Are you willing to gamble your children's future?

Wednesday, May 25, 2011 9:27 AM EDT

Regarding the lifting of the ban on uranium mining that seems to finally be coming to the forefront in the rest of the state, as well as our locality: Let's put this in simple terms.

Redundantly, the National Academy of Sciences is not going to say yea or nay.

So all the folks "waiting on the study" are simply waiting on betting odds.

Even if Virginia Uranium Inc.'s science is current, there will always remain the chance that the natural/manmade disasters that are occurring so frequently all over the world will negate any assurances of safety offered by the company that has everything to gain and nothing to lose should they choose to walk away.

Are you willing to gamble on your children's future? Or your water being safe to drink?

For 300 jobs in a county this size? What about the lost jobs from the social stigma of being host to a dangerous, contaminating operation?

It's beyond me how this can even be a question in our community. Answer me this: Do we even have a community that is more concerned with health, stewardship of our land, and protection against government railroading, vs. "make me a quick dollar?"

What are we becoming?

Linda Worsley
Chatham, VA

Read more:
http://www.wpcva.com/articles/2011/05/25/chatham/opinion/opinion11.txt

A Memorial Day Poem

The Ultimate Sacrifice:

A Memorial Day Poem

We set aside Memorial Day

Each and every year

To honor those who gave their lives

Defending what we hold dear.

In all the dark and deadly wars,

Their graves prove and remind us,

Our brave Americans gave their all

To put danger far behind us.

They made the ultimate sacrifice

Fighting for the American way;

We admire them and respect them

On every Memorial Day.

By Joanna Fuchs

What happens if a tornado strikes a uranium mine?

Tornado on White Oak Mountain (did not touch land)

Alta LeCompte

SoVaNow.com / May 02, 2011

Two high-profile potential threats to Kerr Reservoir — contamination from proposed uranium mining and water wars with urban areas eyeing the resource from a distance — lay dormant and unacknowledged throughout most of the second Clarksville Lake Interest Committee symposium on lake issues.

As the symposium Thursday drew to a close, representatives a watershed advocacy group brought the hot-button issues tothe fore, energizing an audience that had listened all day at the Clarksville Community Center to talks by state officials and university experts.

Commenting on the prospect of uranium mining in Pittsylvania County, Roanoke River Basin Association executive director Andrew Lester, said: “Everybody who lives south and east of the proposed site has everything to lose and nothing to gain.”

“You’re not talking about PCBs and mercury anymore,” said RRBA vice president Gene Addesso. “You’re talking about radioactive material. If a tornado comes through and rips everything up, it’s going to come right into the rivers.”

Andy Lester, the executive director of RRBA, noted that a tornado touched down in Pittsylvania last week. In addition, the proposed mine site sits on a seismic fault, vulnerable to earthquakes that could dislodge radioactive mine waste.

Rainfall in Virginia is different than in any place where uranium mining has been attempted in the past, with violent storms threatening to release the waste, he said.

He said the National Wildlife Federation last week passed a resolution opposing an end to Virginia’s moratorium on uranium mining, which could happen when the legislature convenes in January.

Other environmental groups are mobilizing, and local governments are going on record opposing mining.

He said Floyd, which is upstream of the mine, has passed a resolution opposing General Assembly action to permit the mining. Mecklenburg is considering such a resolution, he said.

He said a Virginia Beach official had told him recently, “The people in Mecklenburg are really going to catch it. Tell them we’ll do whatever we can to help them.”

Read more:

http://www.thenewsrecord.com/index.php?%2Fnews%2Farticle%2Fsymposium_speakers_what_happens_if_a_tornado_strikes_a_uranium_mine%2F&fb_ref=at_xt%3D4dc0c7981a7a32c8_0&fb_source=profile_oneline

NAS Meeting: CO on Uranium Mining: Paul Robinson

Paul Robinson NAS Boulder CO 03/23/11 from Chmura Economics on Vimeo.


http://vimeo.com/22244814

Where does the Roanoke River begin, end?

by Fred Bonner

While casting a lure to this year’s crop of stripers at the new Weldon launching ramp I was curious as to just how many people fishing actually knew where this river began it’s journey to the Albemarle sound. I was surprised at the answer.

Some fishermen were amusing. “Up yonder,” one fisherman replied as he pointed upstream above the railroad bridge. Several of the fishermen thought that the Roanoke River began “in Lake Gaston.” One answered that it began “in the Roanoke Rapids Lake.” Only about 50 percent of the people I questioned answered almost correctly, “it began somewhere up in Virginia.” Only one person gave me the correct answer that the Roanoke River had its origins “somewhere up in the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia.”

History buffs are well aware of the economic importance of the Roanoke River during Colonial times. To this day the spring spawning runs of the striped bass and shad still play a very important role in the economy of eastern North Carolina but the upstream runs of these fish now halt at the dam of the Roanoke Rapids Lake.

Before the dams were built along the Roanoke the fabled spring runs of fish took the spawning fish far upstream into the state of Virginia and fish such as the walleye swam downstream into the Albemarle Sound where they were a commercially important fish that the fishermen mistakenly called a “brook trout.”

Many years ago (before the dams) the true eastern brook trout, the only native salmonid fish to this watershed could have followed the cooler waters from the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia into the waters of the lower Roanoke River in North Carolina.

From the very source of the Roanoke River one has to visit the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia where the Roanoke Watershed branches in two different directions. Near Blacksburg and McDon-ald’s Mill a small stream called Catawba Creek flows off the Catawba Mountain. A few minor streams feed this at the mill site and at this point a new river called the North Branch of the Roanoke River is born. It flows through the picturesque Ellett Valley and follows the Norfolk and Western Railroad tracks to the north.

A few miles to the south, a small creek called Purgatory Creek flows off Pilot Mountain and many other branches add to it. Near the Big Lick community, the Purgatory Creek suddenly becomes the South Branch of the Roanoke River and flows toward the north.

The North and South branches of the Roanoke River merge in the Lafayette community and the river now officially becomes the Roanoke River. At some point between the Lafayette community and the city of Salem, Va., the Virginians have added another name to the Roanoke River. Like our Tar and Pamlico Rivers are really the same bodies of water, the name of the Roanoke River is now followed (in parenthesis) by the name Staunton. The Roanoke and (Staunton) Rivers are the same body of water as it flows through the State of Virginia.

As the Roanoke flows east from the city of Roanoke it soon becomes an impounded River by a dam at Smith Mountain.

Like other lakes along the Roanoke River drainage, the Smith Mountain Lake is famous for its striped bass fishing. Biologists tell us that at one time before the river was dammed and re-dammed, the striped bass migrated this far up along the river on their spawning runs.

Immediately below the Smith Mountain Lake is another impoundment of the Roanoke called Leesville Lake. Below the Leesville Dam the Roanoke (Staunton) River flows through the towns of Altavisita and Brookneal, Va., and continues on downstream toward the big John H. Kerr Reservoir (Buggs Island Lake). It is at this point that the Roanoke and Dan Rivers merge into this huge lake and the (Staunton) name is dropped form the nomenclature. Kerr Lake is in both Virginia and North Carolina (and reports from this lake are for “good largemouth bass fishing”).

