We need a balanced effort to avoid waste and duplication. Significant attention must be given to the biological, ecological, and legal aspects of weather modification.

S. 373 provides a vehicle for achieving each of these goals.

But S. 373 may also serve to avoid many of the frustrations of the past. I say this because I am one who openly laments the "lost decade" in weather modification-that period of "scientific silence" which extended from 1957 to 1966.

As you may recall, in 1953 Congress enacted Public Law 83-256 which created the Advisory Committee on Weather Control whose express purpose was to conduct a complete study and evaluation of experiments in weather modification. The final report of the advisory committee was issued in 1957 and it contained the conclusion that precipitation could be increased 10 to 15 percent by employing accepted weather modification techniques. The report also called for an extensive research program, both basic and applied in weather modification. Neither the research nor the applied programs envisioned in the report were pursued.

Despite the encouraging data contained in the advisory committee report in 1957 and despite a specific mandate given to the National Science Foundation in Public Law 85-510 to modify its research mission by adding an operational engineering function, our Federal weather modification programs remained in the laboratory and well within the definition of "basic research."

Then in January 1966 two authoritative reports on weather modification were issued. One was presented by the National Academy established and supported by the National Science Foundation. These reports substantially confirmed the conclusions reached in 1957 by the Advisory Committee on Weather Control concerning the precipitation increases from the seeding of certain clouds.

In retrospect, the conclusions of 1957 could well have been acted upon in 1958, for they were confirmed in 1966. Hopefully, the "lost decade" will not be repeated.

S. 373 is identical to S. 2916 which passed the Senate in October 1966. Extensive hearings were held on the bill in 1966 and I participated in these hearings as a then member of the Senate Committee on Commerce. Based on those hearings, the original bill was substantially amended by the committee before passing the Senate and I am confident that the scientific community will offer additional constructive suggestions during the course of these hearings. I am confident that this bill can serve as a vehicle not only to achieve the goals I outlined earlier but also to insure the proper application of our growing body of knowledge in the field of weather modification.

What then is the need for S. 2058? I am convinced that now is the time to move ahead more aggressively with the operational aspects of weather modification. I am convinced that we need to accelerate the shift in emphasis from one of basic research to one of application. I believe this can be accomplished with a greater degree of certainty through the enactment of S. 2058.

In fact, we are finally beginning to achieve a balance between the basic research and applied research in the area of increased precipitation through weather modification.

I envision this bill as a "nudge"-a firm nudge toward the beneficial application of precipitation-producing weather modification techniques. In a sense, it is an effort to bring us to one short step this side of tomorrow. I emphasize one "short" step because I fully realize the limitations, the problems, the unresolved questions interwoven into the body of knowledge we have acquired in weather modification.

S. 2058 would direct the President to appoint a coordinating Council consisting of the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce, the Director of the National Science Foundation, and four public members. Two of the public members would be from universities and two from private firms experienced in the field. In my judgment, the Council represents a broad base of expertise which would insure that divergent views within the field of weather modification would share in the establishment of policy.

The Secretary of the Interior in consultation with the Council would be required to prepare within 6 months a plan for the practical application of weather modification programs in the Upper Colorado River Basin. The bill provides that the plan would be carried out by contract with universities and private concerns. The bill would authorize $3 million for 3 successive fiscal years.

The bill expresses the "intent of Congress" that two-thirds of the funds be spent for research. This was done with the recognition that a balance is necessary between research and the operational aspects of weather modification.

The bill clearly is intended to move more boldly in the direction of application.

Frankly, the idea for the bill was conceived during the hearings on weather modification held by this committee in 1966 and by the Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources of the Senate Committee on Interior in 1967. I feel this bill is completely compatible with the atmospheric water resources program of the Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, as announced in November 1966. I commend the Bureau for their relatively aggressive program and, in fact, S. 2058 should supplement this effort. For this reason, I would hope that S. 2058 would receive more than "faint" praise from the Department of Interior. As a matter of fact, Mr. Chairman, it has not. I received a copy of Mr. Kenneth Holum's letter the other day in which it seems perfectly apparent to me that he hasn't studied the bill with any care. He says that the objectives are all right but that they can do it within their own program now; just leave them alone, and they will get enough money and they will finally get around to it. I don't think that this is objective nor do I think he studied the bill. Now, I will comment on that later.

