| The issue as I see it, is not if the cloudbuster can be improved or not, but if the operator can be improved. We do not need better equipment; what we need is more information on how the atmosphere functions and how to make better use of the equipment we have. A properly-trained surgeon, knowing the anatomy of the human body, can do surgery successfully with stone-age tools, but a person who does not know anatomy cannot do successful surgery with a modern, fully-equipped hospital operating room. Ideally, a full-scale training program for cloudbuster operators, comparable to medical school training required to practice medicine, would be a basic requirement to do cloudbusting. Many ideas have been proposed for "improvements" in the cloudbuster. Most of them seem to think that it could or should be made "more powerful". The idea that making the draw more "powerful" would be better is a fundamentally wrong one. The cloudbuster does not drag the air masses around by brute force. It draws only a very small portion of energy from a highly localized spot in the atmosphere, and the orgonomic potential is what does the rest. A stronger draw would not help anything. Anyone who claims to have a way to make the cloudbuster "more powerful" is simply displaying his authoritarianism. Such people should not do cloudbusting. The wish to "overpower" the atmosphere and FORCE it to do this or that is exactly the wrong way to go about cloudbusting. The response of the orgone atmosphere to cloudbusting is like an allergic reaction by the body. A very small grain of pollen can cause a very large man to convulse in a fit of sneezing. More pollen will not cause any more violent a sneeze. The reaction by the body is not in proportion to the stimulus. It is far greater than the mere amount of the stimulus would suggest. Cloudbusting can also be compared to sexual stroking and foreplay. Very gentle stroking at the right spot and at the right rate will accomplish the desired result far better than "powerful" rubbing will. In fact, the way a person behaves in bed with a lover is a prototype of the way that person will behave towards the atmosphere when doing cloudbusting. Someone who goes in for whips and chains in the bedroom will not be likely to show the proper respect and concern for the atmosphere when cloudbusting either. And the probable results will likewise be less than optimum. The usual "improvements" suggested for the cloudbuster generally fall into certain classes: the attachment of some electrical device to the cloudbuster, some form of geometrical shape, or some magnet, crystal, coil, or other attachment regarded as having some special properties. All of these suggestions show a lack of understanding of how a cloudbuster works. Any form of electrical stimulation of the field of the cloudbuster will cause a increase in the most popularized visual effect of a cloudbusting operation, the breaking up of clouds directly overhead. This impresses a lot of people who do not realize that breaking up clouds is not what a cloudbuster does. The name "cloudbuster" is highly misleading in this sense; it reflects the historical fact that that was the first effect noticed by Reich, but does not suggest to someone unfamiliar with that history the wide range of things a cloudbuster can do or how it does them. The expansion from over-excitation of the field of the cloudbuster is transferred to the atmosphere and causes an expansion of the atmosphere, breaking up clouds overhead. It also increases drought tendencies, and prevents the contraction phase of the pulsation of the atmosphere. If a drought tendency already exists, it will become worse and the continued operation of the cloudbuster will only prolong the drought. This has happened several times when the remote-controlled cloudbusters used by Blasband, DeMeo, and Eden were used in areas on the West Coast, where a chronic drought tendency exists. Blasband invented the idea of using 12-volt D.C. servomotors to move the pipes around from a safe distance to avoid the DOR that is attracted to the cloudbuster in a drought atmosphere from affecting the operator. It worked fine on the East Coast, where the atmosphere is much more moist and mobile, but on the drier West Coast, it only resulted in increased drought tendency. Electrical current, as produced by batteries or generators, is what Reich called "secondary energy", and any application of any form of secondary energy to the primary energy, the orgone, will have the same effects. It makes no difference what "voltage", what "amperage", or what "frequencies" or any other minor variation on the basic theme there may be, it is secondary energy, and therefor it will trigger a mild oranur effect. This mild oranur effect will normally be much less than the intense oranur effect caused by radioactive materials, but it is of the same basic nature. Trevor Constable and some others have sought to "improve" the basic cloudbuster design by incorporating various new-age junk like coils, magnets, pyramids, etc. into the design. So far, none of these innovations has really done anything much except confuse people who do not realize what it is that a cloudbuster is supposed to do. Constable himself did not really believe most of what he claimed in his promotional articles. He deliberately lied about how he got his results because he was mainly interested in commercializing cloudbusting, not in advancing scientific knowledge, and had a commercial motive to keep information secret so his prospective customers could not just go out and do