My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Weather Mod Report - 1977
CWCB
>
Water Conservation
>
Backfile
>
Weather Mod Report - 1977
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/19/2011 12:53:09 PM
Creation date
9/30/2006 9:02:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Conservation
Project Type
General OWC
Project Name
Weather Modification
Title
"What Should Colorado Be Doing in Weather Modification"
Date
11/9/1977
County
Statewide
Water Conservation - Doc Type
Final Report
Document Relationships
Senate Bill 96-695
(Message)
Path:
\Water Conservation\Backfile
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />"WHAT SHOULD COLORADO BE DOING IN WEATHER MODIFICATION" <br /> <br />at a Meeting of the Denver Chapter of the American Meteorological Society <br /> <br />Boulder, Colorado, 9 November 1977 <br /> <br />By <br /> <br />Wallace E. Howell <br /> <br />Assistant to the Chief <br />. Division of Atmospheric Water Resources Management <br />Bureau of Reclamation <br /> <br />. <br />. <br /> <br />The Panama Canal Treaty holds a lesson for Colorado. . Compacts do not live <br />forever: There is pre~sure for.revisions of the Colorado River Compact, and <br />there w~ll be more. W~th the r~ver running only 13 million acre feet at <br />Lee Ferry instead of the contemplated 15 million, revision will become <br />ever more urgent as Upper Basin use of Colorado water increases. <br /> <br />The Colorado River Basin is a closed interior drainage with no outlet <br />to the sea. Though a map will show a blue line meandering from the Imperial <br />Valley to the Gulf of California, on the ground this channel has been dry <br />for many years and in all likelihood will remain so. There is more arable <br />land within reach of Colorado River water than it can ever irrigate. If <br />one single cubic meter should ever reach the sea, the pressure to develop <br />a use of it will be irresistible. To speak of a future water surplus <br />in the Colorado Basin is to play semantic games. There may indeed be <br />a surplus ~ some time in the future, above the hard-and-.fast commi tments, <br />but the waiting line for its use is already much longer than can be <br />satisfied under any imaginable circumstance. In many cases, as that <br />of Los Angeles, use of the "surplus" is already old in custom. In brief, <br />water shortage is a permanent fact of life in the Colorado River Basin. <br /> <br />The problem is the same though perhaps less acute in the other rivers <br />that the State of Colorado fathers. Let us consider for a moment the <br />geographical situation. <br /> <br />The two main geographic elements are the mountain ranges and the river <br />valleys. The mountains accumulate the snowfall during the winter and release <br />it as meltwater in late spring and early summer. The river valleys collect <br />the runoff and concentrate it into mainstem flows and reservoirs. <br /> <br />In general, each mountain range feeds at least two rivers, and each river <br />basin drains at least two mountain r8nges~ thus creating an anticongruent <br />relationship bettveen the t'\vo elements. We have stated the purpose in terms <br />of the Colorado River Basin, or at least its major subdivisions. We are <br />compelled thereby to consider augmenting snowfall on all the ranges that <br />feed the river or a major tributary. We cannot augment the snowfall on <br />this group of ranges wit.hout affecting eeveral other rivers. If \ve seed <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.