As the Roanoke River flows from the John H. Kerr Dam into Lake Gaston yet another great fishing lake is formed. Again the Lake’s waters are shared by both Virginia and North Carolina. The Gaston Dam at Clements Island, N.C., feeds the Roanoke River into the last impoundment along the Roanoke River, which is called Roanoke Rapids Lake.

The last dam at Roanoke Rapids is, of course, absolutely as far upstream as the shad and striped bass can migrate on their spawning runs. This blockage of the Roanoke River is largely responsible for the fabulous sport fishery that is now found on the Roanoke River in North Carolina.

The fish “bunch-up” below the dam at Roanoke Rapids and fishermen have a ball every spring.

The Roanoke River below the cities of Roanoke Rapids and Weldon is world renowned for the sport fishing that’s available on into the Albemarle Sound. Not only are the shad and striped bass found there in great abundance, but the fish that are native to the lower Roanoke River also are legendary.

Read more:

http://www.garnernews.net/view/full_story/13099268/article-Where-does-the-Roanoke-River-begin--end-?instance=secondary_sports_left_column

Poll shows Virginians are concerned about the environment

Published: April 17, 2011
By Rex Springston
Richmond Times-Dispatch

Most people think Virginia's environment is in good shape, but more than a quarter expect it to deteriorate over the next decade, a new poll shows.

In addition, most said they would pay more to clean the Chesapeake Bay and to buy green products.

"Virginians generally feel comfortable about the environment but, having said that, they see room for improvement," said Quentin Kidd, a Christopher Newport University political scientist who designed the poll.

CNU is formally releasing its third annual environmental poll Monday, four days before Earth Day. The Richmond Times-Dispatch worked with CNU to develop some of the poll questions.

Among the findings:

•91 percent of those polled said environmental issues were very or somewhat important to them.

•62 percent said they would pay higher fees, such as sewage bills, to clean the bay; 31 percent opposed higher fees.

•53 percent said they were more likely to buy a product at a 5 percent higher cost from an environmentally friendly company; 20 percent said they were unlikely to pay extra.

•52 percent said the environment will be about the same in 10 years or so; 27 percent said it will be much worse; 17 percent said it will be much better.

"I'm a hunter, and I'm a conservationist," said Savarese, one of those polled. "I believe in leaving things better than I found them. … Even the people who claim to love the planet are driving around in things they shouldn't be."

A professed love of the environment doesn't always translate into political action. For instance, a cleanup of the bay has dragged on unsuccessfully for more than 20 years.

The complexity of the cleanup, and the lobbying of some polluting interests, can muffle citizens' voices, said CNU's Kidd. "What the public thinks gets lost sometimes in the shuffle."

In the poll, 57 percent said environmental protections are generally good for the economy; 18 percent said they are bad for the economy.

"Virginians are not as polarized about that relationship between the environment and the economy as the political talking-heads class might want us to think," Kidd said.

Although the questions in CNU's three polls aren't identical, Virginians' conservationist leanings come through in each, Kidd said. "I don't see a lot of dramatic shifts over the three-year period."

The new poll suggests people are willing to do things to help the environment, particularly around the home.

For example, 85 percent said they recycle, and 77 percent said they turn the water off while brushing their teeth.

But only 31 percent said they volunteer for such projects as stream cleanups, while 68 percent said they don't.

Read more:
http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2011/apr/17/tdmain01-poll-shows-virginians-are-concerned-about-ar-977940/

In Aftermath of Severe Storms, Sales Tax Holiday Offers Chance to Prepare for Hurricane Season

Commonwealth of Virginia
Office of Governor Bob McDonnell


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 20, 2011

Office of the Governor
Contact: Jeff Caldwell
Phone: (804) 225-4260
E-mail: Jeff.Caldwell@Governor.Virginia.Gov

Virginia Department of Taxation
Contact: Joel Davison
Phone: (804) 786-3507
E-mail: joel.davison@tax.virginia.gov


In Aftermath of Severe Storms, Sales Tax Holiday Offers Chance to Prepare for Hurricane Season

RICHMOND – As the Commonwealth continues to recover from severe storms in April which spawned tornadoes across Virginia at the beginning and end of the month, with flooding in between, Governor Bob McDonnell announced today that Virginians could take steps to prepare for the upcoming hurricane season by taking advantage of Virginia’s Hurricane Preparedness Sales Tax Holiday, which takes place May 25-31. The sales tax holiday provides an opportunity for citizens to buy what they need to prepare for possible tropical systems, while getting a break on the sales tax. During the sales tax holiday, items like batteries, flashlights, bottled water, and first aid kits, as well as certain bigger-ticket items like generators priced at $1,000 or less, will be exempt from the 5 percent state and local sales tax.

“Our hearts go out to those who were affected by April’s storms,” said Governor Bob McDonnell. “Now, as we prepare for hurricane season, we hope that the opportunity created by the General Assembly to buy storm-related items tax-free next week will serve as an impetus for citizens of the Commonwealth to make sure they are prepared for the months ahead.”

During this seven-day period, retailers may also choose to pay the sales tax themselves on any nonexempt items and pass the 5 percent savings onto their customers. For a full list of eligible products, answers to frequently asked questions and guidelines for consumers and retailers,
go to http://www.tax.virginia.gov/

and click on the “Sales Tax Holiday” logo at the top of the page.

Feeling an impact in Southside

By The Editorial Board
Published: March 23, 2011

It will take years to learn the lessons being taught by the problems at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant.

But the world is watching Fukushima Daiichi, and not just because of the immediate concerns for human health and safety in the area around the plant.

Fukushima Daiichi could eventually lead to the cancellation of other proposed nuclear power plants, both in this country and around the world. That kind of reaction happened after Chernobyl and Three Mile Island; it could happen again.

Given the uncertainly about Fukushima Daiichi and what could happen to the future demand for new nuclear power plants, the opponents of Virginia Uranium Inc.’s proposed mine and mill in Pittsylvania County want the National Academy of Sciences to consider how Fukushima Daiichi could depress the future worldwide demand for uranium.

It’s a good question to be asking right now.

“Who deals with the situation if the uranium company starts mining and milling, becomes unprofitable, and abandons the site?” mining opponent Deborah Lovelace said in a statement. “What will happen to our farming and water while waiting for clean-up? Who pays for any contamination?”

Any business is only as strong as the demand for its product. A uranium mining operation in Canada, Australia or six miles from downtown Chatham has to have buyers for its product.

We’ve all seen local industries idled by slack demand. What would the Virginia Uranium site look like if the mine and mill shut down for a few years because of a drop in worldwide demand for uranium?

That’s a legitimate issue, and it’s one the National Academy of Sciences should consider in its study of uranium mining and milling in Virginia.

That said, it’s important to remember that while nuclear power-generating plants are the end-user of Virginia Uranium Inc.’s products, the health and safety issues surrounding a nuclear power plant are nothing like those faced by a uranium mine and mill.

Our interest is what happens at a uranium mine and mill, which is why we should all be concerned about how the law of supply and demand could affect the future of Virginia Uranium’s proposed project.

It may be too soon to tell what’s going to happen at Fukushima Daiichi, but it’s never too soon to be asking questions about VUI.

Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2011/mar/23/feeling-impact-southside-ar-920914/?referer=None#

Meeting: LIFE!