it themselves instead of hiring him. Most of the "new, improved" designs he published photos of over the years were nothing but decoys, stage props intended to distract attention from how he was really getting his results. He would put on a show for his prospective customers with these props, while at some distance away, out of sight, an accomplice would be doing the actual cloudbusting with the original Reich-style equipment, at his directions, passed on by phone. I know this because it was my own idea, which I used in Australia and told him about when I got back from my expedition to Queensland. Later, when he started showing off his "new, improved" models of cloudbusting equipment, I recognized my own scam when I saw it. I later was able to confirm that by talking to an old farmer in Bakersfield, California, who told me he had operated some equipment for Trevor when Trevor had phoned and told him when to operate it and what direction to point it. When I asked him what the equipment looked like, he answered, "It was just some lengths of irrigation pipe stuck in a barrel of water with a hose going into it and the water overflowing". The use of fast-moving orgone accumulators, of whatever shape, on cars or airplanes, does have an effect on the atmosphere, and such fast-moving orgone concentrations do not need to be grounded to have an effect, but the effect of any ungrounded accumulating device will be only partial. It will stir up and break up a DOR barrier, true enough, but it still does not get rid of DOR as well as drawing it into a large body of moving water will. There are some situations where it might be helpful to break up a DOR blockage that way, but in other situations, it might be better to use water-grounding. Constable does not even mention DOR at all in any of his books or numerous articles because he thinks thinking about it causes it! He once told me Blasband was "socking in" the whole East Coast with DOR by worrying about it all the time! So when it comes to DOR-removal and what to do about DOR, we cannot expect to learn much from Constable. He won't even think about it for fear of attracting it. Again, we do not need to learn any more about how to construct cloudbusters. The original device works perfectly well enough. What is needed, what the direction of research ought to be, is learning more about how the atmosphere normally functions, how it malfunctions and how it reacts to the stimulus from a cloudbuster, in the context of how the orgone atmosphere reacts to any type of stimulus, not just from cloudbusting. When we know enough about the atmosphere, then we will be able to do whatever we need to do with a cloudbuster, without needing any "new, improved" models of equipment being operated by the same old, ignorant operators. |
Friday, November 26, 2010
"Improving" The Cloudbuster
Thursday, November 25, 2010
Good Intentions
The evil that is in the world almost always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence if they lack understanding.
Albert Camus
Not all water shortages are due to DOR. We must always keep in mind that land-use policies are also a problem and there is little point in preserving the atmosphere if the land is to be devastated by ignorant uncaring humanity. In much of Africa, extensive over-grazing by cattle-raising tribes is the most important cause of expanding deserts. This group of well-meaning but ecologically uneducated meddlers is trying to help the cattle-raising savages to produce even more of their damned hoofed locusts to turn even more of Africa into a desert and drive away the remaining wildlife from even more of the few remaining water holes.
Below is a letter I wrote to one of these ignoramuses I had encountered:
Tuesday, June 1, 2010 11:49 AM
Albert Camus
Not all water shortages are due to DOR. We must always keep in mind that land-use policies are also a problem and there is little point in preserving the atmosphere if the land is to be devastated by ignorant uncaring humanity. In much of Africa, extensive over-grazing by cattle-raising tribes is the most important cause of expanding deserts. This group of well-meaning but ecologically uneducated meddlers is trying to help the cattle-raising savages to produce even more of their damned hoofed locusts to turn even more of Africa into a desert and drive away the remaining wildlife from even more of the few remaining water holes.
Below is a letter I wrote to one of these ignoramuses I had encountered:
Veterinaires Sans Frontieres A Menace to the Environment
Dear Ms......................,
After my conversation with you today, I read the Activity Report you gave me, and found it to be, as I had expected, totally anthropocentric in outlook. I am afraid it confirmed rather than alleviated my concerns about the short-sightedness and lack of ecological sophistication implied by a program that encourages cattle-raising in Africa. The practice of cattle-raising should be discouraged and phased out, not helped to continue to devastate Africa the way it has always done.
I found in your pamphlet no trace of concern for native species of animal life. No mention of any efforts being made to lessen the impact of cattle herds on wildlife population. No mention of any measures being undertaken to protect access to water sources for wildlife. No mention of restricting the numbers of cattle in an area to what the land can support. No mention of any concern that wild animals might be kept away from their only sources of water by herders who want to monopolize all available water for their cattle.
