About two dozen opponents of a proposed granite quarry on Dennis Station Road endured hot, humid conditions Sunday, Aug. 9, as they took their months-long protest to the steps of the Putnam County Courthouse.
Several speakers made lengthy, often emotional appeals to protect the area’s land, water and rural character from quarry development.
A few Baldwin County residents also attended to speak out against two recently revealed quarry initiatives south of Lake Sinclair.
Speakers repeatedly raised concerns about blasting, dust, traffic, water quality, health risks, and the potential impact a quarry could have on nearby property values. They also urged residents to remain engaged as the rezoning request moves through Putnam County’s review process.
The gathering drew former and current county officials, as well as several candidates for this November’s election, who offered their perspectives on the quarry controversy.
Republican County Commission District 4 candidate Jennifer Ray spoke early in the afternoon, framing the dispute as one that extends beyond a single property or county line.
“We are surrounded by forests, farms, green space, wildlife, rural communities, and generations of families who have called this home,” Ray said. “These natural resources don’t recognize county lines, and neither should our commitment to protecting them.”
Ray pointed out that local residents quickly organized after learning in January about the quarry proposal by Putnam County Stone LLC. She also praised Baldwin County residents challenging quarry projects there, saying the counties can and should share information while supporting one another.
“This isn’t about being against economic development,” Ray said. “It’s about recognizing that not every project belongs in every location.”
The Putnam Stone proposal initially called for rezoning a 917-acre tract of forest land leased from Weyerhaeuser across Dennis Station Road from the Interfor sawmill. The Wisconsin-based applicants have since reduced the project’s proposed operating footprint to about 340 acres, but opponents repeatedly said the revision did not resolve their concerns.
Local resident Miriam Hatcher said opponents never requested a smaller quarry and remain opposed to mining at the site. She argued the project conflicts with surrounding agricultural and residential uses, as well as the county’s comprehensive land-use plan.
“The reduced footprint doesn’t equal a reduced impact,” Hatcher said before the crowd. “Just because you’re reducing it doesn’t mean the output is going to be reduced. This is still a bad idea.”
Hatcher also compared the proposal to a quarry rezoning request that was rejected near the same area approximately 15 years ago. She said farms, homes and other investments made since then demonstrate why residents want Dennis Station Road to remain rural rather than become an industrial corridor.
“We’re not compromising in this situation,” she said. “We do not want a quarry.”
Former Putnam County Commission Chairman Billy Webster described voting against the earlier quarry proposal. He told attendees he initially stood alone in opposition, but the Putnam County Board of Commissioners ultimately rejected it unanimously after residents voiced their concerns.
“It is people like you coming out and voicing your opinion and your opposition that will change the minds of any commissioners who might be on the fence,” Webster said.
Kimberly Huff, another Putnam resident, focused on what she described as a loss of trust and transparency between residents and county government. She said citizens’ concerns about their homes and community deserve to be heard, even when the debate becomes contentious.
“Our feelings about our future, where we live, and what we’re going to leave behind, those are legitimate, and they are worthy of being voiced,” Huff said.
County Commissioner Richard Garrett, whose District 2 includes downtown Eatonton, emphasized that public involvement matters. However, he said commissioners must also follow established legal procedures while considering an applicant’s property rights.
“It’s a landowner trying to exercise their property rights,” Garrett said. “That’s as constitutional as free speech.”
Garrett said he has spoken with Putnam County Stone representatives and project opponents alike. He added that some residents quietly support the quarry, though they may not feel comfortable saying so publicly.
“My job is to listen to everyone’s opinions, assess all the facts, all the evidence, all the pros and cons, all the trade-offs, and don’t go in with a preconceived notion,” he said.
Garrett also warned that cutting the quarry application review short could expose the county to claims that it acted unfairly or arbitrarily. Still, he encouraged residents to continue contacting their commissioners and participating in public-comment opportunities.
“People-power does make a big difference,” he said. “I’ve experienced it personally.”
Several speakers also expressed broader concerns about the potential reach of quarry blasting. They cited the health risks associated with silica dust, potential impacts on stormwater runoff and underground aquifers, and possible harm to established waterways and residents’ well water.
No quarry representatives spoke at the event or were known to have attended Sunday’s gathering.