Life will have their meeting

Tuesday evening at 6PM

at C& E's

Meeting of the Roanoke River Basin Bi-State Commission

The meeting of the Roanoke River Basin Bi-State Commission

 will be Monday, May 23, 2010 from 10:00 a.m. until 12:00 p.m.

 at the Halifax Community College, Building 1, Room 108,

100 College Drive, Weldon, NC 27890, PH 252-536-7217.

Resolutions from the North Carolina Roanoke River Basin Advisory Committee and the Kerr-Tar COG regarding uranium mining. You will note that a discussion of uranium mining is on the agenda.

http://www.deq.virginia.gov/watersupplyplanning/homepage.html

How Does Eating Locally Grown Food Help the Environment?

Locally Grown Food Uses Less Fuel to Deliver Better Health and More Flavor
From Earth Talk

Dear EarthTalk: Why do environmentalists advocate that people “eat locally?” I don’t understand the connection between patronizing local food producers and environmental quality.
-- Timothy Douglas, Burlington, VT

In our modern age of food preservatives and additives, genetically altered crops and E. coli outbreaks, as with the recent spinach debacle [September 2006], people are increasingly concerned about the quality and cleanliness of the foods they eat. Given the impossibility of identifying the pesticides used and the route taken to grow and transport, say, a banana from Central America to our local supermarket, foods grown locally make a lot of sense for those who want more control over what they put into their bodies.

Locally Grown Food Tastes Better

John Ikerd, a retired agricultural economics professor who writes about the growing “eat local” movement, says that farmers who sell direct to local consumers need not give priority to packing, shipping and shelf-life issues and can instead “select, grow and harvest crops to ensure peak qualities of freshness, nutrition and taste.” Eating local also means eating seasonally, he adds, a practice much in tune with Mother Nature.

Eat Locally Grown Food to Reduce Global Warming

Eating locally grown food even helps in the fight against global warming. Rich Pirog of the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture reports that the average fresh food item on our dinner table travels 1,500 miles to get there. Buying locally produced food eliminates the need for all that fuel-guzzling transportation.

Eat Locally Grown Food to Help the Economy

Another benefit of eating locally is helping the local economy. Farmers on average receive only 20 cents of each food dollar spent, says Ikerd, the rest going for transportation, processing, packaging, refrigeration and marketing. Farmers who sell food to local customers “receive the full retail value, a dollar for each food dollar spent,” he says. Additionally, eating locally encourages the use of local farmland for farming, thus keeping development in check while preserving open space.

How to Find Locally Grown Food Near You

EcoTrust also provides consumers with tips on how to eat locally more often. Shopping regularly at local farmers’ markets or farm stands tops the list. Also, locally owned grocery and natural foods stores and coops are much more likely than supermarkets to stock local foods. The Local Harvest website provides a comprehensive national directory of farmers’ markets, farm stands and other sources of locally grown food

Read more:
http://environment.about.com/od/greenlivingdesign/a/locally_grown.htm

2,500 Products Now Approved under EPA Safer Product Labeling Program

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
April 20, 3011


2,500 Products Now Approved under EPA Safer Product Labeling Program

WASHINGTON – As part of the Earth Day 2011 tribute and continued efforts to protect Americans’ health, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is announcing that more than 2,500 products are now authorized by the agency under its Design for the Environment (DfE) Safer Product Labeling Program to carry the DfE label. DfE-labeled products do not contain known chemicals of potential concern, like carcinogens, reproductive or developmental toxicants. Even minor product components, like dyes and fragrances, are screened for safety. EPA is also announcing that it soon will require manufacturers with products that bear the DfE logo to disclose their ingredients to consumers.

“EPA’s DfE Program helps empower people to choose products that are safer for their families and our planet,” said Steve Owens, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “The DfE program provides important information about the safety of certain products that contain chemicals and gives consumers confidence that DfE products meet rigorous requirements.”

Before allowing the DfE logo to be used on a product label, EPA conducts a scientific evaluation to ensure that candidate products are formulated from the safest possible ingredients. The DfE label means that EPA has screened each ingredient for potential human health and environmental effects and that the product contains only ingredients that, in EPA’s scientific opinion, pose the least concern among chemicals in their class.

EPA is also implementing a requirement effective immediately that new DfE-labeled products list all ingredients (other than trade secrets) on the product label or in another easily accessible location (such as a website, for example). New DfE-approved products also will have to meet additional life-cycle requirements such as sustainable packaging and limits on volatile organic compounds.. The new disclosure and life-cycle requirements will be phased in for existing DfE products. EPA has been working with product manufacturers on the new requirements and applauds the efforts of companies who have already moved towards these standards.

Products that carry the DfE label include all-purpose cleaners, laundry and dishwasher detergents, drain line maintainers, car and boat care and other products. Using DfE- labeled products significantly reduces exposures to chemicals that may be of concern to people’s or environmental health.

More information on the DfE Safer Product Labeling Program and Standard for Safer Products: http://epa.gov/dfe
Note: If a link above doesn't work, please copy and paste the URL into a browser.

DOE to grant up to $130M for renewable energy projects

April 20, 2011 |
Matthew Lynley

The U.S. Department of Energy said today it will grant up to $130 million to renewable energy projects that can’t find funding from private investors.

The funding will come from the Advanced Research Programs Agency — Energy (ARPA-E). President Barack Obama created the agency in 2009 as part of the stimulus package. The agency has so far received $363 million in federal funding, with an additional $650 million requested by the President in his budget proposal for next fiscal year.

So far, six projects funded by ARPA-E have received around $100 million in funding from private investors.

Here’s a list of the types of projects that are eligible for funding:

1. Plants Engineered to Replace Oil (PETRO, $30 million) These projects focus on genetically engineering plants to be more efficient at capturing sunlight and producing energy to drive down the cost of biofuel.

2. High Energy Advanced Thermal Storage (HEATS, $30 million) Projects that develop new techniques to store thermal energy from sunlight and other sources and transfer it across large distances are eligible under this category.

3. Rare Earth Alternatives in Critical Technologies (REACT, $30 million) This type of research aims to eliminate reliance on rare-earth metals for electric vehicles and wind turbines. Prices for rare-earth materials that are found in electric motors and wind turbines have increased between 300 and 700 percent in the past year.

4. Green Electricity Network Integration (GENI, $30 million) These projects focus on developing smart grid technology that efficiently distributes electricity produced from wind and solar power.

5. Solar Agile Delivery of Electrical Power Technology (Solar ADEPT, $10 million) This category covers research on reducing power conversion costs and increasing energy efficiency for solar power, specifically companies that develop semiconductor switches and solar energy storage

Read more:
http://venturebeat.com/2011/04/20/arpa-e-funding-130-million/

Towns, county fire at EPA on uranium mill review

‘Narrow’ focus in review alleged
By Matthew Beaudin, Editor
Published: Sunday, April 24, 2011 6:11 AM CDT

Area governments fired another missive in the Piñon Ridge Uranium Mill fight last week, this time asking the Environmental Protection Agency for a broader review of radon management and questioning the entire review process.

The EPA is tasked with permitting the waste product storage at the would-be uranium mill near the Colorado-Utah border between Telluride and Bedrock, Colo. It allowed an extra comment period that wasn’t required by law, which closed on April 18.

