and directly related to air pollution problems. As set forth in the recent reports of the National Academy of Sciences and the National Science Foundation, considerable experience has been gained in augmentation of water supply, control of lightning and fog, and some worthwhile steps have been taken in the field of damage from hail. The advice of the persons and organizations who have been active in this field should be utilized, in framing legislation and the future development of weather modification technology and practice.

There is obvious reason for separating such regulatory agencies as the Federal Power Commission and FAA from research and practice in these fields. Similarly, responsibility for regulation of weather modification activity should be separated from the agencies which conduct these activities.

With these points in mind, it is suggested that the following persons may bring worthwhile experience and understanding to your committee. We believe that each one would respond favorably to an invitation to your committee hearings in Denver, Colo.

Richard A. Schleusener, director, Institute of Atmospheric Sciences, School of Mines, Rapid City, S. Dak.

Wendell A. Mordy, director, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada, Reno, Nev.

Ill.

Eugene Bollay, E. Bollay Associates, Boulder, Colo.

Boynton Beckwith, meteorology department, United Air Lines, Chicago, Donald M. Fuquay, U.S. Forest Fire Research Laboratory, Missoula, Mont. William Parsons, meteorologist, Pacific Gas & Electric Co., San Francisco, Calif.

R. N. Coe, vice president, Southern California Edison Co., Los Angeles, Calif. Several principles are important if maximum benefit is to be realized from legislation in the field of weather modification:

1. Regulation of weather modification activities should retain and support the experience and achievements of private industry, local and national governmental agencies, and encourage continuing contributions.

2. Weather modification research and operations should utilize fully the capabilities of universities and industries.

3. Weather modification activities in Government should be assigned to agencies which have demonstrated vigor and competence in this area.

4. Weather modification activities should develop the consideration of the atmosphere as a natural resource.

Sincerely,

WILLIAM H. WISELY, Executive Secretary.

WEATHER MODIFICATION BY LOUIS J. BATTAN, PROFESSOR OF METEOROLOGY AND ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF ATMOSPHERIC PHYSICS, THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA, TUCSON, ARIZ., AND PRESIDENT, AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY, BOSTON, MASS.

Thank you for the invitation to submit a statement relevant to S. 2916 and S. 23, two bills dealing with weather modification. The American Meteorological Society has a vital interest in these matters and as president I would like the record to show our desires that research efforts in weather modification and the atmospheric sciences in general be substantially enlarged. Secondly, as a scientist who has been actively engaged in research in cloud physics and weather modification since the early fifties, I would like to express my personal views on these subjects.

AMERICAN METEOROLOGICAL SOCIETY

Since its founding in 1919, the American Meteorological Society has played an important role in the advancement of meteorology in the United States and, indeed, has exerted a constructive influence on meteorology around the world. The objectives of the society as stated in its constitution are, "The development and dissemination of knowledge of meteorology in all its phases and applications and the advancement of its professional ideals."

The society has a membership of about 8,000, roughly half of whom are professional members. Among this group are scientists engaged in research on the atmospheric sciences as well as professional meteorologists engaged in weather forecasting or the providing of other meteorological services. For the most part, the members are associated with government agencies, universities, profit and nonprofit corporations or as private weather consultants. All of the Federal agencies involved in geophysical activities are represented on the society's membership roles.

The society as an organization, has been concerned primarily with what needs to be done in the atmospheric sciences, rather than who should do the job. Within this framework it has focused attention on particular scientific and technical problems requiring attention. Among the most pressing problems are the following: improved weather observations over oceans and sparsely populated areas; improved weather forecasting; increased activity in air pollution research; enlarged efforts in the study of the upper atmosphere; a better understanding of radiation processes in the atmosphere; greater efforts in the study of severe weather events such as violent thunderstorms, hail, tornadoes and hurricanes; and the development of means for detecting and forecasting clearair turbulence.

The subject of weather modification has had the special attention of the society. Its executive director, Mr. Kenneth C. Spengler, was a member of the President's Advisory Committee on Weather Control during its existence from 1953 to 1957. In May 1957 the society, after a survey of the state of knowledge in weather modification, issued a statement giving the society's opinions on the subject. A new committee is now engaged in the preparation of a new society position.

Over the past 15 years the society has been a major force in dissemination of information concerned with research and other activities in weather modification. It has done this through the medium of conferences on regional, national, and international scales. A significant number of these conferences have been cosponsored with such organizations as the American Geophysical Union, American Society of Civil Engineers, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Probably the major function performed by the American Meteorological Society in fulfilling the objectives of its charter is the publication of periodicals containing the results of basic and applied research in the atmospheric sciences. The society issues the following journals: Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Journal of Atmospheric Sciences, Meteorological Monographs, Weatherwise, and Meteorological and Geoastrophysical Abstracts.

All of these outstanding publications, contain articles or information directly or indirectly bearing on the subject of weather modification. The Journal of Applied Meteorology started in 1962 has become a favored vehicle for the publication of articles on this subject. The last periodical listed, briefly called the Abstracts, represents an invaluable source of information for researchers, particularly for students and others newly interested in weather modification and related subjects.

