In January 2025, California experienced the costliest wildfire in history. Politicians and political pundits attempted to attribute blame based on various theories, and some suggested using cloud seeding as a solution to induce rain and put out the fires. While viewed as absurd by many, the efficacy of cloud seeding is well documented. However, cloud seeding faces numerous legal challenges. This Essay examines issues of causation and proposed burden-shifting frameworks for addressing causation, the lack of a uniform regulatory environment, liability when used by ski resorts, disproportionate harm to disadvantaged communities, and the use of geoengineering to combat climate change. Finally, the Essay concludes by examining how cloud seeding serves as a microcosm of the larger geoengineering issues, as cloud seeding regulation, litigation, and adjudication will set a precedent for large-scale geoengineering, which carries the potential of both efficient climate change mitigation and catastrophic environmental harm. In doing so, this Essay provides a valuable framework for assessing competing tradeoffs regarding the legal environment of geoengineering and the inevitable key role it will play in the future of our planet.
I. Cloud Seeding and the California Wildfires
In January 2025, California experienced a wildfire estimated to have cost at least $250 billion.1 The tragedy was followed by much controversy as politicians and political pundits attempted to attribute blame. Accusations of fault included climate change,2 too much focus on DEI policies,3 efforts of environmental groups to impede fire mitigation practices such as controlled burns and vegetation removal,4 and efforts by environmentalists to protect an endangered fish.5 Some politicians even threatened to withhold federal aid if California did not agree to certain policy changes.6
Amidst all of this controversy, Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene promoted the use of cloud seeding geoengineering to help put out the fires.7 Her recommendation was largely met with ridicule.8 This is perhaps because Greene recommended cloud seeding in a way that perpetuated a stereotype that Jewish people control the weather.9 And Greene has a colorful history with this topic, as evidenced by her 2018 suggestion that Jewish people were to blame for deadly California wildfires.10 Regardless, the use of cloud seeding to affect the weather is rooted in science and has a long history in America.11 The practice of cloud seeding—and related geoengineering methods—elicit discussion regarding numerous legal issues.12 This Essay begins by explaining the history, efficacy, and risks of cloud seeding.13 It then discusses issues of causation and proposed burden-shifting frameworks for addressing causation, the lack of a uniform regulatory environment, liability when used by ski resorts, disproportionate harm to disadvantaged communities, and the use of geoengineering to combat climate change.14 Finally, the Essay concludes by considering the significance of how laws are applied to cloud seeding in light of how this would set a precedent for large-scale geoengineering, which has the potential to combat climate change at the risk of causing catastrophic harm.15 This Essay provides a valuable framework for assessing competing tradeoffs regarding geoengineering legislation that will inevitably play a key role in the future of the planet.
II. Cloud Seeding Explained
Cloud seeding, also referred to as “weather resource management,” “rain enhancement,” and “artificial nucleation,” is a subset of geoengineering, which encompasses a variety of practices aimed at artificially manipulating the environment.16 Cloud seeding attempts to alter the weather by injecting chemicals into cumulus clouds.17 It has been implemented in an effort to reach a variety of outcomes such as hurricane suppression,18 increased rain for farmers,19 lightning suppression,20 increased snowfall to help ski resort and summer river sports tourism,21 hail suppression,22 fog mitigation,23 and even for ensuring a rain-free wedding day.24 Cloud seeding has also been used by the U.S. military as a weapon in Vietnam and Laos before it was banned by the Environmental Modification Convention international treaty in 1978.25 In the twenty-first century, cloud seeding is primarily done by injecting chemicals such as silver iodide into clouds by airplane or ground-based rockets.26 This practice dates back to the 1940s.27 The legal implications of cloud seeding are so inextricably intertwined with the practice that they too came about in the 1940s.28 The 1948 inaugural volume of the Stanford Law Review contained an article on cloud seeding titled “Who Owns the Clouds?”29