I envisioned this bill as a pilot project-totally compatible with the pilot project concept announced by the Department of Interior in their program. But it would have the advantages of a pilot project specifically authorized and specifically funded.

I have been informed that the lack of adequate funding has, in fact, caused the retardation of our weather modification programs. In fact, in the hearings before the Senate Subcommittee on Water and PowerResources of the Committee on Interior held April 4, 1967, Secretary Udall, in explaining the Department's weather modification program, stated and I quote, "And probably my own people would say

that they could use additional money, that they could use it well, and that this would make the program move faster."

The statement of Dr. Thomas F. Bates, Science Adviser to the Secretary, in the same hearings confirmed the fact that the lack of funds was retarding the weather modification program. Dr. Bates said and I quote, "Despite the great interest in the subject, the requirements for economy in Government activities precluded immediate expansion except on a very modest scale."

Again in the same hearings, Senator Bible asked Dr. Kahan, "You are basing that on the $5 million of funding of this year? This was your request in the appropriation?" Dr. Kahan: "Yes, although we can see ways of employing wisely more funds if they are made available." And I'm sure that was true, Doctor.

Based on the hearings conducted in 1966 by the Senate Committee on Commerce and in 1967 by the Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources of the Interior Committee, it is clear that the lack of funds has retarded the weather modification program. And, of course, S. 2058, if enacted, would supply more funds, $3 million per year, which I think is critically needed to move the application of our weather modification program forward.

S. 2058 provides that the applied aspects of the pilot program would take place in the Colorado River Basin. I believe, Mr. Chairman, particularly you and I and those of us who live out here know of the critical need for water in our region. And of equal importance is the fact that this is where the Bureau is currently conducting its field research. It should be further noted that Dr. Kahan in the 1967 hearings, when discussing areas which would have early operational capabilities stated, "The area most likely to be in this condition early is the Colorado River Basin."

To further underscore the compatibility of S. 2058 with the programs now being conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation, I would like to quote from the 1966 hearings held in Denver which I had the privilege of presiding over. In discussing an operational program, I asked Dr. Kahan

How much money and mechanics are we talking about?

Dr. KAHAN. There is not now at the present time an adequate network of observation in the Colorado River Basin to undertake the kind of observations on a large scale. We have invested several hundreds of thousands of dollars in our program in instrumentation, and the job is really just beginning.

I would say that there would need to be at least as much money spent in the evaluation effort as was spent in the operational aspect, and probably several times as much.

Senator DOMINICK. Do you feel that from the operational point of view you could set up a meaningful program at a million dollars a year?

Dr. KAHAN. Yes, sir.

Senator DOMINICK. From your observational point of view, how much money would be needed?

Dr. KAHAN. I was thinking that I could take that million dollars and divide it between observational and operational. If you are asking how big a program I would mount if a million dollars had to be spent in just paying for the operation of silver iodide generators, I would want three times that much to observe what was going on.

This above-quoted testimony formed the basis for S. 2058. To conform with Dr. Kahan's statement, the funds contained in the bill would have to be spent on a 3-to-1 ratio for observation and evalua

tion purposes. Actually, I contemplate spending a million dollars a year over 3 years for operational purposes and $2 million a year for 3 years for evaluation and observation, new techniques, and so on. Senator CANNON. Conforming to the ratio that Dr. Kahan mentioned?

Senator DOMINICK. That's correct, yes.

Now, the previous hearings held by this committee as well as the hearings held by the Senate Committee on Interior clearly demonstrated the economic and scientific justification for the program suggested in S. 2058.

Again, Dr. Kahan, I seem to be using his testimony rather fully here. I would like to close by quoting a statement from him at the 1967 Interior hearings.

Speaking of Commissioner Floyd E. Dominy's views on weather modification, Dr. Kahan said, and I quote, "He has insisted from the outset that the program should be soundly grounded in science and seek to grow only as fast as sound planning and proper management would permit."

