Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-12- <br /> <br />When one considers the multiplier effect on the state economy <br /> <br />through "induced" and "stennning-from" effects, as well as household <br /> <br />consumption, the combined annual economic impact by this portion of <br /> <br />the agriculture industry on the North Dakota economy (from rainfall <br /> <br />increases) was found by Cooter to be: <br /> <br />FOR SMALL GRAINS = $5,961,000.00 <br /> <br />FOR HAY $5,003,000.00 <br /> <br />Thus, a total of about eleven million dollars per year for an annual <br /> <br />expenditure of about one-half million dollars by the North Dakota <br /> <br />Weather Modification Board shows a benefit cost ratio of about 22/1. <br /> <br />Figure 6 (also from Cooter, 1980) shows some interesting prob- <br /> <br />lems: technical, political, and psychological - which could actually <br />all be merely statistical. <br /> <br />One can see that the large gains are produced in the south and <br /> <br />west. Although the losses in Crop Reporting Districts (C.R.D. IS) 1, <br /> <br />3, and 6 are NOT statistically significant (see Eddy et al., 1979), <br /> <br />it is difficult to convince people living in those areas that there <br /> <br />is no problem. When one realizes that the seeding areas have been <br /> <br />mainly in CRD 4, 5, 7 and 8 he can imagine cries of a downwind sup- <br /> <br />pression of rainfall in the areas which show dollar losses. <br /> <br />BUT <br />Consider the fact that seeding in North Dakota usually takes place <br />in storms which naturally would produce a good deal of rainfall. <br />Does Figure 6 simply reflect this bias? <br />The algorithms which turn rain into grain and hay are simple <br /> <br />regression equations which make use of the June rainfall as the <br /> <br />~' <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />-<. <br />