While early attempts at cloud seeding were largely unscientific,30 today, the efficacy of the practice is well documented.31 However, it is far from an exact science. This reality is demonstrated by the high variability in estimates regarding how much precipitation cloud seeding produces. Estimates of increased precipitation vary from 2% to 5%,32 3% to 10%,33 7%,34 5% to 10%,35 5% to 15%,36 10% or more,37 8% to 15%,38 14%,39 3% to 21%,40 up to 25%,41 and “6.3 to nearly 29 percent.”42 It is important to note that none of these estimates come close to the 51% requirement in but-for-causation.43
The ability to change the weather brings with it the potential for great harm. In 1972, a South Dakota cloud seeding operation resulted in the overflowing of a creek, which caused 238 deaths.44 In China, a cloud seeding operation was followed by a snowstorm that killed forty people and caused over $500 million in damages.45 Cloud seeding in one location risks depriving nearby areas of valuable precipitation, potentially exacerbating devastating droughts.46 The practice of releasing silver iodide into the atmosphere alone may be harmful.47
III. Difficulty of Proving Causation
The limited case law involving cloud seeding produces a common theme: causation is impossible to prove due to its probabilistic nature.48 It is well established that cloud seeding increases the likelihood of rain.49 Unfortunately for plaintiffs, these longitudinal studies are insufficient to show that a specific cloud seeding operation was the but-for cause of damages.50 Cloud seeding increases the likelihood of rain—which can result in damages—but the rainfall, and therefore the damages, might have happened regardless of the cloud seeding operation. Therefore, as one scholar explained, causation is “exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to prove” in cloud seeding litigation.51 This lack of causation applies to nearly every theory of civil liability for cloud seeding, including negligence, trespass, private nuisance, strict liability, res ipsa loquitur, and negligence per se.52
Some have suggested a burden-shifting framework to attribute liability in the absence of causation.53 One such proposal involves the creation of a Weather Modification Trust Fund enacted at the state level to compensate those harmed by cloud seeding operations.54 A simple table could provide an objective standard for when and how much in damages will be awarded based on the timing and location of weather events in relation to cloud seeding operations.55 However, because it would be nearly impossible for cloud seeding operators to prove they did not cause damages, this burden-shifting framework is likely too harsh against the operators. Imposing the potential of extreme liability with no effective defense could lead to cloud seeding becoming financially unfeasible and, therefore, society being deprived of the multiple benefits it offers.
IV. Regulatory Issues
There is little regulation of cloud seeding, and the limited regulation is controlled at the state rather than federal level.56 There is no centralized recordkeeping or federal regulatory regime for the practice.57 And the reporting requirements at the state level are minimal.58 This lack of comprehensive recordkeeping is problematic because it makes it difficult to measure the potential effects cloud seeding may have on climate change.59 Lack of recordkeeping and regulation is further problematic because some cloud seeding operations are experimenting with using new chemicals to inject into clouds. For example, in Texas, operators have been experimenting with a new process called “dual seeding,” which uses a mix of both glaciogenic and hygroscopic materials.60 Finally, the largely unregulated nature of cloud seeding could set a dangerous precedent for future geoengineering projects, which are accompanied by the potential for catastrophic consequences.61
V. Ski Resort Legal Issues
Another potential legal issue with cloud seeding involves its use by ski resorts to enhance snowpack.62 This is of paramount importance to the ski resort industry because being able to either open earlier or stay open later in the season can dramatically improve profits.63 The problem is that when a cloud seeding operation causes snow to fall on one resort, that snow cannot fall on another resort. Therefore, the resort that was deprived of snowfall has, in a sense, suffered a harm. And in such potential litigation, the causation problem discussed above would be mitigated.64 This is because the downwind ski resort deprived of snowfall would not be claiming that any single cloud seeding operation caused the deprivation of snowfall on a specific day. Rather, they would be claiming that multiple operations throughout the season resulted in an overall deprivation of snowfall. Viewing causation from this longitudinal framework could avoid the otherwise fatal bar from recovery that but-for causation imposes.
