Laserfiche WebLink
<br />002410 <br /> <br />Funds for projects authorized lito minimize abnormal weather conditions" were to <br /> <br />be appropriated to the Colorado Water Conservation Board. To detennine need for <br /> <br /> <br />such projects, the board was to consider precipitation records of the previous <br /> <br /> <br />summer, snowfall moisture content of the previous two winters, current or <br /> <br /> <br />anticipated reservoir storage levels, statistics on the percent of normal <br /> <br /> <br />streamflow anticipated in specified river basins, and demonstration of major <br /> <br /> <br />hardship from abnonnal natural precipitation patterns. <br /> <br />The 'bill was heard in the House Agriculture and Natural Resource Committee where <br /> <br /> <br />support was not sufficient to overcome the opposition of various committee <br /> <br /> <br />members and interest groups. The appropriation was ultimately reduced by <br /> <br /> <br />committee amendment to a one time amount of $50,000. This contrasted with the <br /> <br /> <br />initial request of $1,400,000 for a seven year period. <br /> <br />In a compromise effort the bill was also amended to allow privately funded <br /> <br /> <br />weather modification projects to be considered ~n the event snowpack water <br /> <br />content was less than 100 perc ent of the prior 15 year average. This made the <br /> <br />legislation more acceptable to the ski areas. House Bill 1221 finally passed the <br /> <br />House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee and was forwarded to the <br /> <br />Appropriations Committee. The proponents of the bill could not muster further <br /> <br />support and the bill received no further hearing, <br /> <br />Past experience indicates that a weather modification research bill is unlikely <br /> <br /> <br />to pass without support of a number of interest group lobbies. Such support was <br /> <br />not forthcoming in 1980. <br /> <br />20 <br />