25 Years Ago--What We Said Then

(From the Danville Register and Bee 09/16/2007)

By BERNARD BAKER
Register & Bee staff writer

CHATHAM - Former Chatham District Supervisor ClaudeWhitehead well remembers the controversy surroundinguranium mining 25 years ago.
That was when Marline Corp. said it had discovered 30million pounds of uranium oxide - potentially worth $1billion or more - in Pittsylvania County.
The debate was hot, Whitehead recalls, and rumors ranrampant because most people didn't know a lot about uranium mining.
"People were talking about black cows turning into redcows," Whitehead said. "People would lose all theirhair and babies would be born without legs. All thisstuff was floated around."
Conversations with various county officials - and areview of the stories written during that time - recapthe controversy, which eventually led to a moratoriumon uranium mining.
The debate over mining was divided into three groups. Many local officials supported the mining operationbecause it would bring jobs and additional tax revenue.
Environmentalists were against it because they wereconcerned about the health hazards of miningradioactive material.
Legislators were a mixed bag. Area representativessupported the move, but a General Assembly committeelooking into the matter backed off approving mining operations.
Marline promised 900 jobs to start with, with numbersrising to 1,400 a few years after mining started. Addto that $1.3 million in tax revenues, according to1982 dollars, and Marline was a welcome sight to Pittsylvania County.
"There were a lot of people who were interested in thejobs it would bring," said A. Calvin Neal, whorepresented the Dan River District at that time. But Marline was not received as warmly by thoseconcerned over the potential damage to the environment.
"The tailings was what gave people a lot of problems,"Whitehead said. "That was the most concern - who wouldmonitor and look at it after the mining operation was over."
Norman Reynolds, president of Marline, said thecompany was aware of the hazards of tailings, and saiddisposing of them had changed since the 1940s and1950s, when it was dumped in a river or behind a mine.
Reynolds tried to build support for the project bysaying it could help the U.S. become less dependent onforeign energy sources. Opponents pointed out Reynoldswas a Canadian, and they countered that there was aglut of uranium in the market at that time and uraniumwasn't needed because nuclear power plant constructionwas on hold at that time.
"We're not saying the uranium should never be mined,"said Barbara Lambert of Stop Uranium Mining inVirginia, at the time.
Opposition to uranium mining also took the directionthat the company was promising more than it could deliver.
Jo Ann Spangler was a leader in Concerned Citizens ofPittsylvania and Henry County and a local industrialchemist who opposed uranium mining. She said that thepromise of new jobs was misleading.
"The jobs necessary for mining operations don't go tolocal people," she said in the July 22, 1982, editionof The Bee, due to the technical nature of the positions.
Staunton River District Supervisor Fred Ingramdescribed himself as "very pro-Marline" in the Dec.10, 1982, edition of The Bee. "This is an industry wecan definitely use to help our economy and create jobs."
Then Delegate Ken Calvert, R-Danville, saw no reasonto block Marline. He "would not support a moratoriumunless the study indicates that are some dangers .that I'm not aware of," he said in an article thatappeared in The Bee.
In the middle was Delegate Charles R. Hawkins, who was studying the issue.
"I'm still trying to be objective," Hawkins told TheBee. "Between the two extremes lies the truth. Peoplehere have a deep love of the land. The land means moreto them than money. If it can be proved there won't bedamage, they'll be for it."
That's one reason opponents favored a longermoratorium, so that it could be studied longer. Theyfelt local leaders were rushing into the mining operation haphazardly.
"The debate is the level at which they create toxiceffects, not that they are toxic," said Velma Smith, astaff member of the Warrenton-based Piedmont Environment Council.
Residents like Guyretta Motley of Sheva, who livednear the proposed mine site, wanted more information about the venture.
"I just came to find out more about it, really" shesaid in an Oct. 27, 1982, article in The Bee. "Itreally is kind of scary."
Paul Buonviri had moved to Chatham from a community inUtah where uranium was mined. Buonviri said he and hiswife, "have a lot of questions about it - we haven'tseen it done safely. The way they're talking aboutthat moratorium - that sounds fine to me."