September 22, 1971

Honorable Peter H. Dominick
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Dominick,

I was much interested to read your extension of remarks on
“drought in Western United States and in Florida” which appeared in
the Congressional Record for August 6th.

The political-technological tangle in the field of weather
modification for thea@léviation of drought is very similar to what
prevails in hurricane modification, I am enclosing a commentary
on that situation which appeared recently in The Washington Post
but which was drafted some weeks earlier,

There are, I am told, technical reasons that might make hurricane
modification a more appropriate field in which to demonstrate the
efficacy of technical interventions. Three seedings in the storm fury
program, conducted under severe restrictions, have already given us
@ great deal of information and a rather small number of additional
trials bids fair to provide conclusive evidence, The question is
whether these trials should now be moved to an operational context.

I cannot pretend to be a primary expert in meteorological engineering
but my interpretation of what I have read is that the obstacles are
more political than technical,

Here is one situation where the decision cannot and will not be made
by the engineers, Congress and the Executive have an obligation to
ventilate the pros and cons and reach a political decision. This will
certainly have to include new statutory law to define the recourse
available to individuals with claims of unfair injury.

The same, of course, applies to efforts at rain making for one man's
irrigation may be another's flood, And a third may be deprived of water he
would have received in the “natural” course of events.

The re-equilibration of political interests is a formidable task and
I hope you will persevere in your efforts to further the essential political
decisions which are a precondition of technical progress,

Sincerely yours,

Joshua Lederberg
Professor of Genetics

JL/rr

Enclosure