“Both the town and county have repeatedly emphasized the need for the state and federal agencies with jurisdiction over the proposed Piñon Ridge Uranium Mill to consider the cumulative impacts on environmental quality that such a facility, and related uranium mining activity, could create should it become operational,” representatives from the Town of Telluride, San Miguel County and the Town of Ophir wrote in a joint memorandum to the EPA on April 18.

“It is the town and county’s considered position that the licensing process for the proposed … mill appears to be fundamentally flawed since neither the CDPHE nor EPA apparently has the regulatory jurisdiction to consider the potential cumulative impacts of the proposed mill and related mining activities.”

Hilary White, the executive director of the Sheep Mountain Alliance, a non-profit group opposed to the mill, has faulted the EPA in the past for a “basic” review that isn’t nearly technical enough.

The EPA was forced by a legal ruling in 2008 to revamp its radon emission regulations but hasn’t yet finished retooling them, meaning current decisions are coming under old standards.

The April 18 memo says the EPA’s review was “narrowly” focused on analyzing radon emissions from the mill’s tailings facility and evaporation ponds.

Sheep Mountain Alliance is in a legal fight with both the state and Energy Fuels. In early February it filed a suit that accused state regulators of violating federal and state laws in the run up to approving the mill and ignoring dangers to air and water quality.

Read more:
http://www.telluridenews.com/articles/2011/04/24/news/doc4db22b31eeb35721387333.txt
http://www.telluridenews.com/articles/2011/04/24/news/doc4db22b31eeb35721387333.txt

Coalition to Keep the Ban on Uranium Mining in Virginia Growing Statewide

For Immediate Release

May 12, 2011

Coalition announces dozens of supporting localities and groups, launches petition drive and website
Contact:  Cale Jaffe, Southern Environmental Law Center, 434-977-4090
Mary Rafferty, Virginia Chapter of the Sierra Club, 804-225-9113, ext 105
Naomi Hodge-Muse, President of the Martinsville/Henry County NAACP, 276-632-9674

RICHMOND, VA - The Keep the Ban Coalition today announced the support of 41 localities and organizations that have joined the growing statewide movement urging the Virginia legislature to resist an industry push to lift the state’s ban on uranium mining as early as next year. Local governments that have passed “keep the ban” resolutions and other resolutions.

The Keep the Ban Coalition today announced the support of 41 localities and organizations that have joined the growing statewide movement urging the Virginia legislature to resist an industry push to lift the state’s ban on uranium mining as early as next year.

“Virginia has had a ban in place on mining uranium for nearly 30 years, and for good reason,” said Naomi Hodge-Muse, president of the Martinsville-Henry County NAACP and leader of the Sierra Club Keep the Ban Team, Martinsville. “There are just too many questions and potential risks of radioactive and toxic materials contaminating our streams, rivers and drinking water. With all the storms and hurricanes we get, this is the worst possible place you could put a uranium operation.”

The uranium industry is lobbying to lift the ban and begin mining uranium in Virginia, starting at a major deposit at a Pittsylvania County site called Coles Hill, first discovered in the late 1970s. The industry also secured leases in many counties.

Recently, Virginia Uranium, Inc. told Wall Street investors that it plans to introduce legislation lifting the uranium mining ban in the 2012 session of the General Assembly.

Coalition partners note the well-documented links between exposure to uranium waste and myriad health problems, including bone, liver and breast cancer, lung and kidney diseases, and birth defects. Another concern is the severity and frequency of storms in the region, which could damage uranium facilities and potentially wash contaminated storm water and uranium waste into nearby water resources. In the last 40 years, nine hurricanes and countless other major storms have deluged Virginia. In 1969, Hurricane Camille dumped 31 inches of rain on central Virginia. This April, at least 30 tornadoes were recorded in Virginia, including one in Halifax County about 20 miles from the Coles Hill site.

Virginia Beach, which gets its drinking water from Lake Gaston, downstream of the Coles Hill site, recently released the findings of its $437,000 study which concluded that a catastrophic failure of a uranium waste containment structure at the site could contaminate the city’s drinking water for as long as two years. Roughly 1.2 million people in Virginia and North Carolina rely on the Roanoke River system downstream of the Coles Hill site for drinking water.

Mary Rafferty with the Sierra Club’s Virginia Chapter said that nine local groups have formed around the state in recent months to campaign for keeping the ban on uranium mining in Virginia.

“I’m fielding calls every week from concerned citizens across the state with requests for more information and for ways to get more involved. Mining proponents think this issue will be won behind closed doors in Richmond, but the people of Virginia are demanding it be debated in town halls and onfront porches,” said Rafferty.

“If the ban is lifted, it will be lifted statewide, which means Virginians throughout the state could potentially be affected by uranium mining, milling and waste disposal in their communities, or miles upstream,” said Cale Jaffe, senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

The coalition website is designed to educate the public on the risks posed by lifting the ban on uranium mining, milling and waste disposal in Virginia. The site has fact sheets and press coverage on the issue, and visitors can sign a petition in favor of the ban and join a local volunteer group.

To see list and to vote, click the list below:
http://keeptheban.org/

Uranium mining puts Roanoke River on endangered list

By Tara Bozick
Published: May 17, 2011

American Rivers announced today that proposed uranium mining landed the Roanoke (Staunton) River on its annual list of “America’s Most Endangered Rivers.”

The report is not a list of the most polluted rivers, but is a “call to action for rivers at a crossroads, whose fates will be determined in the coming year.”

The possibility that the General Assembly could lift Virginia’s moratorium on uranium mining helped the Roanoke River grab a spot in the top 10 endangered rivers nationwide, said Peter Raabe of American Rivers, a national water conservation organization.

Virginia Uranium Inc. is pushing to lift the ban to mine and mill a uranium deposit on a tributary of the Roanoke River in Pittsylvania County.

American Rivers is calling on the Virginia legislature to uphold the statewide ban to protect the region’s rivers and communities that rely on the Roanoke River Basin for drinking water, according to a news release. The Roanoke flows from the Blue Ridge Mountains to North Carolina’s Outer Banks.

“Virginia’s leaders demonstrated great foresight and moral courage when they banned uranium mining 30 years ago,” Raabe said in a statement. “The question now is whether they will continue to protect our clean water, or allow this mining company to create a poisonous future for the region’s communities.”

Allowing uranium mining puts the health of the region’s rivers and communities at risk because extracting the uranium leaves behind radioactive waste, according to the American Rivers report. The risk of radioactive contamination of the water would be long lasting and far-reaching, as the basin supplies drinking water for Virginia Beach and Hampton Roads and North Carolina cities. Raleigh, N.C., applied to tap 50 million gallons a day from the basin, the report continued.

Andrew Lester, executive director of the Roanoke River Basin Association, said the listing validates water groups’ concerns. Lester, who is against lifting the moratorium, said that nobody could guarantee uranium mining can be done safely, especially when the area is prone to floods and severe weather.

“The important thing is, it spotlights the situation and gets everybody’s attention,” Lester said, adding he would like the public to get more involved in the uranium debate.

Chris Miller, executive director of the Piedmont Environmental Council agreed, adding that Virginia is subject to unusually heavy and concentrated rainfall and that the state’s climate would make it hard to safely contain radioactive material.

