Downwinders and the Radioactive West (2021)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Downwinders and the Radioactive West is a documentary film which premiered on US television (PBS) in 2021.

 

The topic is the nuclear testing program in the western part of the continental USA in the 1950s and the 1960s and the radioactive fallout produced by this program.

 

Whenever a nuclear bomb was tested on the ground, a huge radioactive cloud appeared above the site where the bomb exploded. The wind moved the cloud in a certain direction and the cloud passed over a certain area. The people who lived in the area over which the cloud passed are known as downwinders.

 

What were the consequences of the nuclear testing program and the radioactive fallout produced by the testing program?

 

Many people believe the health of the downwinders was undermined by the radioactive fallout produced by the nuclear testing program which caused deadly diseases, such as cancer and leukemia.

 

Other people are sceptical. They say there is little or no connection between the nuclear testing program and the health of the downwinders.

 

They say the nuclear testing program was safe and insist that claims made by downwinders are not supported by the scientific evidence.

 

In this film, the topic is discussed in great detail by three groups: downwinders, local politicians, and academic experts who have studied the scientific evidence.

 

Here is some basic information about this film:

 

** Writer, producer and director: John Howe

** Narrator: Peter Coyote

** Production: PBS Utah

** Available on the PBS website

** Language: English

** Subtitles: English

** Run time: 57 minutes

 

Several persons are interviewed in this film. Here are the names of the participants (divided into four categories):

 

# 1. Downwinders

** Mel Clark – resident of Cedar City, sheep rancher

** Mary Dickson – journalist, writer

** Ilene Hacker – resident of St. George

** Tosh Kano – Hiroshima 1945 survivor, resident of Salt Lake City

** Ian Zabarte – Principal Man, Western Shoshone Tribe

 

# 2. Local politicians

** Michael Okerlund Leavitt – Republican politician, governor of Utah 1993-2003 – Secretary of Health and Human Services 2005-2009

** Jim Matheson – Democratic politician, Congressman from Utah 2001-2015 (son of Scott Matheson, who was governor of Utah 1977-1985)

** Ben McAdams – Democratic politician, Congressman from Utah 2019-2021

** Tom Udall – Democratic politician, US Senator from New Mexico 2009-2021 – US ambassador to New Zealand since 2021 (son of Stewart Lee Udall, who was Secretary of the Interior 1961-1969)

 

# 3. Academic experts

** Bruce W. Church – a retired radiation expert, Department of Energy (this person defends the nuclear testing program)

** Rod Decker – journalist, author (this person is sceptical)

** Dr Heidi Hanson – epidemiologist, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah

** Dr David Kennedy – historian, Stanford University

** Dr Steven L. Simon – staff scientist, Division of Cancer, Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer Institute (this person is sceptical)

** Dr Ken Smith – epidemiologist, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah

 

# 4. Others

** The Honorable Bruce Sterling Jenkins (1927-2023) – a Senior US District Judge for the District of Utah

 

Archive footage is used between the talking heads. Archive footage is used to support and supplement the statements made by the participants. Archive footage is used when the narrator is speaking.

 

THE DOWNWINDERS AND THEIR CASE

According to this film, the victims of the nuclear testing program and the radioactive fallout can be divided into at least four and maybe five categories:

 

# 1. Livestock, primarily sheep

 

# 2. Civilians living in places like St. George and Salt Lake City (Utah)

 

# 3. Native Americans, members of the Western Shoshone Tribe, living in Nevada and Utah

 

# 4. American soldiers who were stationed around the test site during an explosion

 

# 5. Native Americans, members of the Navajo Tribe, who worked in uranium mines in Arizona

 

When ranchers in Utah noticed that many sheep were sick and died, they suspected that this was a consequence of the nuclear testing program and the radioactive fallout produced by the testing program.

 

They decided to sue the government. They wanted an apology and economic compensation for their losses.

 

The case was heard in 1956. The presiding judge Albert Sherman Christensen (1905-1996) ruled in favour of the government. The ranchers lost the case. There was no apology and no economic compensation.

 

Many years later, new information about the case was discovered. It seemed the government had manipulated the evidence in order to avoid being blamed for the death of the livestock.

 

The ranchers decided to sue the government again. They hoped they could win this time. The case was heard in 1982. By a strange coincidence, the presiding judge was the same as the one who had ruled in the case back in 1956.

 

Judge Christensen was impressed by the new information. He declared that the government had misled the court in 1956 and this time he ruled in favour of the ranchers. The government lost the case.

 

According to the judge, the government should issue an apology and offer economic compensation to the ranchers. But the government refused to do this.

 

The government appealed, and in 1985 when the case was heard in a court of appeal, judge Christensen’s ruling was overturned.

 

When residents in places like St. George and Salt Lake City began to suffer from cancer and leukemia, they suspected that this was a consequence of the nuclear testing program and the radioactive fallout produced by the testing program.

 

They decided to sue the government. They wanted an apology and economic compensation for their suffering.