There is limited case law that might suggest landowners have a right to receive the precipitation that would naturally fall on their land, and therefore, any action that artificially reduces this naturally occurring precipitation may be impermissible. For example, in Southwest Weather Research, Inc. v. Rounsaville, the court granted a temporary injunction reasoning that “the landowner is entitled to such precipitation as Nature deigns to bestow. . . . It follows, therefore, that this enjoyment of or entitlement to the benefits of Nature should be protected by the courts if interfered with improperly and unlawfully.”65 However, the injunction in Rounsaville only pertained to the airspace directly over the plaintiff’s property.66 Compare the result in Rounsaville to that of Slutsky v. City of New York, where the owners of a vacation resort sought a temporary injunction against the city’s cloud seeding operation.67 There, the court ultimately maintained that the plaintiffs “clearly have no vested property rights in the clouds or the moisture therein . . . .”68
VI. Disproportionate Harm to Disadvantaged Communities
Similar to how disadvantaged communities experience disproportionate environmental harm from climate change, they also likely experience disproportionate harm from cloud seeding.69 Some scientists believe that rainfall functions as a natural pollution-mitigation process.70 Consequently, if cloud seeding efforts are focused on increasing precipitation for ski resorts and agriculture, disadvantaged communities that are unlikely to be near these areas are less likely to receive precipitation and the pollution mitigation benefits that follow.71 This is of particular concern because disadvantaged communities are more likely to live in environments with high pollution.72 They are also more likely to be in flood-prone areas.73 Finally, the potential harm from silver iodide exposure may be disproportionately incurred by those in disadvantaged communities due to increased rates of pre-existing conditions and lack of access to health care.74
VII. Geoengineering as a Tool Against Climate Change
Cloud seeding is a subset of “Geoengineering,” also sometimes referred to as “climate engineering” and “climate remediation.”75 Geoengineering is a broad category encompassing various methods for “the large-scale manipulation of a specific process central to controlling Earth’s climate for the purpose of obtaining a specific benefit.”76 Examples include injecting sulfate aerosols into the atmosphere to reflect sunlight away from Earth, afforestation and reforestation, thinning clouds 20,000 feet and higher to allow solar radiation to more easily escape back into space, ocean fertilization to draw out CO2 from the atmosphere, rock weathering to absorb more CO2, and direct carbon capture.77 Geoengineering offers a potential cost-effective solution to combat climate change.78 While gaining support among scientists and legislators, the practice is highly controversial.79 It may result in “moral hazard” by undermining traditional strategies to reduce emissions.80 It risks creating a technological lock-in whereby the deployment of geoengineering effectively ensures geoengineering solutions indefinitely.81 Finally, engaging in geoengineering comes with the risk of producing more harm than good, especially considering the unilateral nature of its deployment.82 Cloud seeding does not offer direct solutions to combat climate change, but some have posited that it offers an environmentally friendly method to enhance the water supply compared to alternatives such as building dams, reservoirs, and pipelines.83
VIII. Conclusion
This Essay comes at a critical time as there is currently a confluence of events converging around weather alteration. The U.S. government has shown increased interest in using weather modification to respond to climate change.84 Large-scale geoengineering projects with potentially catastrophic consequences are being considered.85 The issue of interstate riparian water rights have become exceedingly contentious.86 In 2024, the Tennessee Senate passed a bill barring the practice of releasing chemicals into the air to affect the weather.87 The Bureau of Reclamation recently pledged $2.4 billion in cloud seeding projects.88 And the Supreme Court is likely to issue a controversial decision blocking downwind EPA air pollution protections.89
Cloud seeding currently sits at the intersection of scientific advancement, environmental necessity, and legal uncertainty. These factors combine to produce a highly pressing public policy issue. Furthermore, cloud seeding serves as a microcosm for large-scale geoengineering, which has the potential to either efficiently mitigate climate change or catastrophically harm the environment. The framework provided in this Essay for balancing the inherent tradeoffs involved in cloud seeding will help inform the broader tradeoffs involved in large-scale geoengineering. As weather modification continues to increase in urgency and controversy, crafting thoughtful legal and regulatory responses will be crucial to navigating its risks and maximizing its benefits.
* Visiting Assistant Professor of Business Law, Texas A&M University Central Texas; Lead Lecturer, Texas A&M University School of Law.
1. Indrabati Lahiri, California Wildfire Costs Set to Impact European Reinsurance Giants, Yahoo! Finance (Jan. 13, 2025, 8:55 AM), https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/california-wildfire-costs-set-impact-145516911.html [https://perma.cc/MWR4-QDHX].
2. See, e.g., Matthew Glasser & Julia Jacobo, This is How Climate Change Contributed to the California Wildfires, ABC News (Jan. 8, 2025, 6:12 PM), https://abcnews.go.com/US/climate-change-contributed-extreme-wildfires-california/story?id=117475669 [https://perma.cc/3C5Z-3RUP].
