Laserfiche WebLink
<br />rather short and concise list. We come rapidly to the point where adding more observations and <br />descriptors to the list yields no tangible return in understanding. <br />As we consider various animals that for one reason or another are regarded as candidates for <br />significant impact, how do we determine whether precipitation management belongs on their list <br />of stimuli? <br />The animal compartment also exemplifies the issue presented by alternatives. If the elk are <br />starving, they can be fed regardless of how near or how distant the connection is between their <br />starvation and precipitation management. <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />Societal <br /> <br />For the purpose of this workshop, we make a distinction between justification for undertaking <br />a program and consideration of its environmental impacts. Some of these impacts impinge on <br />human occupations, economic activities, and perhaps the form and functioning of social <br />institutions. The justification for undertaking the management of precipitation is not at issue <br />here, nor is the verification of expected benefits or losses that enter into that justification. At <br />issue are the derivativ~: impacts of precipitation manag~:ment upon human beings when viewed as <br />a part of the total environment. <br />One school of social scientists has set itself a bold goal. This goal is to make methodical and <br />rational use of advanced principles of social science to predict the changes in social institutions <br />and their functioning that would result from the widespread and prolonged application of <br />precipitation management. This is an ambitious undertaking. Does social science command the <br />comprehensive theoretical framework capable of predicting the spectrum of social responses to a <br />technological innovation of this sort? Can it use this theory with sufficient confidence to design <br />and implement an optimized set of solutions? In particular, should Project Skywater adopt the <br />goals and methods of this school as its own? If so, with what provisions and reservations? <br />Less ambitiously, can we approach the identification and quantification of some of the stresses <br />and responses that precipitation modification may impose on social institutions? Can we <br />determine at least in a general way the range of circumstances under which various interest <br />groups may be benefited, disbenefited, or remain unaffected? Can we look toward development <br />of means for compensating disbeneficiaries? For distributing costs of operation to incidental <br />beneficiaries? How will precipitation management impinge significantly on human groups-their <br />development, structure, and function-on the processes of interaction between them, or on <br />organized patterns of collective behavior? <br />Some of the strongest reactions to precipitation management have occurred where this activity <br />became a scapegoat for natural disasters, or where it was seen as likely to produce the opposite of <br />the intended effects. To what extent do these responses spring from the nature of precipitation <br />management? To what extent are they expressions of preexisting social cleavages, with <br />precipitation management being merely the excuse? What can or should we do about it in the <br />way of education? <br /> <br />.. <br /> <br />23 <br />