Laserfiche WebLink
<br />RECEIVED <br />SEP 1 9 1996 <br /> <br />WES'l'ERN KANSAS WEATHER MODIFICATION PROGRAM c.e.~~~~3o~~':'d <br />, e-mail: hailman@pld.com . ,-,'1 '1 <br />Internet: http://WWW.P.ld.com/userS/hai1man/master..~".r:I=:: <br />, ASC <br />WEEKLY NEWSLETTER ~~ ~ <br />'96-22 ", I <br />Ii L <br />.' E <br />FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 7 - SEPTEMBER 13, 19-9,6'==,~"~",-" <br /> <br />General Interest: A recent legislative effort failed to r,estore the <br />former Federal-State Atmospheric Modification Program (AMP) to the <br />National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). In <br />the past this program "earmarked" funds for a select few states to <br />_*.....t:___ ............he- mod{f;c-"'~o- r----rc'- Tn ~~.:;... r' ----A.....h- '..up ......5 <br />l:"'-....."""....~,; ft'w,,",,"," .... J. ....J.. 0.""..L. u c;;:,cc;.r' U., b.l.. \..,U.oh14 c':ll.toi............ "" 1e: -OJ."" Wc;a <br />non-competitive among states, but it did require matching funds <br />from those states allowed to participate in it. After evaluating <br />the Western Kansas Weather Modification Program (WKWMP) late in <br />1994, Kansas Water Office (KWO) officials looked at the AMP as a <br />means of advancing long-term weather modification objectives in <br />Kansas. However, by then federal budget cutting was already too far <br />advanced and the program became unfunded in the NOAA budget. <br /> <br />The reason program reinstatement failed to gain new senatorial <br />support was due to the its uncompetitive underpinnings, not its <br />intent. Senators from moisture-short Arizona, liked the program <br />objectives, but couldn't support the legislation as written. so, a <br />different approach is to be taken which would eliminate references <br />to specific states only being considered for next year. <br /> <br />The new language would appropriate funding for NOAA's AMP by <br />designating it for.....atmospheric modification research in states <br />making a significant state/local expenditure and/or commitment to <br />the development and/or application of the technology". The exact <br />wording is still uncertain, but its intent is to end "earmarkinq" <br />of funds to specific states yet ensuring that those states making <br />a financial commitment which need federal support would receive it. <br /> <br />This could open up some interesting possibilities for Kansas. <br />If the new legislation eventually passes, the Kansas Water Office <br />should be working closely with people from the scientific community <br />and our program. perhaps we can make significant progress in many <br />areas which will have benefit for Western Kansas and other Plains <br />States. A, research program, as described, would help us achieve our <br />own stated goals, which are: to reduce crop-damaging hail and to <br />increase rainfall when needed. If we accomplish our goals we will <br />benefit the agricultural community directly and, by extension, the <br />regional economy which it supports. Property owners everywhere, <br />whether in communities or in rural areas, should also benefit, <br />long-term. <br />