For Cale Jaffe, senior attorney at Southern Environmental Law Center, the listing is a wake-up call to the magnitude and importance of the issue, as the Roanoke River supports not only tourist economies downstream but also local small farmers and anglers.

“We have an obligation to keep that economy strong,” Jaffe said.

Jaffe said the lesson from the BP oil disaster is things don’t always go according to plan and that the decision of managing the risk is left with the General Assembly.

“This is a big deal on a national scale,” Jaffe said. “We’ve got an immense responsibility here. We have to be up to the challenge.”

The Roanoke River Basin Association, the Dan River Basin Association and the Southern Environmental Law Center nominated the river as part of American Rivers’ open nomination process across the country. Nominations were then narrowed down substantially using an internal scientific and technical advisory committee, Raabe said.

For more information on American Rivers: http://americanrivers.org/
Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2011/may/17/uranium-mining-puts-roanoke-river-endangered-list-ar-1043386/#comments

Canadian company expands ownership of Virginia uranium deposit

December 17, 2010
By Paige Winfield Cunningham Virginia Statehouse News

A Canadian company now owns one-third of the largest undeveloped uranium deposit in the U.S. And it's located at Coles Hill in Virginia.

The site is at the center of a controversy over whether Virginia’s moratorium on uranium mining should be lifted. Supporters and opponents are anxiously awaiting the results of two studies examining the environmental and socioeconomic impacts if the Coles Hill deposit is mined. Legislators may consider lifting the moratorium after those studies are completed in December 2011.

While the site was originally thought to contain 30 million pounds of uranium oxide, that estimate has since climbed to 119 million pounds that could be worth $10 billion.

With all that money potentially at stake, the site has been attracting more investors. British Columbia-based Virginia Energy Resources has been expanding its ownership of Virginia Uranium Inc., a company set up by Walter Coles Sr., an owner of the Coles Hill property.

VUI is “locally owned and managed,” according to its Web site, which indicates the company is 78 percent owned by the two families — the Coles family and the Bowen family. But the families have recently been cutting back their stakes as VER inches up its ownership of the property, said VUI project manager Patrick Wales.

VER is investing more in Coles Hill than any of its other uranium projects, which include stakes in Saskatchewan, Quebec, Mexico and Labrador. Wales said the VUI Web site will be updated next month to reflect VER’s now roughly 30 percent ownership of the Coles Hill property.

Formerly called Santoy Resources, the corporation last year changed its name to Virginia Energy Resources and the Coles came on board.Walter Coles Sr. came on as board chairman and Walter Coles Jr., as executive vice president. The younger Coles is now president of VER.

As corporations advocate for the moratorium to be lifted, they’ve incited fierce criticism by residents in the Coles Hill area who fear the effects of uranium mining on their drinking water and soil. Phillip Lovelace, who farms beef cattle about five miles away from the site, formed a nonprofit last year to support the moratorium.

Even though the environmental study is being performed by the National Academy of Sciences, Lovelace criticizes it because it’s being paid for with VUI funds funneled through Virginia Tech.

“It concerns a lot of people in this area,” he said. “It hurt the National Academy of Sciences’ credibility in a lot of peoples’ eyes.”

Funding of the socioeconomic study has sparked some criticisms as well.

Del. Terry Kilgore, chairman of the Coal and Energy Committee, led the creation of a uranium subcommittee in 2008. After the subcommittee called for the socioeconomic study to be conducted, Kilgore found funding for it from another group over which he presides — the Tobacco Indemnification and Community Revitalization Fund, a fund set up to support the economies of tobacco-dependent communities using money from a settlement with tobacco companies.

The Tobacco Commission is paying $200,000 for the study, which will be conducted by the Richmond-based firm Chmura Economics & Analytics.

Del. Watkins Abbitt also sits on both the Coal and Energy Commission and the Tobacco Commission. He opposed using tobacco funds to pay for the study, which was approved by the commission 18-8. Abbitt said he opposed using the tobacco money because it didn’t directly create jobs in the area. VUI says the potential mining operation would employ 300-500 people.

“I’m not criticizing Kilgore. Everyone’s entitled to his opinion,” Abbitt said. “I just didn’t think it was the proper place, but obviously the majority of people did

Read more:
http://virginia.statehousenewsonline.com/2565/canadian-company-expands-ownership-of-virginia-uranium-deposit/

Groups aim to keep uranium mining ban in place

Cattle Farms in Virginia!

By Ray Reed
Published: May 12, 2011

Three groups have united to ask the General Assembly to keep Virginia’s uranium mining ban in place next year.

The Keep the Ban Coalition said legislators will receive a study of mining issues in December from the National Academy of Sciences, but lawmakers won’t have enough time to review it and ask detailed questions about what might happen if they lift the ban.

The Southern Environmental Law Center, the Sierra Club’s Virginia chapter, and an NAACP spokeswoman from the Martinsville area supported keeping the ban during a news conference call Thursday.

Heavy rainstorms could carry waste from a mining and milling operation into streams and drinking water as far downstream as Virginia Beach, members of the group said.

The coalition said 41 groups, including 14 local-government bodies, oppose mining uranium anywhere in Virginia. Eight of the governing bodies are in North Carolina.

Naomi Hodge-Muse of Martinsville, president of the area’s NAACP chapter and also of a local Sierra Club affiliate, said the uranium ban was “not just a matter of the environment, it is a matter of justice” because the area needs “long-term, good-quality jobs.”

Jaffe said officials of Virginia Uranium, which is seeking to mine a uranium deposit at Coles Hill in Pittsylvania County, have said they will ask legislators to lift the mining ban when the assembly convenes in January.

Read more:
http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2011/may/12/groups-aim-keep-uranium-mining-ban-place-ar-1035759/

'Natural' pet care: Keeping cats and dogs toxin-free

By Jim Motavalli Published
March 28, 2011

Americans love pets (in 2009 we shared our homes with 64 million dogs and 82 million cats). In fact, we treat pets pretty much like people.

So it's hardly surprising that, as the movement toward all-natural foods and products has grown among humans, it has also grown for pets.

It's not unusual to find the neighborhood pet store stocking raw elk or gluten-free treats. Sales of organic and natural pet food are projected to grow from $1.7 to $2.8 billion by 2015, three times as fast as overall sales.

Here's a quick guide to helping your pooch or pussycat go natural. A note on the home remedies: We haven't tested them ourselves, so consult your vet.

Behind the label
As with human food, there are no regulations governing the word "natural" on pet food labels.

For certainty, choose only products bearing the USDA organic seal. In general, look for foods labeled "human grade," with no byproducts.

Take no "meat byproducts." Such meat-processing waste may come from so-called 4-D animals, which are dead or disabled when they arrive at slaughterhouses, or a variety of unmentionable animal parts.

Watch out, too, for labels that list cheap fillers like cornmeal and soy, as well as chemical preservatives (look for natural preservatives like vitamins and antioxidants).

Fleas, begone!
For dogs, boil several quartered lemons in a pint of water and let it sit overnight before decanting into a spray bottle. Spray and rinse daily.

To make a dog flea collar, rub eucalyptus, tea tree or citronella essential oils into an ordinary rope collar.