 

The case was heard in 1984. The presiding judge Bruce Sterling Jenkins was impressed by the evidence presented in court. He ruled in favour of the downwinders. The government lost the case.

 

According to the judge, the government should issue an apology and offer economic compensation to the victims of the nuclear testing program. But the government refused to do this.

 

The government appealed, and when the case was heard in a higher court, judge Jenkins’ ruling was overturned.

 

The US government claimed the nuclear testing program was necessary to defend and protect the freedom and national security of the United States.

 

Apparently, this argument swayed the members of the higher court. 

 

Whether the health of the downwinders had been undermined by the nuclear testing program or not, the need to defend and protect the freedom and national security of the United States was seen as more important than the health of the citizens of Utah.

 

** The ranchers lost in court when they talked about losing their sheep.

 

** The downwinders lost in court when they talked about losing their friends and members of their family.

 

But the cases were discussed in public, and the topic became a public issue. 

 

There was a growing sentiment that something could and should be done about it. The politicians could not ignore this sentiment. They decided to act. In 1990, Congress passed a law which is known as RECA:

 

The Radiation Exposure Compensation Act

 

The law includes an official apology and offers economic compensation to victims of the nuclear testing program. The amount of compensation is divided into three levels:

 

** Low level

50,000 dollars = to civilians (the downwinders)

 

** Medium level

75,000 dollars = to American soldiers who were told to watch explosions

 

** High level

100,000 dollars = to Native American miners who worked in uranium mines

 

Some of the downwinders who are interviewed in this film use harsh words, strong language, when talking about the nuclear testing program in Nevada.

 

They say the leaders of the American government treated them like “guinea pigs.”

 

Some of the local politicians who are interviewed in this film use harsh words, strong language, when talking about the nuclear testing program in Nevada.

 

They say the leaders of the American government regarded the downwinders as “expendable.”

 

This is sad.

 

But true.

 

RATINGS AND REVIEWS

What do reviewers say about this film? This question is not easy to answer.

 

The film is not listed on IMDb. There is no rating and there are no reviews.

 

The film is not available on Amazon. There is no rating and there are no reviews.

 

CONCLUSION

What do I think? In my opinion, this is an important film about an important topic.

 

The story of the downwinders and the radioactive west deserves to be told, and in this film, it is done very well.

 

I do, however, have one minor complaint:

 

In this film, we hear from four politicians. Three are former members of Congress, while the fourth is a former governor of Utah. All four are free to speak their mind. They do not have to worry about being elected again.

 

But why do we not hear from current members of Congress? What about the US senators from Arizona, Nevara, and Utah? What about the Representatives of these three states? What do they have to say about this topic? Why do we not hear from any of them?

 

Did the filmmakers try to contact and interview current members of Congress? If the answer to this question is yes, what was the response?

 

I think it is remarkable that the only politicians who speak out in this film are former politicians. What is the reason for this?

 

Having made this observation, I am not going to complain about anything else.

 

In my opinion, this is a great film which deserves a rating of five stars (100 percent).

 

REFERENCES

 

# 1. Books

 

** Justice Downwind: America’s Atomic Testing Program in the 1950s by Howard Ball (1986)

 

** Uranium Frenzy: Saga of the Nuclear West by Raye C. Ringholz (1989) (revised and expanded edition 2002)

 

** Fallout: An American Nuclear Tragedy by Philip Fradkin (1989) (second edition 2004)

 

** American Ground Zero: The Secret Nuclear War by Carole Gallagher (1993)

 

** The Atomic West edited by Bruce Hevly and John M. Findley (1998)

 

** Downwind: A People’s History of the Nuclear West by Sarah Fox (2014) (2018)

 

** Doom Towns: The People and Landscapes of Atomic Testing by Andrew G. Kirk (author) and Kristian Purcell (illustrator) (2016)

 

# 2. Film and video

 

** The Atomic Café (1982)

Run time = 1 hour 32 minutes

IMDb = 76 percent

Rotten Tomatoes = 93 percent

 

** Trinity and Beyond (1995)

Run time = 2 hours

IMDb = 79 percent

 

** Countdown to Zero (2010)

Run time = 1 hour 32 minutes

IMDb = 69 percent

Rotten Tomatoes = 79 percent

 

** Downwind (2023)

Directors = Douglas Brian Miller and Mark Shapiro

Writers = Warren Etheredge and Mark Shapiro

Narrator = Martin Sheen

Run time = 1 hour36 minutes

IMDb = 69 percent

 

# 3. Items available on the internet

 

** Lynn Smith,

“She crusades for downwinders.”