It seems not to have dawned upon the people in your organization that there is something much more important in Africa than humans and their cattle. There is a whole ecosystem there. An ecosystem that is the most diverse and biologically rich on earth. The same ecosystem, in fact, that created the human species among so many others. And unless the inherently highly destructive practice of raising cattle is reined in, it will not last another human generation. That would be a tragedy far greater than the mere economic displacement of a few cattle herders who would be far better served in any case by a program to re-train them for some other occupation that would be both better suited for their prosperity in the modern world and less destructive to the vital ecosystems of Africa.
You seemed in our short conversation to be unaware of the vast body of scientific and anthropological literature on the topic of biocentrism and the concept of Deep Ecology. That is not really surprising since most of the general public is unaware of those fields. But in the case of an activist who is working to promote programs you obviously believe and intend to be beneficial, it is dangerous in the extreme. I urge you to read up on the subject of Deep Ecology. You can find several books on it if you search the internet using search terms like "Deep Ecology", "biocentrism", and "restoration ecology".
I suggest reading Waste of the West, by Lynn Jacobs. It give a lot of scientific detail on the destructivness of cattle grazing to natural ecosystems.
If you really want to do something to help the humans of Africa, the most important thing you could do for them would be to promote birth control. Africa is drasticly over-populated and that is at the roots of all the other problems. Unless something is done to reduce the population, nothing else will help.
I urge you to re-think the long-term goals of your organization in light of the needs of all species, not just humans and their cattle. And please call this to the attention of your co-workers. If you have any further questions or comments, please let me know.
Sincerely,
After my conversation with you today, I read the Activity Report you gave me, and found it to be, as I had expected, totally anthropocentric in outlook. I am afraid it confirmed rather than alleviated my concerns about the short-sightedness and lack of ecological sophistication implied by a program that encourages cattle-raising in Africa. The practice of cattle-raising should be discouraged and phased out, not helped to continue to devastate Africa the way it has always done.
I found in your pamphlet no trace of concern for native species of animal life. No mention of any efforts being made to lessen the impact of cattle herds on wildlife population. No mention of any measures being undertaken to protect access to water sources for wildlife. No mention of restricting the numbers of cattle in an area to what the land can support. No mention of any concern that wild animals might be kept away from their only sources of water by herders who want to monopolize all available water for their cattle.
It seems not to have dawned upon the people in your organization that there is something much more important in Africa than humans and their cattle. There is a whole ecosystem there. An ecosystem that is the most diverse and biologically rich on earth. The same ecosystem, in fact, that created the human species among so many others. And unless the inherently highly destructive practice of raising cattle is reined in, it will not last another human generation. That would be a tragedy far greater than the mere economic displacement of a few cattle herders who would be far better served in any case by a program to re-train them for some other occupation that would be both better suited for their prosperity in the modern world and less destructive to the vital ecosystems of Africa.
You seemed in our short conversation to be unaware of the vast body of scientific and anthropological literature on the topic of biocentrism and the concept of Deep Ecology. That is not really surprising since most of the general public is unaware of those fields. But in the case of an activist who is working to promote programs you obviously believe and intend to be beneficial, it is dangerous in the extreme. I urge you to read up on the subject of Deep Ecology. You can find several books on it if you search the internet using search terms like "Deep Ecology", "biocentrism", and "restoration ecology".
I suggest reading Waste of the West, by Lynn Jacobs. It give a lot of scientific detail on the destructivness of cattle grazing to natural ecosystems.
If you really want to do something to help the humans of Africa, the most important thing you could do for them would be to promote birth control. Africa is drasticly over-populated and that is at the roots of all the other problems. Unless something is done to reduce the population, nothing else will help.
I urge you to re-think the long-term goals of your organization in light of the needs of all species, not just humans and their cattle. And please call this to the attention of your co-workers. If you have any further questions or comments, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Joel Carlinsky
Unwelcome Explanation
A reader wrote asking for precise directions on how to do cloudbusting. He was very exact in what he wanted to know. My answer must have been very frustrating for that type of person. Here is what I told him: "Most of the questions you are asking are dependent on subjective criteria and there is no precise answer of the sort you are asking for. The only really correct answer is to learn enough about orgone energy and how it looks, feels, and acts in a multitude of different situations to be able to recognize what you are seeing and know what to do. You keep asking for exact details that nobody can tell you because the situation is never static. The kind of details you keep asking for are the sort of mechanistic thinking that just does not work in dealing with orgone energy." |
"Fun"
One lunatic wrote to another lunatic advising him to try cloudbusting "for fun". This sort of thing is alarming. "Fun" is not what people should be doing cloudbusting for. Anyone who wants to have fun by cloudbusting ought to take up practicing medicine for a hobby instead. It would do a lot less harm to the public.