For cats, skip the essential oils (cats may ingest them while grooming), but sprinkle a little brewer's yeast on their food daily to alleviate skin problems, including those caused by fleas.

Flea powders containing permethrin should be avoided for cats.

Read more:
http://solutions.edf.org/2011/03/28/critter-care-keeping-your-pets-naturally-healthy/?utm_source=envdefensefund&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=socialmedia

Resolution: Board backs continued ban on Va. mining

Monday, 02 May 2011 19:31

Halifax County commissioners today voted to support the continued ban on uranium mining in Virginia because of its possible affects on water supply in the Roanoke River and the two lakes in the Roanoke River Low Country.

"As a result of this mining there are sediment ponds," Commissioner Rives Manning said during today's meeting. "Being in a flood plain if the dams break the river basin and lakes can become contaminated."

Board Chair James Pierce said Norfolk and Virginia Beach have a vested interest in protecting the water supply here since they draw from Lake Gaston.

The resolution supporting continuing the ban says a Virginia Beach study concludes cell failure in mining operations would be washed downstream and affect water quality in the Kerr Lake Reservoir and Lake Gaston, "Resulting in radiation levels in the water 10 to 20 times above the Safe Drinking Water Act levels."

While the event in the Virginia Beach model is rare, the resolution notes, "The magnitude of potential impacts on the basin's eco-system and the communities is too great to leave it to chance."

The basin, the resolution says, "Serves as a drinking water source for over one million people who could face increased risks associated with uranium mining, milling and storage of radioactive waste."

Read more:
http://rrspin.com/News-from-Roanoke-Rapids-Weldon-and-Halifax-County/Board-backs-continued-ban-on-Va.-mining.html

West Piedmont Region - Hazard Mitigation Survey

Dear Community Member,

Is your home or office building susceptible to damage from earthquakes, wildfires, or floods? Do you want to recover more quickly from disasters and prevent future damage from these and other natural hazards? Your participation can make our communities more resilient. We know you are busy and respectfully request a few moments of your time to respond to the brief survey below.

With a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the West Piedmont Planning District Commission is leading a local effort to update the region’s Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan identifies natural and manmade hazards throughout the planning district. The plan includes the counties of Franklin, Henry, Patrick, and Pittsylvania; the cities of Danville and Martinsville; and the towns of Boones Mill, Chatham, Gretna, Hurt, Ridgeway, Rocky Mount, and Stuart. It presents an identification of hazards and an assessment of vulnerability of the community and critical facilities to these hazards. The plan lists potential actions needed to reduce risk and future damage.

Although the plan enables the region to be eligible for various assistance grants, the plan’s value really lies in the identification of hazards and helps emergency managers and residents better prepare for disasters. The current hazard mitigation plan is available online at the Virginia Department of Emergency Management Web site at www.vaemergency.com/library/plans/mitigation.cfm  under “West Piedmont”.

Your responses to this survey will inform the plan update.
This survey is also available online at http://www.wppdc.org/
 All responses will be taken until May 15, 2011. Thank you for your time and cooperation.

Read more:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/WestPiedmontHMP

Leesville Lake Association looks for help to pick up debris

By John Crane
Published: May 08, 2011

ALTAVISTA -- The Leesville Lake Association’s annual Beautification Day will be held from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. May 21.

Volunteers are needed on both land and water to help remove tree trunks, limbs and manmade debris from the Leesville Lake’s shoreline and surface. Volunteers can use a boat, truck or trailer to bring the debris to collection sites at Brumfield boat ramp, Tri-County Marina or Runaway Bay boat ramp.

Boaters are asked to pick up or tow debris from the shoreline and surface to a collection site. Property owners can also collect debris from their shorelines and bring them to a collection site.

Those without a boat or shoreline are urged to come to a collection site to help unload debris from boats and vehicles and put it into trash boxes.

The Leesville Lake Association conducts Beautification Day and this is the eighth year for the event.

Volunteers and sponsors will receive a complimentary T-shirt with a silk-screened image by artist Bob Rankin. A picnic for volunteers will be held at 2 p.m. May 22 at the Tri-County Marina. Volunteers are encouraged to bring a side dish, salad or dessert, while the association will provide hamburgers, hot dogs and soft drinks.

To volunteer and indicate T-shirt size, visit at www.leesvillelake.org or email or call Roger Winters at rogwinters@embarqmail.com or (434) 369-4737.


Appalachian Power Company is responsible for clearing debris from Leesville Lake on an ongoing basis. To report floating or submerged debris, call 1-800-956-4237.

Meeting: LIFE

The next meeting of LIFE

will be 5/10/11 @

C&E Restaurant

@ 6:00 pm.

VA 4 Wind: 8 Reasons It’s a Great Idea!

 

By Eileen on Dec 01, 2009

Virginia has one of the best sites in the world for offshore wind. A shallow outer continental shelf extending many miles out, combined with ample Class 5 (excellent) and 6 (outstanding) wind resources, means we could potentially meet 100% of our total energy demand from offshore wind turbines.

Wind is a clean, renewable resource.

UNlike coal, oil, gas and uranium, offshore wind is a clean, renewable energy source, which can help Virginia meet its renewable energy targets. Offshore wind turbines emit no air pollution and don’t foul our rivers; they pose no risk of mercury poisoning; they do not cause asthma or other lung ailments. They require no mountaintop removal coal mining, produce no radioactive waste, do not spill toxic sludge onto our beaches, and do not consume scarce fresh water resources for washing coal or cooling generating plants.

Offshore wind is located where the demand is. Most major cities of the eastern U.S. are relatively near the coast. Offshore wind farms can provide power to these load centers without requiring long distance transmission lines. Here in Virginia, a wind farm twelve miles offshore from Virginia Beach could be readily integrated into the region’s high-voltage transmission grid by connecting to an existing 500 KV substation in Chesapeake. Connecting even larger amounts of offshore wind there could prevent the need to import additional coal-generated electricity from west of Virginia, and the need for new transmission lines that would have to cross our parks and historic places to bring power to northern Virginia.

Offshore wind is a proven, commercially available technology. Offshore wind offers an energy solution that can be adopted now. The technology is well-established worldwide, with offshore wind farms in ten countries, totaling more than 1,130 megawatts (MW). U.S. offshore projects are moving ahead in six other Atlantic states. Delaware has recently approved a 450 MW wind farm 11.5 miles off its coast, and a 420 MW wind farm in Nantucket Sound off the southern coast of Massachusetts has nearly completed federal review. Rhode Island and New Jersey have recently awarded projects of 400 MW and 350 MW, respectively. New York and Georgia also are studying offshore project sites for near-term development.

Virginia’s offshore wind development can start now. The Virginia Coastal Energy Research Consortium (VCERC) recently completed an ocean mapping study suggesting that a single study area twelve miles off Virginia Beach could accommodate 4 GW (4,000 MW) of offshore wind capacity — even after excluding areas used for U.S. Navy and NASA activities, shipping lanes, and dredge spoil disposal. VCERC has studied the engineering feasibility, cost, and economic development potential of Virginia’s offshore wind resource, and concluded that the immediate commercial opportunity would entail a 20-year build-out, ensure new career-length jobs in the Hampton Roads maritime industry, and create thousands of new jobs throughout the state, with a cost of energy less than that from a new coal-fired generating plant.