3. See, e.g., Lisa Hagen & Jude Joffe-Block, Why Right-Wing Influencers are Blaming the California Wildfires on Diversity Efforts, NPR (Jan. 10, 2025, 4:38 PM), https://www.npr.org/2025/01/10/nx-s1-5252757/california-wildfires-dei-diversity-influencers-firefighters [https://perma.cc/7VDJ-DTSG].
4. See, e.g., Danielle B. Franz, California’s Fires Show Environmentalist Policies Can Have Deadly Results, Nat’l Rev. (Jan. 13, 2025, 6:30 AM), https://www.nationalreview.com/2025/01/californias-fires-show-environmentalist-policies-can-have-deadly-results/ [https://perma.cc/BQP7-47JZ].
5. See, e.g., Jo Yurcaba, Conservatives Blame California Wildfires on a Small Fish, DEI and More, NBC News (Jan. 9, 2025, 5:49 PM), https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/conservatives-play-blame-game-california-wildfires-pointing-fingers-de-rcna186983 [https://perma.cc/H7WL-VB2M?type=image].
6. Thor Benson, What Blue States Can do if Trump and Republicans Withold Disaster Aid, Rolling Stone (Jan. 14, 2025), https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/trump-republicans-threaten-withhold-disaster-aid-california-1235234628/ [https://perma.cc/74F5-336J].
7. Nina Golgowski, GOP Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene Wants to Use Weather Manipulation to Fight Fires. Here’s Why it’s Unlikely, Huffington Post (Jan. 13, 2025, 2:29 PM), https://www.huffpost.com/entry/marjorie-taylor-greene-cloud-seeding-california-wildfires_n_67851b40e4b0a67d61a3f70a [https://perma.cc/E3Z8-WSSL].
8. See, e.g., Kase Wickman, On California Fires, Marjorie Taylor Greene Offers Up Another Wacky Weather Control Conspiracy Theory, Vanity Fair (Jan. 14, 2025), https://www.vanityfair.com/style/story/marjorie-taylor-greene-la-fires-weather-control?srsltid=AfmBOopzbjyWxJCnGo48_ZI6EOmGszayF8dUl25cYAVmNxE7DOUfbbik [https://perma.cc/87NV-9NJ2].
9. Greene’s suggestion to use cloud seeding to combat the California wildfires concludes with “They know how to do it.” Marjorie Taylor Greene (@RepMTG), X (Jan. 12, 2025, 7:54 AM), https://x.com/mtgreenee/status/1878440354724098343?mx=2 [https://perma.cc/Y93H-KG2N].
10. Jonathan Chait, Marjorie Taylor Greene Blamed Wildfires on Secret Jewish Space Laser, Intelligencer (Jan. 28, 2021), https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-qanon-wildfires-space-laser-rothschild-execute.html [https://perma.cc/G4CV-444Y].
11. History of Cloud Seeding, Idaho Dep’t Water Res., https://idwr.idaho.gov/iwrb/programs/cloud-seeding-program/history-of-cloud-seeding/ (last visited Mar. 24, 2025) [https://perma.cc/URX4-VV2L].
12. However, as it pertains to the 2025 wildfires in California, cloud seeding is of minimal value because the severe drought which produced the fires means that there are not ample clouds to seed. See, e.g., Hatty Willmoth, What is Cloud Seeding? Marjorie Taylor Greene’s Wildfires Solution Mocked, Newsweek (Jan. 14, 2025, 1:57 PM), https://www.newsweek.com/cloud-seeding-marjorie-taylor-greene-california-wildfire-2014871 [https://perma.cc/6MPH-6LCR].
13. See infra Part II.
14. See infra Part III.
15. See infra Part IV.
16. Geoengineering, Harv.’s Solar Geoengineering Rsch Program, https://geoengineering.environment.harvard.edu/geoengineering (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/8L2F-CVPL].
17. Frequently Asked Questions, Tex. Dep’t Licensing & Regul., https://www.tdlr.texas.gov/weather/weatherfaq.htm (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/3EW2-67C3].
18. Mike Wall, Cloud Seeding Could Tame Hurricanes, Live Sci. (Dec. 16, 2011), https://www.livescience.com/17524-cloud-seeding-hurricanes-global-warming.html [https://perma.cc/FU3A-CTK2].