In its publication activities, the aims of the society are to stimulate more and better research and services by all its members-government, university, and private. It has become increasingly clear in recent years that the national effort in the field of weather and climate modification falls far short of the level the problems deserve. The American Meteorological Society stands ready to take its rightful place in an enlarged effort.

INDIVIDUAL VIEWS

For the last 15 years, the author of this document has been directly involved with cloud physics and weather modification research. As a consequence, I have certain opinions on the subject and would like to express them. It is emphasized that these views are strictly my own and are not to be construed as representing those of the American Meteorological Society.

In certain respects the report by the Panel on Weather and Climate Modification of the National Academy of Sciences is in agreement with the final report issued in 1957 by the President's Advisory Committee on Weather Control. The Academy report notes that the evidence on hand supports the conclusions that in certain circumstances precipitation may be increased by 10 to 20 percent. How

ever, the careful wording of the conclusions should not be overlooked. Thes not say it has been proved that precipitation can be increased. They sug optimism and hold out the hope for precipitation increases, but do not pro...... them.

Both the Academy report and the one issued by the Special Commission in Weather Modification of the National Science Foundation caution that tain instances, cloud seeding might lead to precipitation decreases

In my view, the evidence points to three possible effects on ra.i-fall by e seeding with ice nuclei: (1) increase, (2) decrease, or (3) no effect.

basis of number of project studies, the first category is dominant, but it is not e that one can confidently prediet beforehand which result is likely to oo ur a give an adequate explanation therefore.

For these reasons, rainfall augmentation cannot be regarded as entirely in category of an engineering project. To be sure once a clond-seeding prow-t ins been adequately designed, its conduct is largely one of engineering The des and selection of precipitation measuring gages, their installation and mainter the design, testing, and operation of the seeing generators are ulei problems. Also, if the project has been properly designed, even the anni the data can be largely routine, insofar as answering the que tion “P! cloud seeding increase precipitation?" However, the interpretation of **» collected in terms of the physical mechanisms involved is by no means rou It requires meteorological knowledge and insight.

In the design phase of a cloud seeding project, it is essential that talents of meteorologist, statistician, and in some cases engineer be em; It is essential that every program be planned and carried out in such a f that at the conclusion, valid statistical and physical evaluations can be tage ‘a determine if the seeding had any effect. A large measure of the uncerta.. existing today in the evaluation of weather modification exist because to stre few of the many projects conducted during the past 15 years have involved type of controls needed to draw convincing inferences about the restij 'a.

It is reasonable to ask why this is regarded as an appropriate time enlarged research effort. In my opinion, there are several reasons: (1) A conclusive proof of the efficacy of cloud seeding for rainfail ang sentat not in hand, the evidence strongly suggests that in certain circumstar w crenses of 10 to 20 percent can be produced. (2) The growing need f supplies of fresh water makes it imperative that all possible strivs vestigated. (3) We now have a better understanding of the proper as i systems and their microphysics than we had 10 to 15 years ago struments are now available for cloud and precipitation observati (t.s radar, aircraft instrumentation, and satellitesi, (5) New Theoret of atmospheric phenomena coupled with high speed computers alw tions which would have been virtually impossible a decade ago of scientists with an interest in weather modification reagrch 1 and continues to increase (7) There is an increasing desire with in the Government to tackle the difficult job of weather mod tention and determination within the Congress that progress be accelerated

Most of the emphasis in weather modification research has been certi ramfall with.ulation Other areas of study also need to be givet. It tention The accumulation of engineering data for use in drum,jan* I' cooled clouds and fogs over airports has been unnecessarily slow develoring techiiques for opening holes through "warm" fogs has bee jointing

Research in the physis of hail and hail suppression has been gre Efforts abroad particulariy from Russia, Switzerin d. a i are conflicting The Russians report amazing access in hul wi means of toe nimi'ei moeding, other groups suggest that seedling in În stances in,ght cause more damaging hai Inight of the trem end tion of agricutural products in the United States, it is esset.'...al that more about hall-tortus at.d how to influence them.

The research programs on such problems as lightning suppress m. difcation, tornado monicali n, falat from very kundes, to vi

The need for investigation of the causes for climatic change a bility of exertag 15 jenes on the climate are of great timp rảnh, v regard the requirement for further international coop rat, ni beste

ingly obvious. The climate on one part of the globe cannot be changed without causing a change on other areas. The problem is, of course, quite complicated. At the present it is impossible to predict satisfactorily what the consequences would be if any large part of the earth were to be artificially warmed or cooled. As has been noted by others, it is essential that a better understanding of climate be obtained before attempting any experiments of this nature.

How much larger should the program of weather modification be than it is today? How fast should it grow? How many qualified people are working in this area today and how many can be attracted as more funds become available? How crucial are weather modification problems when compared with other Government programs?

These questions are not easy to answer. Clearly the present funding is inadequate when measured against the number of people eager to work on the problems and the importance of weather modification in relation to other Government programs. The Academy Committee and the NSF Commission project requirements of $20 to $50 million by 1970. Considering that the fiscal 1966 budget for Federal programs is $7.2 million, these projections do not strike me as exorbitant.