Offshore wind is affordable. Construction costs have soared for conventional power plants, and their fuel prices have increased under pressure from growing worldwide demand. Construction of an offshore wind farm currently costs only 30% more than a conventional coal plant for the same rated power capacity, and the “fuel” for a wind farm is free. Over the 25-year projected power plant life, using the range of volatility that coal prices have exhibited in the past year (ranging from $55 to $145 per ton), wind is the better investment. Wind becomes even more attractive when the cost of coal is adjusted to include carbon dioxide emission costs, either in the form of a carbon tax or a carbon cap-and-trade program, or in the form of carbon capture and sequestration processing costs. As an added comparison, construction of a nuclear power plant would cost approximately 50-70% more than an equivalent offshore wind facility, and would take far longer to permit, design, and build.

Offshore wind farms create jobs. The economic advantages of offshore wind are even greater when job benefits are considered. Construction, installation, operation and maintenance require a skilled labor force that can be hired and trained locally. Many of the components of wind turbines can also be fabricated locally, taking advantage of Virginia’s strong maritime industrial base.

The public supports offshore wind. A scientific survey by the University of Delaware found that over three-quarters of the state’s population supported the proposed offshore wind project, even if it is visible from shore. When offered a choice between the offshore wind project and an equivalent new generating plant using coal or natural gas, over 90% voted for wind, even if it were to cost more.

Read more:
http://vasierraclub.org/2009/12/virginia-offshore-wind/

Happy Mother!

EPA Helps Build Awareness Around Asthma

CONTACT:
Stacy Kika
kika.stacy@epa.gov
202-564-0906
202-564-4355

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
May 3, 2011


EPA Helps Build Awareness Around Asthma

Asthma affects nearly 25 million people in the U.S.

WASHINGTON – To kick off Asthma Awareness Month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is commemorating World Asthma Day by bringing awareness to a growing nationwide problem. Asthma has consistently increased over the past decade with more than 4 million additional cases reported, including nearly 1 million additional cases reported in children. One out of every 10 school aged children is affected and approximately 13 million people have reported having an asthma attack in the past year. EPA is taking action to ensure cleaner air and a healthier environment for children and families dealing with asthma.

"All Americans should be able to breathe easy whether they’re at home, at work or on the playground," EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said. "Yet too many of our children and family members suffer from asthma, resulting in doctor and hospital visits, lost learning time, more sick days and higher health care costs. It's our mission at EPA to protect the health of our communities by putting Clean Air Act safeguards in place to reduce levels of harmful pollutants in the air we all breathe. "

EPA provides guidance and resources to reduce indoor air triggers such as dust mites, mold, cockroaches, pet dander, and secondhand smoke in homes and schools. In addition to voluntary actions, EPA has taken a number of regulatory actions to protect people's health by updating air quality standards and reducing air pollution from power plants, industry and vehicles. For example, EPA recently proposed the first national standard for mercury pollution from power plants, which is estimated to prevent 120,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms, helping people breathe easier by improving outdoor air quality and reducing fine particle pollution.


As part of Asthma Awareness Month, EPA recommends these top five steps people can take to help prevent asthma attacks:



· Take it outside. One of the most common asthma triggers in the home is second hand smoke. Until they can quit, people should smoke outside, not in their home or car.

· Play it safe. Ozone and particle pollution can cause asthma attacks. People should check the Air Quality Index (AQI) to view reports of unhealthy levels.

· Keep it clean. Dust mites are also triggers for asthma. For dust mite control, cover mattresses and pillows with allergen proof covers and wash sheets and blankets once a week in hot water.

· Stake your claim. Household pets can also trigger asthma. People should keep pets out of the bedroom and off furniture.

· Break the mold. Mold is another asthma trigger. The key to controlling mold is controlling moisture. People should wash and dry hard surfaces to prevent and remove mold, and should replace moldy ceiling tiles and carpet.

Asthma is a nationwide problem. On June 9-10 EPA will host the National Asthma Forum in Washington, D.C. Hundreds of providers, health departments, community asthma coalitions, researchers, policy makers, and others will gather to discuss the most effective community based strategies for improving asthma outcomes, building successful and sustainable asthma care programs, and extending the reach and impact of high quality asthma care to everyone in need.

More information on asthma: http://www.epa.gov/asthma/index.html

More information on the forum: http://www.epa.gov/asthma/forum.html

More information about community-based asthma programs: http://www.asthmacommunitynetwork.org/

GUEST OPINION: Aquaculture good for environment, economy,

by Sandra E. Shumway
Posted Apr 05, 2011 @ 12:35 PM

EDITOR'S NOTE: The following guest commentary has been submitted in relation to the proposal for an oyster farm on Nanaquaket Pond in Tiverton. 

Have you enjoyed Oysters Rockefeller, clams casino, mussels marinara, or maybe Coquilles St. Jacques recently? Chances are those shellfish were cultured overseas and imported to the United States. This adds to the cost and often reduces product quality. The clams, oysters, mussels and scallops could just as easily have been grown in local waters, simultaneously supplying fresh markets, employing local people, reducing our imports and improving our national trade balance.

In the U.S., it’s recreation and aesthetics that come first, fishing and aquaculture are usually placed at the end of the list. Perhaps another difference between foreign and domestic aquaculture is that other countries have managers and legislators who support and promote aquaculture, and considerable research funds are provided by those governments to advance the industry.

Aquaculture has been practiced in China for over 3,000 years. Romans enjoyed oysters so much that their prodigious feats of oyster-eating are remarkable even by today’s standards for gluttony and conspicuous consumption. In the 1600s, Native Americans living along the New England coast stored oysters in pits during the winter to preserve broodstock for planting in enclosed bays in the spring. But that interest in aquaculture certainly seems to have waned over the years.

Today in the U.S., aquaculture is more of a novelty for a few hardy souls rather than a major food-producing industry. Shellfish culture in the United States was in its infancy 30 years ago and has made slow progress. We have the technology (and we readily sell it or give it away via scientific exchange to competitors worldwide). We clearly lack the vision and enthusiasm of our competitors.

While Americans enjoy their share of seafood, there is a “not in my backyard” mentality when it comes to aquaculture. Japanese point proudly to the 11,000 oyster rafts in Hiroshima Bay.
While Americans are willing to ignore millions of lobster trap buoys floating in coastal waters from Maine to North Carolina, they balk at the sight of two aquaculture buoys within eyeshot.

Oyster racks on otherwise unused shores are deemed unsightly. Crab and lobster traps can be set over seagrass beds in Florida, but not shellfish cages cannot. If you want to incite a riot, try to place four buoys in a cove in Maine or scallop cages on the shore of Virginia!

It should be an easy sell. Bivalve culture can be good for the environment, the economy, and the consumer.

The animals are suspension feeders and get their food by filtering particles from seawater. In doing so, they reduce sediment loads and turbidity of estuarine and coastal waters and remove excess nutrients from the water column.

Oyster populations in Chesapeake Bay 130 years ago were large enough to filter the entire bay in three to six days. Today, because shellfish populations are so depleted, a similar filtering would take about 325 days! It has been calculated that 3,750 rapidly growing oysters would be sufficient to eliminate the nitrogenous wastes reaching the estuary from one person living further upstream.