19. Katie Brigham, How States Across the West Are Using Cloud Seeding to Make It Rain, CNBC (Dec. 17, 2022, 9:44 AM), https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/17/how-cloud-seeding-can-help-replenish-reservoirs-in-the-west.html [https://perma.cc/HC8C-BJ34].
20. Gregory N. Jones, Weather Modification: The Continuing Search for Rights and Liabilities, 1991 BYU L. Rev. 1163, 1163 (1991).
21. Jay Adams, Cloud Seeding’s Role in the Winter Season, Denver Water (Dec. 10, 2018), https://www.denverwater.org/tap/cloud-seedings-role-winter-season?size=n_21_n [https://perma.cc/53GC-7ADY].
22. Jones, supra note 20, at 1163.
23. Planned Weather Modification Through Cloud Seeding, Amer. Meteorological Soc’y, https://www.ametsoc.org/index.cfm/ams/about-ams/ams-statements/archive-statements-of-the-ams/planned-weather-modification-through-cloud-seeding/ (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/6LCT-FCBY].
24. Bethany Hubbard, Cloud Seeding Guarantees Perfect Wedding Weather, Discover Mag. (Nov. 19, 2019 9:59 PM), https://www.discovermagazine.com/environment/cloud-seeding-guarantees-perfect-wedding-weather [https://perma.cc/9QJV-NJ3K].
25. Seymour M. Hersh, Rainmaking Is Used as Weapon by U.S., N.Y. Times (Jul. 3, 1972), https://www.nytimes.com/1972/07/03/archives/rainmaking-is-used-as-weapon-by-us-cloudseeding-in-indochina-is.html [https://perma.cc/FM4S-NN7P]; Eleanor Cummins, With Operation Popeye, the U.S. Government Made Weather an Instrument of War, Popular Sci. (Mar. 20, 2018, 10:30 PM), https://www.popsci.com/operation-popeye-government-weather-vietnam-war/ [https://perma.cc/JEF4-4HLH].
26. Frequently Asked Questions, supra note 17.
27. History of Cloud Seeding, Idaho Dep’t Water Res., https://idwr.idaho.gov/iwrb/programs/cloud-seeding-program/history-of-cloud-seeding/ (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/ZK8R-RR73].
28. See, e.g., Who Owns the Clouds?, 1 Stan. L. Rev. 43 (1948).
29. Id.
30. See, e.g., Henry G. Houghton, An Appraisal of Cloud Seeding as a Means of Increasing Precipitation, 32 Amer. Meteorological Soc’y 39, 39 (1951).
31. See infra notes 32–42 and accompanying text.
32. See Heather Sackett, Vail Resorts’ Cancellation of Cloud Seeding This Winter Could Mean Less Water in Streams, Vail Daily (Nov. 27, 2020), https://www.vaildaily.com/news/vails-cancellation-of-cloud-seeding-this-winter-could-mean-less-water-in-streams/ [https://perma.cc/PZE8-J57W].
33. See Alex Cabrero, Cloud Seeding Efforts in Utah Will Increase to Bring More Snow, KSL TV 5 (Sept. 29, 2023, 5:40 AM), https://ksltv.com/590072/cloud-seeding-efforts-in-utah-will-increase-to-bring-more-snow/ [https://perma.cc/J24G-F7T5].
34. See Zak Podmore, Utah Is a Leader in Cloud Seeding. Is It Working?, Salt Lake Trib. (Apr. 9, 2021, 11:32 AM), https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/03/28/utah-is-leader-cloud/ [https://perma.cc/FMM5-GEYS].
35. See Jerd Smith, As Pandemic Hammers Its Finances, Vail Pulls Out of State Cloud Seeding Program, The Colo. Sun (Nov. 11, 2022, 4:54 PM), https://coloradosun.com/2020/11/27/vail-finances-colorado-cloud-seeding/ [https://perma.cc/6GBM-BPB2].
36. Climate Impacts on Human Health, EPA, https://climatechange.chicago.gov/climate-impacts/climate-impacts-human-health#main-content (last visited Mar. 24, 2025) [https://perma.cc/46YD-ZMKV].
37. See Cloud Seeding Program, Desert Rsch. Inst., https://www.dri.edu/cloud-seeding-program/what-is-cloud-seeding/ (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/5CVW-T5Z4].