The same ignoramus also advised "breaking rainfall records" to convince skeptics. Breaking records does not prove anything to skeptics. Records get broken all the time. Causing excessive rainfall is not in the best interests of the planet. It is simple vandalism by cloudbuster. The responsible use of the cloudbuster is to RESTORE NORMAL WEATHER CONDITIONS, not to break records.
Such irresponsible misuse of the cloudbuster is unfortunately possible, but it would be a lot better if such pathological people could be kept out of this field. Already, many innocent people have been killed by this sort of playing around with something that should be taken at least as seriously as doing major surgery.
Climate deterioration is caused by build-up of DOR. The proper way to do cloudbusting is to remove DOR and let the atmosphere return to normal behavior. The goal of any well-done cloudbuster operation is the re-establishment of atmospheric SELF-REGULATION which has been obstructed by DOR.
Any other use of cloudbusting is malpractice and only adds to the problem of the disruption of normal weather patterns.
I sent copies of this correspondence to members of my mailing list so the international Reichian community would be aware of this potential danger to the stability of the atmosphere. But obviously, some more effective measures to combat such ignorant irresponsiblity are urgently needed.
Some Further Points
A few additional points I did not mention in my last letter.
Trevor Constable ended all public operations in America for exactly the reason that I was talking about, the risks of being held liable for storm damages. DeMeo has so far not been worried about this risk because he thinks no official body will accept that cloudbusting works, so he is in no danger of being sued.
He is arrogant enough to think that if cloudbusting ever did become accepted, he would be put in charge of the government weather control program. This shows how little he knows of how the political system works. If cloudbusting became accepted, the first Director of Weather Control Services would be some senior scientist with the right political connections, not an outspoken politically incorrect radical like DeMeo.
Then there would be Congressional hearings on what weather to have, and the big business interests with the most money for lobbyists and campaign contributions would end up getting the weather they want for their own business interests and the rest of the public would just have to put up with whatever weather those businesses wanted.
And DeMeo would end up like all the anti-war scientists who worked on the first atomic bomb, picketing the White House, protesting what the government was doing with what he had taught them.
Legal Entaglements
Many people have been killed by side-effects of cloudbusting. That is not always due to carelessness or incompetence of the operator either. It is simply impossible to limit the extent of a cloudbusting operation to a small target area and impossible to know in advance what might happen to people over the large area affected in case of a storm.
The only reason nobody has ever been charged with manslaughter so far is that the establishment does not believe cloudbusting can actually affect weather. If they ever do become convinced of it, cloudbusting will be outlawed and anyone doing it will be charged with murder or at least manslaughter the first time some innocent person dies from a weather-related cause.
The same goes for the civil suits for damages that will be filed against any known cloudbuster operator as soon as the courts are convinced cloudbusting might be responsible for someone suffering financial harm. No government can grant anyone permission to damage property or kill people and promise them they will not be sued or criminally prosecuted. Individuals could still file suit and prosecutors have full discretion in deciding who to bring criminal charges against.
Cloudbusting is also a human rights violation under international law because it is classed as an experimental procedure. To experiment on anyone without his consent is a human rights violation. That was firmly established by the Neuremburg Trials in Germany after WWll. To secure informed consent from every person in the area covered by a cloudbusting operation would be impossible, but if even one person refused to consent, it would be illegal to proceed because you would be subjecting him to a scientific experiment without his permission.
American cloudseeding companies carry expensive insurance policies, but that works only because cloudseeding is only marginally effective, if that, and the area that can be affected, even if all the claims made for it are true, is so small compared to the area affected by a cloudbuster. It would be impossible to buy insurance for a storm the size of New South Wales, for example.
That is one reason I would not want publicity. And I should think that if you have a farm that someone could get a lien on if they filed a suit against you, you would not want it either. This is exactly the sort of legal entanglements the system always uses to tie up people like Reich, or any unorthodox medical pioneer. Why provide them with the legal excuse they need to get you involved in fighting them in court?
