that are
both national and international in scope, state and local programs
are also considered. Priority consideration is given to programs
in New Mexico, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, South Carolina,
Georgia, and Florida.
|
|
Habitat |
To support ecosystem-wide
habitat protection with particular emphasis on locally developed
strategies for private and public lands; to support efforts
that defend wild places from destructive practices such as mining,
unsustainable logging, and over-grazing; to support efforts
that create understanding of the relationship between wildlife,
habitat protection and long-term economic stability; to protect
the world's last remaining vast tracts of relatively undisturbed
forestlands. (Please note the special geographic focus of Russia,
Brazil and British Columbia, Canada for this funding priority);
to protect forest ecosystems through reducing wood consumption,
eliminating waste, and promoting safe, sustainable non-wood
alternatives. The Foundation awards both general support and
project-specific grants. See The Foundation website for limitations.
Grant proposals are reviewed four times per year. See The Foundation
website for proposal review dates and deadlines.
|
Fiancial
assistance. No cost sharing required. |
501(c)3
organizations or projects with a 501(c)3 fiscal sponsor are
eligible. Although The Foundation considers programs that are
both national and international in scope, state and local programs
are also considered. Priority consideration is given to programs
in Alaska, New Mexico, Montana, Colorado, Nebraska, South Carolina,
Georgia, and Florida
|
| The
Compton Foundation |
Environment |
Priorities
include: land, river and watershed protection and management
for purposes of long term habitat and ecosystem preservation
and restoration; changing the relationship between people and
the natural environment in order to promote a sustainable and
just balance between meeting present human needs and conserving
natural systems for future generations. See The Foundation website
for examples. Proposals must be received by February 15 for
Board consideration in May and September 15 for Board consideration
in December.
|
Financial
Assistance |
Non-profit
organizations whose projects have regional, statewide (especially
Pacific Coast states), or national significance. U.S. non-profits
collaborating with non-profits in Mexico are also eligible. |
| The
Lindbergh Foundation |
|
Lindbergh
Grants are made in the following categories: agriculture; aviation/aerospace;
conservation of natural resources - including animals, plants,
water, and general conservation (land, air, energy, etc.); education
- including humanities/education, the arts, and intercultural
communication; exploration; health - including biomedical research,
health and population sciences, and adaptive technology; and
waste minimization and management. The Foundation is interested
in funding a variety of innovative research and educational
projects which focus on the Lindbergh's vision of balance between
the advance of technology and preservation of the natural/human
environment. See The Foundation website for examples. The deadline
for grant applications is the second Thursday of June in the
year preceeding the awarding of funds. All applicants receive
notification of final selections by April 15 of the following
year. |
Provides
grants of up to $10,580 (a symbolic amount representing the
cost of the "Spirit of St. Louis") meant to serve
as seed moneyfor pilot projects. |
Individuals
from government agencies, media, universities, and other non-profit
organizations from the U.S. and abroad. |
|
|