In my view, decisions on which agencies should play a major role in carrying out weather modification research should certainly take into account performances in the past as well as the existing scientific and professional staff with meteorological competence. At this stage the major problems are still meteorological ones.

On this basis, the National Science Foundation's program in weather modification research should not only be continued but should be enlarged. With limited resources at its command, the Foundation has supported an active and productive program at universities, private companies, and has assisted various Government research efforts through transfer of funds. In supporting university research on the basis of merit, the Foundation has made it possible to carry out meaningful research. Some of this research has built the foundations for work now being financed by other agencies. A very important consideration which must be taken into account is that university support from NSF has provided for the training of graduate students and increased the number of available scientists.

The Environmental Science Services Administration (ESSA) has the greatest concentration of atmospheric scientists of all the Government agencies. Over the year it has shown that it can efficiently manage large observational programs involving up-to-date equipment. In the past the Weather Bureau, for various reasons, one of them being a shortage of funds, has not had an ambitious weather modification effort. Senate bill S. 2916 proposes that the Department of Commerce, presumably through ESSA, be authorized to carry out an enlarged program of weather modification. Since progress in this field will depend largely on the scientific talent employed, it makes sense to me that a greatly enlarged effort in ESSA be supported. It also seems reasonable to me that ESSA be charged with the responsibility of monitoring weather modification activities to prevent undesirable interference between projects, to protect federally supported programs from liability, and to indemnify the public for damages which might arise as a result of Government-supported work. ESSA also is a logical agency to assume the responsibility for collecting and evaluating data produced by weather modification projects and for publishing the results at reasonable intervals.

Other Federal agencies having specific mission requirements should also be supported in larger measure. The work of the Bureau of Reclamation has brought about the initiation of precipitation augmentation projects in the West. These new programs promise to yield answers to important questions relating to increased precipitation in a number of river basins.

Agencies such as the Federal Aviation Agency, Forest Service, Air Force, Army, and Navy have specific programs concerned with their assigned missions. In the past some of these agencies have had to seek funds from the National Science Foundation to conduct research. Their programs should be supported directly at the levels which can be reasonably justified.

At the present time, Federal efforts in weather modification research is partitioned among the Departments of Defense, Commerce, Interior, Agriculture, and the National Science Foundation. Certainly close coordination is needed and a mission-oriented agency needs to be assigned certain regulatory responsibili

ties.

But at the present time there does not appear to be sufficient information on hand to justify the centralization of all authority in one agency. In my opinion, the absence of such centralized authority has not been the major reason for the inadequacy of our research efforts in weather modification. The low level of support and the shortage of qualified scientists must be regarded as important reasons for slow progress. Note that although Federal expenditures in weather modification research in fiscal 1965 and 1966 are listed as about $5 and $7.2 million, for the preceding 6 years they averaged just slightly over $3 million per year for the entire national effort.

The realization is that a much greater research effort is overdue and the trend of increased funding over the last 2 years has injected new life into weather modification research. Continued increases in funding are in order if the problems are to be solved in reasonable times. At the same time, greater coordination is needed within the Government to assure that the available funds are being used wisely.

I thank you for the opportunity to express these views.

UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON,
Seattle, Wash., March 4, 1966.

Hon. Senator WARREN MAGNUSON,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: Because of the present stage of development of weather modification and the lack of scientists trained in this phase of atmos pheric sciences, I feel it would be unwise to place the sole responsibility of weather modification and climate control, including research and training of a future generation of scientists, under a single Government agency.

Therefore, I wish to point out that since 1958 the National Science Foundation has had the responsibility of initiating and supporting programs of study and research in the field of weather modification. The Foundation has pursued this goal by providing financial support on a wide basis to Government, university, and private research teams engaged in theoretical and applied research activities in weather modification. As a result of these programs many significant scientific advances have been made in the subject.

The bill now before you proposes that the responsibility for weather modification research and applied work be removed from the National Science Foundation and placed with the Secretary of Commerce. Numerous arguments for and against such a move will be put to you, but we do not wish to add to these here. We would, however, like to draw your attention to the important role which university research and teaching has to play in any national program of weather modification.

Firstly, it is clear that university research teams, by virtue of their emphasis on fundamental research into the physical processes which lead to the formation of clouds and to the development of snow and rain, will continue to provide the scientific basis for weather and climate modification experiments. It is only through a continuation and expansion of such basic research that further progress is likely to be made in the field. Secondly, no matter which Government agency is assigned the responsibility of directing the national program, it must ultimately rely on university departments to provide sufficient numbers of properly trained scientists in this field. It is a sobering thought that at the present time this country produces fewer than five Ph. D. students per year who have specialized in the physics of clouds and weather modification.

I would therefore urge that steps be taken to insure that if and when increased funds are appropriated for new programs in weather modification, commensurate funds be made available for university research, teaching and complete funding of buildings for this subject and the related atmospheric sciences. By virtue of its responsibility to support basic research and education in the sciences, the National Science Foundation would seem the appropriate agency to administer the funds for the all-important university research and training of men who will be capable of directing weather modification experiments. Sincerely,

P. E. CHURCH,

Professor of Atmospheric Sciences.