Victoria, Australia Legislation On Rainmaking
Version No. 014
Rain-making Control Act 1967
No. 7637 of 1967
Version incorporating amendments as at 8 February 2008
TABLE OF PROVISIONS
Section Page
1 Short title and commencement 1
2 Definitions 1
3 Authority to carry out rain-making operations 2
4 Authority to make arrangements 2
5 Form and content of authority 2
6 Consultation of Ministers 3
7 Duration of authority 3
8 Cloud-seeding in Victoria to induce rainfall in another State 3
9 Offence to carry out unauthorised rain-making operations 4
10 Certificate to be evidence 4
11 Minister may order discontinuance of unauthorised operations 4
12 No liability in respect of authorized operations 5
13 Reports on rain-making operations 5
14 Construction of references to rain etc. 6
15 Regulations 6
═══════════════
ENDNOTES 8
1. General Information 8
2. Table of Amendments 9
3. Explanatory Details 10
i Version No. 014
Rain-making Control Act 1967
No. 7637 of 1967
Version incorporating amendments as at 8 February 2008
An Act to regulate certain Rain-making and other Cloud-modification Processes, to make Provision with respect to Claims for Damages against Persons lawfully engaged therein and for other purposes.
BE IT ENACTED by the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty by and with the advice and consent of the Legislative Council and the Legislative Assembly of Victoria in this present Parliament assembled and by the authority of the same as follows (that is to say):
1 Short title and commencement
(1) This Act may be cited as the
(2) This Act shall come into operation on a day to be fixed by proclamation of the Governor in Council published in the Government Gazette.
Rain-making Control Act 1967. 2 Definitions
In this Act unless inconsistent with the context or subject-matter—
prescribed
means prescribed by regulations made under this Act; rain-making operation
means the seeding or nucleating of clouds by artificial means from a manned aircraft. 1 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 3 Authority to carry out rain-making operations
s. 3
(a) for improving primary production either generally or locally and whether with respect to one or more than one primary product;
(b) for improving water storages either generally or locally;
(c) for reducing fire-danger in a forest area; or
(d) for any other sufficient purpose—
the Minister may authorise the carrying out of rain-making operations in respect of the area or areas concerned.
Whenever it appears to the Minister to be desirable in the public interest to promote rainfall or otherwise modify natural cloud processes in any part of Victoria—
S. 4 amended by No. 46/1998 s. 7(Sch. 1).
(a) shall be in writing signed by the Minister and addressed to the authorised officer or body;
(b) shall be subject to such conditions limitations and restrictions as are prescribed or the Minister thinks fit to impose with respect to carrying out the rain-making operations; and
4 Authority to make arrangements
Where the Minister authorises rain-making operations under the foregoing provisions of this Act he shall issue his authority to some person or body under his control to make arrangements for carrying out those operations.
5 Form and content of authority
(1) Every authority under this Act to carry out rain-making operations—
2 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 (c) may at any time by the Minister be revoked or varied by notice in writing to the authorised officer or body.
(2) An authority given by the Minister under this Act may authorize rain-making operations to be carried out on any specified day or days or may authorise a programme of rain-making operations to be carried out whenever atmospheric conditions are favourable during any period and in any area specified in the authority.
S. 5(3) amended by Nos 41/1987 s. 103(Sch. 4 item 55.1), 46/1998 s. 7(Sch. 1).
(3) The Minister shall cause a copy of every authority issued under this Act to be forwarded to Minister administering the
Water Act 1989, the Minister administering the Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987 and the Minister administering Part 9 of the Local Government Act 1989. 6 Consult
ation of Ministers s. 6
The Minister shall not revoke or vary any authority issued at the request of any other Minister without first consulting with the other Minister upon the matter.
7 Duration of authority
Unless sooner revoked an authority under this section shall remain in force until the rain-making operations authorised by the authority have been carried out or, if any time is specified in the authority for completing the rain-making operations, until the expiration of that time.
8 Cloud-seeding in Victoria to induce rainfall in another State
At the request of the Minister of an adjoining State administering any Act corresponding with this Act the Minister may authorise rain-making operations to be carried out in Victoria to promote rainfall in the adjoining State.
3 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 9 Offence to carry out unauthorised rain-making operations
s. 9
Any person who carries out any rain-making operations in Victoria which are not authorized under this Act shall be guilty of an offence.
Penalty: $1000 or imprisonment for twelve months.
10 Certificate to be evidence
A certificate in writing purporting to be signed by the Minister that any specified rain-making operations were or were not authorized under this Act to be carried out shall be conclusive evidence that the operations were or were not so authorized.
11 Minister may order discontinuance of unauthorised operations
(1) Where it appears to the Minister that any person or body is carrying out or is about to carry out rain-making operations not authorized under this Act the Minister may by order require the person or body to discontinue or refrain from commencing the rain-making operations.
(2) An order made under subsection (1) shall be in writing signed by the Minister and may be served personally or by post.