Continuing, Dr. Kahan said, and I quote, "Now the time is right to shift into high gear." And, again, I agree, now is the time to shift into high gear, and that's why I have put up S. 2058 and that's why I hope it will be enacted.

Now, I must say, Mr. Chairman, if I may just ad lib for a few minutes, that I reviewed the report which was given to the Interior Committee by Mr. Holum-signed by Mr. Holum, anyhow-dated on June 11, 1968. So it is very recent. And in commenting on S. 2058, he recommends that the bill not be enacted. And he goes into a whole group of things. Basically what he says is that passage of the bill is unnecessary, that they are already doing it.

Senator CANNON. Well, if I may interrupt, he doesn't recommend that it not be enacted, but that it be enacted with certain changes that he outlined at some length, as I interpret his letter here.

Senator DOMINICK. Well, I certainly hope you're right. I'm certainly not fixed into any specific form of bill. But he says that my bill emphasizes only the first two elements; namely, cloud seeding and evaluation. As a matter of fact, I specifically referred in the bill to the environmental studies on ecology and the water law and all these kinds of things.

Senator CANNON. If I may interrupt

Senator DOMINICK. And new techniques.

Senator CANNON. I was referring to his statement on S. 373. Senator DOMINICK. Yes; S. 373 he's in favor of. It's my bill that he says is unnecessary.

Senator CANNON. I'm sorry for interrupting you. I wanted to correct that. Yes; he did recommend that S. 2058 not be enacted.

Senator DOMINICK. That's correct. And I just don't know if he ever really studied the bill. And it is exasperating to me. He says on page 4 at the top, for example, and I quote, "It would appear to be unduly restrictive from a scientific and engineering viewpoint to incorporate this type of fixed and arbitrary ratio into basic authorizing legislation for a rapidly changing research, development, and implementation program."

And I just finished reading Dr. Kahan's statement saying that this is exactly the ratio that they would need in order to put a meaningful program together. As I say, he quotes five points but he says I only covered two of them. As a matter of fact, I covered at least four, maybe all five of them, in the bill. This is why I said I wonder whether he really studied it.

In any event, I would hope that we could have a review and I could take this up again with the Department and go into it, solely because I think the Interior Department, in an effort to say, "We're going to go our own way and not do anything else," are cutting off their own. nose to spite their face. And I say it very frankly.

Now, S. 373 is an excellent bill, but if we are going to go into the operational phase, which I think we need to do, we're going to have to make a start somewhere and we're not making any starts now.

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate you letting me take this time. I would like to sit in and participate with you on the rest of the hearing.

Senator CANNON. I would be very happy to have you sit in and participate completely in the hearing.

Senator DOMINICK. Thank you, sir.

Senator CANNON. The next witness is Dr. Werner A. Baum, Deputy Administrator of ESSA.

STATEMENT BY WERNER A. BAUM, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

Dr. BAUM. Mr. Chairman, I am Werner A. Baum, Deputy Administrator of the Environmental Science Services Administration, ESSA. I might point out that I will be leaving that post in 3 weeks to assume the presidency of the University of Rhode Island. So I speak as an about-to-be-taxpayer and scientist of broader interest than that represented by my agency.

Senator CANNON. If people would refer to someone like Senator Dominick and myself in such a position, they would say that you are a lame duck at this time.

Dr. BAUM. Precisely correct.

I would also, Mr. Chairman, like to introduce Dr. George S. Benton, who is with me today. Dr. Benton is Director of the ESSA research laboratories which conduct our research program in weather modification and related fields. Dr. Benton will attend your hearings in Reno next week and at that time will discuss the ESSA technical program in some detail. For this reason I will limit my remarks today to the growing need for a logical organization of Federal research in weather modification and the need for a unified national effort.

I have submitted a prepared statement for the record, and to conserve time today I will merely provide a short summary of that state

ment now.

Senator CANNON. The statement will be included in the record in full, and you may summarize from it as you wish.

Dr. BAUM. Thank you, sir.

S. 373 authorizes a broad national program in weather modification and recognizes the importance and relationship of modification to the needs of a number of Federal agencies. The bill authorizes the