Signatures 80 total
Page: 1, 2
-
1
Name: Allison Wolff on Jul 22, 2010Comments:Flag
-
2
Name: Karin Nance on Jul 23, 2010Comments: It's critical that the proposed uranium mill run not follow through for the sake of the long term health of all living beings in the region, regardless of short term economic benefits.Flag
-
3
Name: Cathy James on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
4
Name: Blythe Sargent on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
5
Name: Robert Coe on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
6
Name: Jaime Grechika on Jul 23, 2010Comments: Ridgway, COFlag
-
7
Name: Rebecca Pugh on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
8
Name: Laura Ianacone Taschek on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
9
Name: Erika Gordon on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
10
Name: Pamela Frenz on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
11
Name: Sheila Manzagol on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
12
Name: Jenni Ward on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
13
Name: Jesse Mctigue on Jul 23, 2010Comments: I grew up in Telluride and am back raising my own family. The mine will have devastating environmental effects on our air quality and if a leak were to occur in one of the tailing liners (of which are not fail proof) will have catastrophic effects in our groundwater. The only compelling argument for the mine is for economic stimulus in the Naturita/Nucla region, however even this argument is deeply flawed. The market for uranium has not been consistent over the last fifteen years and this is a very short-term solution for very deep-rooted, long-term economic problems in the area. We should invest in renewable energy sources to give the people of the region jobs, not in an energy source that has potential detrimental environmental effects and an unknown future.Flag
-
14
Name: Emily Shoff on Jul 23, 2010Comments: Please--do not construct the mill. Your children and ours deserve better.Flag
-
15
Name: Caroline S Conzelman, PhD on Jul 23, 2010Comments: My family lives in Telluride, and our daughter's middle name is Dolores---after the incomparable river that will be tapped to feed this mill and polluted as a consequence. Uranium is not a clean fuel, contrary to some current popular notions. We should be putting all this money and initiative into truly alternative fuels and conservation efforts! No time to waste.Flag
-
16
Name: Elizabeth Salem on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
17
Name: Cindy Fusting on Jul 23, 2010Comments: This issue is deeply affecting all of us in the San Miguel Watershed. Please consider our health and welfare in your decision-making process, and deny approval for the proposed Pinon Ridge Uranium Mill.Flag
-
18
Name: Ann Mellick on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
19
Name: Anonymous on Jul 23, 2010Comments:Flag
-
20
Name: Monica Kelly-Warren on Jul 24, 2010Comments:Flag
-
21
Name: Hilaree O'Neill on Jul 24, 2010Comments:Flag
-
22
Name: Tiffany Osborne on Jul 24, 2010Comments: I am completely against the mill in Paradox/BedrockFlag
-
23
Name: TINA Godisak on Jul 25, 2010Comments:Flag
-
24
Name: Brittany Miller on Jul 25, 2010Comments:Flag
-
25
Name: Mary Ann Osborne on Jul 25, 2010Comments:Flag
-
26
Name: Hilary White on Jul 26, 2010Comments:Flag
-
27
Name: Anne Reeser on Jul 26, 2010Comments:Flag
-
28
Name: Pamela Sante on Jul 26, 2010Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: Gigi Spitzer on Jul 26, 2010Comments:Flag
-
30
Name: Lynette Brown on Jul 26, 2010Comments:Flag
-
31
Name: Julie Schneider on Jul 27, 2010Comments: I may be a "mom" only to my dogs, but I still agree with everything being said in this petition. I am a daughter though, and I don't want my parents welfare to be negatively impacted as a result of the proposed Pinon Ridge Uranium Mill project. CDPHE needs to actually consider the environmental impacts and not just go through the motions, only to ignore everything, except their own economic welfare. It appears, like MMS, that they are in the "business" of approving such projects just so they can financially support themselves.Flag
-
32
Name: Clea Petrie on Jul 27, 2010Comments:Flag
-
33
Name: Annie Carlson on Jul 28, 2010Comments: I am completely opposed to the Pinon Ridge Uranium Mill. The negative health and environment implications are too great.Flag
-
34
Name: Lucas D Price on Jul 28, 2010Comments: We can do better than this. The necessity to go through with this is not based in reality. The job growth is negligible, the real need for uranium unsubstantiated and the long term impacts irreversible. We can make up for any lack in employment in the west-end economy with local food production and eco-tourism. Thank you.Flag
-
35
Name: Jackie Unternahrer on Jul 29, 2010Comments:Flag
-
36
Name: Karen Unternahrer on Jul 29, 2010Comments:Flag
-
37
Name: David Kuntz on Jul 29, 2010Comments:Flag
-
38
Name: Art Goodtimes on Aug 1, 2010Comments: As a parent with children living in the Norwood area, I think mining uranium that has a radioactive half-life of thousands of years and milling it for nuclear reactors is completely irresponsible, since we have no way to ensure this industrial processing won't harm our children and generations to come for thousands of years into the future. I am personally opposed to the Canadian-owned Pinon Ridge mill project. Remember Utah's downwinders. Back then, the government told them the A-bomb tests were safe.Flag
-
39
Name: Carol Lee on Aug 1, 2010Comments:Flag
-
40
Name: Anonymous on Aug 2, 2010Comments:Flag
-
41
Name: Cynthia Sommers on Aug 3, 2010Comments:Flag
-
42
Name: Jennifer Shimkonis on Aug 6, 2010Comments:Flag
-
43
Name: Mark Rikkers on Aug 10, 2010Comments:Flag
-
44
Name: Kristin Metheny on Aug 10, 2010Comments:Flag
-
45
Name: Len Metheny on Aug 10, 2010Comments:Flag
-
46
Name: Nate Soules on Aug 11, 2010Comments:Flag
-
47
Name: Mallory Rice on Aug 12, 2010Comments:Flag
-
48
Name: Jennifer Isaac on Aug 13, 2010Comments: Please keep our mountains sacred and clean for our children, they deserve to remain pure in body & soul.Flag
-
49
Name: Christine Reich on Aug 14, 2010Comments:Flag
-
50
Name: Pamela Shifrin on Aug 14, 2010Comments:Flag
Page: 1, 2