(3) Any person or body to whom an order under this section is addressed who fails to comply with the terms of the order shall in addition to any penalty to which he is liable under section 9 be liable to a penalty of not more than $1000 for every day upon which he continues to carry out rain-making operations in contravention of the order.
4 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 12 No liability in respect of authorized operations
s. 12
(1) Neither the Minister, any person or body authorized by the Minister to make arrangements for carrying out a rain-making operation, nor any person carrying out rain-making operations authorized by the Minister under this Act shall in any way be liable in respect of any loss or damage caused by or arising out of the precipitation of rain hail sleet snow ice fog or mist in consequence of the rain-making operations so carried out.
(2) A person carrying out rain-making operations outside Victoria under and in accordance with the law (if any) corresponding with this Act and in force in the State or Territory where the operations are carried out shall not in any way be liable for any loss or damage caused by or arising out of the precipitation in Victoria of rain hail sleet snow ice fog or mist in consequence of the rain-making operations so carried out.
13 Reports on rain-making operations
S. 13(1) amended by Nos 46/1998 s. 7(Sch. 1) (as amended by No. 12/1999 s. 3(Sch. 1 item 24)), 12/1999 s. 4(Sch. 2 item 10.1).
(1) The person or body authorised to make arrangements for carrying out rain-making operations under this Act shall furnish a report in writing concerning those operations to the Minister in accordance with the provisions of subsection (2) or upon request in writing made by the Minister.
S. 13(2) amended by No. 46/1998 s. 7(Sch. 1) (as amended by No. 12/1999 s. 3(Sch. 1 item 24)), 12/1999 s. 4(Sch. 2 item 10.1).
(2) Every report in writing made for the purposes of this section shall be in the prescribed form signed by or on behalf of the person or body concerned and shall be lodged with the Minister—
(a) where the operations will be completed within fourteen days from the commencement thereof—within forty-eight hours after the completion of operations;
(b) where the operations extend more than fourteen days from the commencement thereof—not later than Wednesday in each week with respect to operations conducted during the week ending at midnight on the previous Saturday; and
(c) where the report is requested by the Minister—within the time stipulated by the Minister in the request.
s. 14
(1) In any Act other than this Act and in any other law contract agreement or instrument (whether passed made or entered into before or after the commencement of this Act), but subject to any express provision to the contrary in any Act, a reference to rain hail sleet snow ice fog or mist includes a reference to rain hail sleet snow ice fog or mist (as the case requires) which resulted or may have resulted from a rain-making operation and every such Act law contract agreement or instrument shall be read and construed and have effect accordingly.
(2) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as depriving a person of any right of action that he might have apart from this Act in respect of or arising out of a rain-making operation that is not authorised under this Act.
15 Regulations
The Governor in Council may make regulations for regulating and controlling rain-making operations and activities and in particular, without in any way limiting the generality of the foregoing, for or with respect to—
(a) prescribing forms for the purposes of this Act;
(b) prescribing conditions limitations or restrictions to which authorities given under this Act are to be subject and prescribing penalties of not more than $100 for contravention of or failure to comply with any condition limitation or restriction to which an authority is subject;
(c) prescribing the information to be furnished by persons or bodies carrying out or assisting in rain-making operations under this Act;
(d) regulating the letting of contracts for carrying out rain-making operations;
s. 15
(e) prescribing the equipment to be used in carrying out rain-making operations and the mode of carrying out such operations;
(f) prescribing the qualifications of persons employed in carrying out rain-making operations and prohibiting the employment of unqualified persons;
(g) prescribing penalties not exceeding $100 for breach of regulations made under this section; and
(h) generally any matter or thing required or authorised to be prescribed for carrying this Act into effect.
═══════════════
7 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 ENDNOTES
1. General Information
The
Rain-making Control Act 1967 was assented to on 19 December 1967 and came into operation 1 May 1968: Government Gazette 1 May 1968 page 1708. 8 Rain-making Control Act 1967 No. 7637 of 1967 2. Table of Amendments
This Version incorporates amendments made to the
–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––
Rain-making Control Act 1967 by Acts and subordinate instruments. Conservation, Forests and Lands Act 1987, No. 41/1987 Assent Date: | 19.5.87 |
Commencement Date: | S.103(Sch. 4 item 55.1) on 1.7.87: Government Gazette 24.6.87 p.1694. |
Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the Rain-making Control Act 1967 |
Endnotes
Endnotes
14 Construction of references to rain etc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)