Laserfiche WebLink
<br />l4-_...JI <br /> <br />River Basin states, is in a pos1t1on to make policy. If Colorado doesn't, <br />if it is content to let George do it, what will be the chance that George <br />will speak with a Georgia accent and will never have been west of the <br />Chattahoochee River? <br /> <br />I believe these circumstances call for a broad-gauge approach to weather <br />modification, taking a long-range view of it. A succession of emergency <br />cloud-seeding programs threatens to polarize citizens pro and con and <br />provides no rational basis for resolution of conflicting opinions. Drought <br />is norm in Colorado, and drought mitigation activated only in the direst <br />times is no way to go about it. The problems I identified are not restricted <br />to drought. <br /> <br />. <br />. <br /> <br />What does Colorado need to do in the political-legal arena? It has a law <br />on the books but legislation is not the only step that a state must take, <br />nor is it even the logical first step. In my opinion, an adequate state <br />policy with respect to weather modification must rest on four cornerstones. <br /> <br />The first cornerstone is staff studies that will give particular expression <br />to the general perception of that individual State's need for water and <br />water management. The steps toward water famine are many, diverse, and <br />cumulative. <br /> <br />Means of keeping water-budget accounts are needed that document those <br />steps and identify predetermined decision points at which defensive <br />measures will be taken. <br /> <br />This implies a strategy of decisionmaking under conditions of uncertainty. <br />I am going to digress for a moment to make a point for precipitation <br />stimulation on that issue. <br /> <br />It seems to be a favorite cliche that prec1p1tation stimulation is an <br />uncertain procedure, with the inference usually intended that use of it <br />would only increase the degree of uncertainty facing the water-resources <br />manager. But let us analyze this situation and see if the inference <br />is warranted. <br /> <br />We are able to say with a high degree of confidence that state-of-the- <br />art cloud-seeding operations intended for precipitation augmentation do <br />result in an average precipitation increase, even though the same cannot <br />be said for an individual storm occasion nor can the amount of the increase <br />be stated except within broad limits and in probabilistic terms. <br /> <br />This means that a program of precipitation augmentation limited to epochs <br />when natural precipitation is anything but extremely high must reduce the <br />range of variation. In other "lords, despite its lIuncertainty, I~ its use <br />decreases the amount of uncertainty with which the resources manager is <br />faced. The uncertainties are not additive. <br /> <br />Included in the staff studies should be assessments of <br />implications of long-range State policy and programs. <br /> <br />the environmental <br />I will speak first <br /> <br />3 <br />