38. See Jonathan A. Jennings & Ronald T. Green, Rain Enhancement of Aquifer Recharge Across the West Texas Weather Modification Association Target Area, 46 J. Weather Modification 45, 52 (2014).
39. See Cloud Seeding Program, Desert Rsch. Inst., https://www.dri.edu/cloud-seeding-program/what-is-cloud-seeding/ (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/N6LH-BW57].
40. See Don A. Griffith, Mark Solak & David P. Yorty, 30+ Winter Seasons of Operational Cloud Seeding in Utah, 41 J. Weather Modification 23, 23 (2009).
41. See Jack Queen, How Cloud Seeding is Boosting Snowfall Totals at Colorado Ski Areas, Steamboat Pilot & Today (Oct. 5, 2017), https://www.steamboatpilot.com/news/how-cloud-seeding-is-boosting-snowfall-totals-at-colorado-ski-areas/ [https://perma.cc/D6JX-X47X].
42. Id.
43. See infra notes 48–55.
44. Arnett Dennis, Cloud Seeding and the Rapid City Flood of 1972, 42 J. of Weather Modification 124 (2010).
45. Early Snowstorms Kill 40 Across North-Central China, N. Y. Times (Nov. 14, 2009), https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/world/asia/15snow.html [https://perma.cc/U7GQ-8QU6].
46. See, e.g., Billion-Dollar Disasters: Calculating the Costs, Nat’l Centers for Env’t Info. (Mar. 8, 2024), https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/dyk/billions-calculations# (explaining that droughts cost an average of $11.4 billion per event) [https://perma.cc/YY3S-DAPJ].
47. Pa. Nat. Weather Ass’n v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification Ass’n, 44 Pa. D. & C.2d 749, 761 (Pa. C.P. 1968) (The court maintained that some cloud seeding agents are “poisonous” and that “possible harm can result from uncontrolled and unregulated weather modification activities.”).
48. See, e.g., Adams v. California, Civil No. 10112 (Super. Ct. Sutter Co., Calif. Dec. 21, 1964); Slutsky v. New York, 97 N.Y.S.2d 238, 239 (Sup. Ct. 1950); Reinbold v. Sumner Farmers, Inc. No. 2734-C (Cir. Ct. Tuscola Cnty., Mich., 1974); Sw. Weather Rsch., Inc. v. Rounsaville, 320 S.W.2d 211, 212–14 (Tex. Civ. App. 1958); see Pa. Nat’l Weather Ass’n v. Blue Ridge Weather Modification Ass’n, 44 Pa. D. & C.2d 749, 749, 751–52 (Ct. Com. Pl. Pa. 1968).
49. See Koh Ewe, How Cloud Seeding Works and Why It’s Wrongly Blamed for Floods from Dubai to California, Time (Apr. 17, 2024, 7:45 AM), time.com/6967836/dubai-floods-cloud-seeding-rain-blame-climate-change/ [https://perma.cc/PDX7-LKJM].
50. See Manon Simon, Enhancing the Weather: Governance of Weather Modification Activities of the United States, 46 Wm. & Mary Env’t L. & Pol’y Rev. 149, 215 (2021) (“[T]he complexity of weather modification science is such that, in practice, it would be impossible to demonstrate that a single seeding operation has increased precipitation to a degree that contributed to a particular damage.”); Sho Sato, The Role of Local Governmental Units in Weather Modification: California, in Controlling the Weather: A Study of Law and Regulatory Procedure 221, 239 (Howard J. Taubenfeld ed., 1970) (“[W]hen the state of the art is such that the complainant faces a virtually impossible task of carrying his burden of proving the amount of augmentation at a given place at a given time, a complainant is effectively denied relief.”); Melissa Currier, Note, Rain, Rain, Don’t Go Away: Cloud Seeding Governance in the United States and a Proposal for Federal Legislation, 48 U. Pac. L. Rev. 949, 958 (2017).
51. Ralph W. Johnson, Legal Implications of Weather Modification: The General Legal Setting, in Weather Modification and The Law, 76, 85 (Howard J. Taubenfeld ed., 1968).
