Laserfiche WebLink
<br />program, which is due the first of September. We will have that report <br />prepared and attempt to .analyze what happened during this winter.: <br /> <br />Based upon that report, we. hope to propose a long-range program. That <br />long-range program must take into consideration federal and local fund- <br />ing. We hope to put that together so that we can recommend to the Board <br />by late summer or early fall a long-range, continuing program. We are I <br />not prepared to do that at this time. We simply don't have theinfor- <br />mation on which to evaluate a continuing, long-range program.. This is <br />the first year in the history of the state that we have conducted a <br />comprehensive weather modification program.: As a matter of, fact, this <br />is one of the largest programs ever conducted in the history of the <br />united States. : It will take a while .to. analyze .that program. Because <br />of the budgetary limitations and the personnel limitations, we could <br />not give the Legislature this year a request for funds for the next year. <br /> <br />, , <br />However, if the Legislature wishes to appropriate funds, <br />we can use them. I have suggested that, ~f they do want <br />funds, we could use about $250,000 this coming year. <br /> <br />, <br />then :I am sure <br />to appropriate <br /> <br />We do think the program ~s extremely worthwhile and the only chance that <br />Colorado has to increase its water 'supply in :the future. We have a lot <br />of local cooperators who are really sold on the program, the ski areas, <br />various water :conservancy districts, the Denver Water Board, and others. <br />They are convinced ,that the program pays. great dividends at a :very low <br />cost per acre-foot. We think the cost per acre-foot of water produced <br />by the weather modification program probably does not exceed a dollar <br />per acre-foot, something in, that range. There -is no other way we can <br />produce water that cheaply.: <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: As a member of the weather modification advisory. committee <br />.in our area, I am constantly asked the question: "How much more pre- <br />cipitation are we receiving?" In discusssing this matter with Ralph <br />Papania, they are trying to monitor the increase. Do you expect that <br />you will get any quantitative evaluation of the increase as a result, of <br />the work this year? <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS:: Yes, we. have 'considerable information based upon .the. many <br />years of experiments conducted by the. Department of the Interior in the <br />San Juan Basin. That was a five-year pilot program. They have indepen- <br />dent firms evaluating the :results of that program; if you can read all <br />the scientific jargon that is in those reports and strip it out, you. <br />will:find that in some storms they concluded that the induced or addi- <br />tional precipitation went as high as 55 percent for certain storms. <br />The average 'was more in the range of 15 to 20 percent. Even so, that I <br />is a considerable amount of water. ,That means that we should be able <br />to increase the snowpack in Colorado':'by well over a million acre-feet <br />annually~ We are trying to get more definitive figures. It is a~v~ry <br />tough proposition, but we have a lot of background information on it <br />already. <br /> <br />, <br />MR. FURNEAUX: I have a question. Larry, I heard on the news this <br />morning that there is considerable resistance in the Legislature:to <br />Tuture 'funding of that program. Have you heard anything about that? <br />I suppose that is normal. <br /> <br />-30- <br />