BOARD00272

• Board Meeting Date: 7/28/2003
• Description: Flood Section - Weather Modification Program
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Badn Rverale SnOll ~ater Content.

( X of Rverage.)

Program, SWE levels were between 102% and
117% in or near the target areas. It" is also
noteworthy to state that SWE levels were low in
the central and south Utah Mountains program.
This might be due to the fact that Utah is the
nation's second driest state. Is this definitive
evidence, not likely but it is noteworthy.

Conclusions: The CWCB staff hopes that this
report was informative and will continue to
update the board on new and existing programs in
Colorado. The science of weather modification is
controversial as there are many unknowns and as
programs grow there is potential for
environmental conflicts with user
groups. This program also has potential
to be one of the useful natural resource
management tools in current and future
years. One of the key points is not to
oversell cloud seeding as the answer to
problems. It can only augment
snowpack levels and only in years with
sufficient orographic storm systems.
Overselling Cloud seeding was done in
previous years and hurt the operational
programs. It can only augment
snowpack and only in years where there
are appropriate storm systems in the
target areas. Cloud Physics and cloud
dynamics are very complicated processes and the science and operational community for weather
modification have been struggling for decades with ways to truly document gains in precipitation
produced from operational programs. However, it is known that these programs work to some extent are
beneficial to water users. One would only need to look at the 30-year program in the Sierra Nevada
Mountains and 23-year program in Utah to realize that other states have invested and believe in this
technology.
The CWCB staff believes that as the projects and programs continue to grow so should the states
capability to administer the weather modification program and monitor permits for compliance and
negative environmental impacts in Colorado. Guiding documents at the USBR list cloud seeding as one
of the potential exploratory areas for future water development and the CWCB sees potential for future
collaboration with federal agencies and local governments to provide funding, guidance and evaluation
for weather modification programs. The CWCB staff wm continue to develop web-based products, seek
guidance and collaboration with the experts and collect scientific studies to expand the state's capability
to assist local governments and local water users. If there is any additional information that the board or
water managers or public should want I will make it part of the Weather Modification Permitting Program
objectives for the 2003-2004 season.

"
"
..

"

.

"

..

..

,~" 91 21
..

9110
..

"
"ti1l6 11

"
"
~ 9 6~

t3 ~ ., M
"
..

"

Ii 113
'"
n 1~2

!If!
..
1166.
..

.. ,

'"

Report Date:

"

APRIL 27 ,200S

6216269
. "

, ,

ProvlslonalOata
Basecl on l10untllln Data frQII1NRCSStlOTEL Sl.tes

.

Automated cloud seeding generators In the
Sierra Nevada Mountains. Pictures
provided by Arlen Huggins of the Desert
Research Institute

.

12