Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOJ178 <br /> <br />conduct cloud seeding programs in a safe and beneficial manner. <br />Certain environmental or social issues have been identified as related <br />to winter orographic cloud seeding as a result of these research and <br />operational experiences. Experience has laid to rest some of these <br />issues. Others will require continued data collection and monitoring <br />over a longer term in order to judge their importance and impact. <br /> <br />A Final Environmental Statement for the Colorado River Basin Pilot <br />Project was filed in 1971. The subsequent 5-year San Juan Ecology <br />Study investigated onsite effects on Colorado's San Juan Mountains <br />during the Pilot Project. This and other studies, such as the Medicine <br />Bow Ecology Project, the Sierra Ecology Project in California and <br />Nevada, and the Skywater IX Conference, provided information applicable <br />to long-term cloud seeding. The Project Skywater Programmatic Final <br />Environmental Statement, filed in 1977, described both past and ongoing <br />field programs and evaluated potential impacts of future activities. <br /> <br />The Project Skywater Programmatic Final Environmental Statement found <br />cloud seeding would not significantly affect the environment in research <br />programs ot limited duration and presented an initial survey of effects <br />that might occur if the technology were applied over long periods of <br />time. It also reported that seeding agents were not found to have a <br />significant effect on the environment in both Reclamation and National <br />Science Foundation sponsored research. <br /> <br />2. Legal issues. - Legal questions concerning weather modification <br />programs can be divided into four general categories: general liabil- <br />ity concerns, regulation, social costs, and water rights. The com- <br />plexity of the questions in each category varies according to the <br />weather element and the geographic area affected, from county to county <br />within a river basin to mu1tijurisdictiona1 or international scales. <br />The legal and public response to the technology is evolving. Properly, <br />these responses and policy determinations have corresponded to the <br />state-of-the-art evolution of the technology. Notwithstanding accept- <br />ance of the principle that nonbeneficiaries as well as beneficiaries <br />should be treated equitably, only limited legal guidance can be <br />expected prior to the scientific development and proof of the tech- <br />nology. Scientific confirmation of the technology is a primary goal of <br />the proposed demonstration program. <br /> <br />Colorado and Utah have enacted weather modification laws which claim <br />rights to all water produced in the State through weather modification <br />technology. There is increasing agreement that water produced by cloud <br />seeding during CREST should be considered as part of the natural water <br />supply until the technology is demonstrated and an evaluation completed <br />which will permit quantification of augmented flows. If an operational <br />precipitation management program were initiated to produce water to <br />meet needs involving the Federal Government, the question of a potential <br />Federal water right claim to the new water will concern the States and <br />other water rights owners. A policy decision regarding legal claim by <br />the Federal Government will be desired by State and local interests as <br />they develop their own policies and attitudes about such a program. To <br />meet this requirement, work will be continued with representatives of <br /> <br />37 <br />