52. See MacKenzie L. Hertz, It’s Raining, It’s Pouring, Weather Modification Regulation is Snoring: A Proposal to Fill the Gap in Weather Modification Governance, 96 N.D. L. Rev. 31, 38–45 (2021). However, note that the two states of Wisconsin and Colorado maintain that unauthorized cloud seeding operations—including operations that violate the terms of a cloud seeding permit—constitute negligence per se. See Wis. Stat. Ann. § 93.35(14)(d) (West 2024); Colo. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 36-20-123(2) (West 2024).
53. See Hertz, supra note 52, at 56.
54. Id. at 58.
55. Id.
56. See Simon, supra note 50, at 151.
57. See Karen Bradshaw & Monika U. Ehrman, Cloud Seeding, Wildfire Smoke Emissions, and Solar Geoengineering: Why is Climate Modification Unregulated?, 35 Geo. Env’t L. Rev. 459, 467 (2023).
58. See Jianlin Chen, Optimal Property Rights for Emerging Natural Resources: A Case Study on Owning Atmospheric Moisture, 50 U. Mich. J.L. Reform 47, 74 (2016).
59. See Bradshaw & Ehrman, supra note 57, at 468.
60. Arquimedes Ruiz Columbie et. al, Comments on Current Dual Cloud Seeding Operations in Texas, 44 J. Weather Modification 96, 96–100 (2012).
61. Chelsea Harvey, Geoengineering is Not a Quick Fix for the Climate Crisis, New Analysis Shows, Sci. Am. (Apr. 3, 2023), https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/geoengineering-is-not-a-quick-fix-for-the-climate-crisis-new-analysis-shows/ [https://perma.cc/C5RM-UUU3].
62. See, e.g., David O. Williams, Cloud Seeding Study Validates Ski Industry Staple, Aspen Journalism (Feb. 25, 2020), https://aspenjournalism.org/cloud-seeding-study-validates-ski-industry-staple/ [https://perma.cc/MXL2-8UWJ].
63. See, e.g., Ian Greenwood, The Race is On—Which Ski Resort Will Open First?, Powder (Sep. 5, 2024), https://aspenjournalism.org/cloud-seeding-study-validates-ski-industry-staple/ (Ski resorts are only open for a few months out of the year so gaining an additional week or two of revenue is significant.) [https://perma.cc/4CPT-QFM6].
64. See supra notes 48–55 and accompanying text.
65. Sw. Weather Rsch., Inc. v. Rounsaville, 320 S.W.2d 211, 216 (Tex. Civ. App. 1958).
66. The court explicitly explained, “We do not mean to say or imply . . . that the landowner has a right to prevent or control weather modification over land not his own.” Id.
67. See Slutsky v. New York, 97 N.Y.S.2d 238, 239 (Sup. Ct. 1950).
68. Id.
69. Michael Conklin & Justin Blount, Bad Policy Runs Downhill: How Cloud Seeding Jurisprudence Disproportionately Harms Disadvantaged Communities, 75 Syracuse L. Rev. ___ (forthcoming 2025) pre-publication manuscript available at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4851009.
70. Virginia Simms, Making the Rain: Cloud Seeding, the Imminent Freshwater Crisis, and International Law, 44 Int’l Law. 915, 923–24 (2010).
71. Id.
72. Disparities in the Impact of Air Pollution, Amer. Lung Assoc. (Nov. 2, 2023), https://www.lung.org/clean-air/outdoors/who-is-at-risk/disparities [https://perma.cc/T56P-DNKJ].
73. Leslie Kaufman, The Truth About Flood Risk Can Worsen American Inequality, Bloomberg (June 29, 2020, 5:00 AM), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-06-29/the-truth-about-flood-risk-can-worsen-american-inequality [https://perma.cc/C53E-3WL3].
74. See, e.g., Bob Hughes, Pre-Existing Conditions: Is Poverty on the List?, Mo. Found. Health (Feb. 19, 2019), https://mffh.org/news/pre-existing-conditions-is-poverty-on-the-list/ [https://perma.cc/WD7C-HEYE]; Lillian Witting, Limited Access: Poverty and Barriers to Accessible Health Care, Nat’l Health Council (Jan. 20, 2023), https://nationalhealthcouncil.org/blog/limited-access-poverty-and-barriers-to-accessible-health-care/ [https://perma.cc/36RD-EF99].
75. Erin Tanimura, Geoengineering Research Governance: Foundation, Form, and Function, 37 SPG Environs Env’t. O. & Pol’y J. 167, 168 (2014).