The activities associated with farming shellfish not only provide jobs in some-times depressed regions of the country, but allow fishing communities to thrive in spite of declining wild fisheries.
Water quality in shellfish growing areas must be of the highest quality, and bivalve culture activity often results in increased monitoring of environmental conditions of estuaries and coastal waters. Shellfish growers will not tolerate the discharge of untreated sewage near their farms.

Culturing bivalves can be good for scientists too. Growout sites provide a natural laboratory for researchers and many educators use hands-on aquaculture operations to teach ecology.

Aquaculture can be good for you!  Shellfish are high in protein and low in cholesterol and fat. They provide all of the essential amino acids and are an excellent source of Vitamins A, B1, B2, B3, C and D.

Careful management and a cooperative working arrangement between shellfish growers, scientists, legislators and the general public are essential to the growth of aquaculture in the U.S.

Shellfish aquaculture is a “green” industry and it can be a win-win situation all around. New attitudes and new management strategies are needed to encourage aquaculture, improve efficiency, and reduce and guard against environmental degradation.

It’s a balance that’s good for everybody and you can bet the farm on it!

Read more: http://www.heraldnews.com/archive/x230255623/GUEST-OPINION-Aquaculture-good-for-environment-economy-health#ixzz1IhmKFI9V

Dangers of Uranium

Leaking Liners in AZ

By The Editorial Board

Published: April 19, 2011

To the editor:

Those who support the mining of uranium in Virginia appear not to know that uranium in the United States continues to kill people in Arizona, New Mexico and Utah.

Prior to the opening of uranium mines, the Navajo were considered “resistant” to cancer. However, 89 percent of Navajo miners still working at the Shiprock mine in 1970 had died of cancer by 2000.

Uranium poisons the land and the water forever. Young Navajo today are dying of leukemia and reproductive cancer from radioactive pollution. Traditional people can no longer use their springs to water their livestock and corn. A plume of contamination is moving from a tailings heap into the springs of the traditional Hopi village of Moenkopi.

Uranium is a dangerous source of energy. Millions in Japan wonder how many generations will suffer from the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster. Millions live with the aftermath of Chernobyl. The U.S. was lucky with Three Mile Island. No one is immune to human error. Japanese officials admit to cutting corners to increase profit: no one is safe from high level corruption.

Uranium remains so deadly after its brief service — approximately three years — that what is not reprocessed must be stored safely for 10,000 years. Worldwide, there are no operative permanent storage sites. Temporary storage is expensive: canisters of illegally dumped nuclear waste are washing up on Somali shores, and with them reports of increased sickness and death.

There is no evidence that modern techniques will prevent the dangers of dust, water pollution, terrorism or long-term storage.

ALLISON CLOUGH M.D., M.P.H.
Flagstaff, Ariz.

http://www2.godanriver.com/news/2011/apr/19/dangers-uranium-ar-981329/

NAS Uranium Meeting

Paul Robinson NAS Boulder CO 03/23/11 from Chmura Economics on Vimeo.

Read more:
http://vimeo.com/22244814

May 5th Roanoke Keep the Ban Meeting

Subject: May 5th Roanoke Keep the Ban Meeting!

Hi All,
Can you circulate this event with your networks in the Roanoke area? It should be a great event!

Thanks,
Mary

----

On Thursday May 5th Sierra Club, Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and League of Individuals for the Environment will be hosting a Roanoke kick off meeting to Keep the Ban on uranium mining in Virginia. Can you join us?

Roanoke 'Keep the Ban' Kick Off Meeting
Thursday May 5, 2011
7:00pm - 8:30pm
Unitarian Universalist Church of Roanoke
2015 Grandin Rd, SW, Roanoke

RSVP to Ann Rogers (amelvin3@verizon.net)

Virginia has a nearly 30 year ban on uranium mining. Foreign backed interests are trying to lift that ban starting less than 50 miles away from Roanoke in Southside Virginia. Uranium deposits have been identified throughout the state. If the ban were lifted it would be lifted statewide. Drinking water, human health, farmland, property values, wildlife and tourism across Virginia are at risk.

The ban could be lifted in the next 12 months. Come to our kick off meeting and learn what you can do to protect our heath, our heritage and our future.

For more information or to RSVP contact: Ann Rogers amelvin3@verizon.net

Thanks and I'll see you on May 5th!

--
Mary Rafferty
Grassroots Organizing Manager
Sierra Club - Virginia Chapter

Email: Mary.rafferty@sierraclub.org
Office: (804) 225-9113 ext 105
Cell: (401) 862-8749

Uranium mining not worth long-term harm

Posted: Friday, April 8, 2011 5:00 am

To the editor:

Our opportunity to speak to the ban on new uranium mining claims near the Grand Canyon has been extended to May 4. Speak out, because uranium never stops being deadly.

-- Uranium kills miners: 89 percent of the Navajo miners working in Shiprock in 1970 have died of cancer.

-- Uranium poisons the land and the water forever. Young Navajo continue to die of leukemia and reproductive cancer from radioactive pollution. The "dry mines" of the previous mining boom continue to contaminate the waters of Moenkopi and Black Falls.

-- Uranium is a dangerous source of energy: Millions in Japan wonder how many generations will suffer from the Fukushima nuclear plant disaster. Millions live with the aftermath of Chernobyl. The U.S. was lucky with Three Mile Island. No one is immune to human error. Japanese officials admit to cutting corners to increase profit: No one is safe from high level corruption.

-- Uranium remains so deadly after its brief service -- approximately three years -- that what is not reprocessed must be stored safely for 10,000 years. Worldwide, there are NO operative permanent storage sites. Temporary storage is expensive: canisters of illegally dumped nuclear waste are washing up on Somali shores, and with them reports of increased sickness and death.

Uranium mining in Arizona will create a brief economic boom in exchange for permanent environmental harm and human suffering.

ALLISON CLOUGH, M.D., MPH
Flagstaff

Read More:
http://www.azdailysun.com/news/opinion/mailbag/article_db652d3e-f33c-5544-b560-3a9994f5c48 5.html

Meeting: Support the Ban on Uranium Mining in Virginia

Sunday May 15th, 2011, Conversations about Progressive Christianity (CPC) is sponsoring a presentation and dialogue in support of retaining Virginia's Ban on Uranium Mining.

Wise stewardship of the world that has been entrusted to our care is part of what CPC considers being the living presence of "God".

Join us in welcoming Trieste Lockwood of Interfaith Power and Light as she presents us with an opportunity to discover and discuss the implications of uranium mining in Virginia.

Also joining in the discussion will be Teresa Stanley, Organizer for the South Hampton Roads Chapter of Virginia Organizing.

She is working with a collaboration of folks locally who want to address the Uranium Mining Ban.

This event will start with CPC providing a meal for all attending at 11:00 am after the church services

Admission: Free to all

Event Dates:  May 15, 2011

Sunday:  11:00 am

Event location:  Lynnhaven Colony Congregational Church

Address:  2217 West Great Neck Rd, Virginia Beach VA, 23451

More contact info: Mark Munson, Phone: 757 638-7249

http://hamptonroads.com/2011/04/support-ban-uranium-mining-virginia