76. Philip Boyd, Geoengineering, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/science/geoengineering (last visited Mar. 21, 2025) [https://perma.cc/YD8X-YBWC].
77. Greg Scoblete, An Introduction to Geoengineering, Verisk (Jan. 11, 2024), https://core.verisk.com/Insights/Emerging-Issues/Articles/2024/January/Week-2/An-Introduction-to-Geoengineering [https://perma.cc/FS7G-KVUZ].
78. See, e.g., Anthony E. Chavez, Using Legal Principles to Guide Geoengineering Deployment, 24 N.Y.U. Env’t. L.J. 59, 65–67 (2016).
79. See, e.g., James Temple, What is Geoengineering—and Why Should You Care?, Tech. Rev. (Aug. 9, 2019), https://www.technologyreview.com/2019/08/09/615/what-is-geoengineering-and-why-should-you-care-climate-change-harvard/ [https://perma.cc/R865-PLP4].
80. Tanimura, supra note 75, at 174.
81. Id. at 175–76.
82. Daisy Dunne, Geoengineering Carries ‘Large Risks’ for the Natural World, Studies Show, Carbon Brief (Jan. 22, 2018, 4:02 PM), https://www.carbonbrief.org/geoengineering-carries-large-risks-for-natural-world-studies-show/ [https://perma.cc/6D47-42Q7]; Tanimura, supra note 75, at 177.
83. See Zak Podmore, Utah Is a Leader in Cloud Seeding. Is It Working?, Salt Lake Trib. (Apr. 9, 2021, 10:32 AM), https://www.sltrib.com/news/2021/03/28/utah-is-leader-cloud/ [https://perma.cc/2EW2-CJSB].
84. Manon Simon, Enhancing the Weather: Governance of Weather Modification Activities of the United States, 46 Wm. & Mary Env’t L. & Pol’y Rev. 149, 150–51 (2021).
85. See, e.g., Alejandro De La Garza, A Controversial Technology is Creating an Unprecedented Rift Among Climate Scientists, Time (Mar. 17, 2023, 1:14 PM), https://time.com/6264143/geoengineering-climate-scientists-divided/ [https://perma.cc/3B7Y-NKSD]; Daisey Dunne, Geoengineering Carries ‘Large Risks’ for the Natural World, Studies Show, Carbon Brief (Jan. 22, 2018, 4:02 PM), https://www.carbonbrief.org/geoengineering-carries-large-risks-for-natural-world-studies-show/ [https://perma.cc/2JQF-8Y7G].
86. See, e.g., Tristan Bove, The Rules Governing the Colorado River Were Made for a ‘Previous World’ and the West is Now Confronting a 21st Century Nightmare as it Runs Dry, Fortune (Apr. 15, 2023, 4:00 AM), https://fortune.com/2023/04/15/colorado-river-shrinking-california-arizona-water-rights/ [https://perma.cc/GSY3-2N9W].
87. Diana Leyva, Tennessee Legislature Passes Bill Based on ‘Chemtrails’ Conspiracy Theory: What to Know, The Tennessean (Mar. 20, 2024, 10:24 AM), https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/local/2024/03/20/tennessee-senate-passes-bill-banning-chemtrails-what-to-know/73027586007/ [https://perma.cc/PV2S-NCTM].
88. Jilia Jacobo, Daniel Manzo & Ginger Zee, These Geoengineering Technologies Could Help Combat the Climate Crisis, Scientists Say, ABC News (Apr. 21, 2023, 5:04 AM), https://abcnews.go.com/US/geoengineering-technologies-combat-climate-crisis-scientists/story?id=98476205#:~:text=Log%20In-,These%20geoengineering%20technologies%20could%20help%20combat%20the%20climate%20crisis%2C%20scientists,solar%20geoengineering%20and%20carbon%20capture. [https://perma.cc/VC4F-TTXX].
89. Amy Howe, Supreme Court Likely to Block EPA Ozone Regulation, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 21, 2024, 3:50 PM), https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/02/supreme-court-likely-to-block-epa-ozone-regulation/ [https://perma.cc/RVS6-YM5R]. This is relevant to cloud seeding as there is likely interstate effects from the practice.
The full text of this Article is available to download as a PDF.