Los Angeles Times

6 March 1987

 

** Rory Carroll,

“Hollywood and the downwinders still grapple with nuclear fallout,”

The Guardian

6 June 2015

 

** Tom Williams, “Nuclear workers and a different side to Utah’s nuclear history,” Utah Public Radio, 8 February 2021 (49 minutes)

 

** Emma Feuz, “New legislation has been introduced to extend support for Utah downwinders,” Utah Public Radio, 20 October 2021 (2 minutes)

 

*****

Downwinders 

and the Radioactive West

(PBS Utah, 2021)

 

*****

Downwind:

A People's History of the Nuclear West

By Sarah Fox

(2014) (2018)

 

*****

 

Bisbee '17 (2018)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bisbee ‘17 is a documentary film which premiered in 2018. The topic of this film is the Bisbee Deportation, a dark and often forgotten chapter of American history, which took place in Bisbee (Arizona) in July 1917. 

 

Here is some basic information about this film:

 

** Director: Robert Greene

** Camera: Jarred Alterman

** Historical advisor: Katherine Benton-Cohen

** Run time: 112 minutes

 

BACKGROUND

Bisbee is located in the southeast corner of Arizona, only seven miles from the US-Mexican border. The town was founded in 1880. The life of this town was based on extraction of metals: silver, gold, and copper.

 

The deposits of copper were extremely rich. Copper is used in the production of weapons. 

 

The mining company was making good money. But the miners were not getting rich.

 

In April 1917, the US entered World War One. Suddenly, the demand for copper increased dramatically. The copper company could expect even more profits. But the miners were not happy with their conditions.

 

In June 1917, they decided they had to respond. They stopped working and began a strike. They wrote down their basic demands. They wanted:

 

** A fair salary

** A safe working environment

** Recognition of the trade union

 

They wanted to negotiate on the basis of these demands. But the leaders of the mining company refused to negotiate. They would not even talk to them.

 

Many miners were members of the I.W.W., the International Workers of the World, also known as the “Wooblies.” 

 

The I.W.W. was a radical union which was against discrimination. The union accepted men and women, white and non-white members, skilled and unskilled workers.

 

The I.W.W. was also against the war. Therefore, the mining company regarded members of this union as traitors who were working for the Germans, even though this was not true and there was no evidence of this.

 

Many miners were recent immigrants. Perhaps a third from Mexico, a third from Eastern Europe, and a third migrant workers from other parts of the US.

 

A confrontation was building up in Bisbee. But there was no violence.

 

On 12 July, the mining company went into action: the local sheriff Harry Wheeler and ca 2,000 deputies rounded up almost 1,200 miners and forced them at gunpoint to the local stadium. From there they were forced to the railroad where they were loaded into boxcars.

 

Once the miners were inside, the train started rolling toward the east. Towards the next state (New Mexico). When the train stopped in the middle of the desert, the miners were unloaded.

 

They were told to fend for themselves. But they had no food and no water. 

 

Before departing, sheriff Wheeler gave them a warning:

 

“Do not come back!

 

If we see you again, we will kill you!”

 

After this dramatic episode, the miners in Bisbee realized that they should not make any demands. There was no more talk about trade unions.

 

The deportation was not forgotten. But nobody talked about it. The work continued for decades. The last mine was closed in 1975. Without the mining industry, the town became smaller, but it is still there.

 

THE FILM

Bisbee ‘17 is not a traditional documentary where we have a narrator and a series of experts, also known as talking heads. The director has taken a different approach to his topic.

 

On 12 July 2017, the citizens of Bisbee organised a re-enactment of the dramatic events that took place in the town exactly one hundred years before.

 

It was an open-air theatre where many citizens were actors. Some played one of the 2,000 deputies, while others played one of the almost 1,200 miners.

 

Two brothers played two brothers: one was a deputy; the other was a miner. The deputy had to arrest his brother who was a miner!

 

This is what we see in this film. The re-enactment of events which happened in July 1917 and the preparations leading up to the special day. We see the actors as they prepare themselves for their roles.

 

Each actor has to understand his or her character. What were their feelings? What were the reasons for doing what they did?

 

The result is a film that is surprisingly balanced, because the story is seen and told from both sides: the mining company and the miners.

 

RATINGS AND REVIEWS

What do reviewers say about this film? Here are the results of three review aggregators:

 

68 per cent = IMDb

93 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes (the critics)

60 per cent = Rotten Tomatoes (the audience)

87 per cent = Meta (the critics)

51 per cent = Meta (the audience)

 

When you look at Rotten Tomatoes and Meta, you can see that there is a clear difference between the critics and the audience. The critics like the unusual and nontraditional style of this film, while the audience is not happy about it.

 

On Amazon there are at the moment 64 ratings, 23 with reviews. The average rating is 4.2 stars, which corresponds to a rating of 84 percent.

 

Here are the details:

 

5 stars = 60 percent

4 stars = 20 percent

3 stars = 7 percent

2 stars = 7 percent

1 star = 6 percent

 

CONCLUSION

For me, the biggest problem is not the unusual and nontraditional style. I can accept it. I can see it has a certain charm. For me, the biggest problem is the length of the film. It is too long. Almost two hours!

 

Even some of the critics, who are impressed by this film, admit that it is too long. The director should have cut it down to 100 minutes or better still 90 minutes.

 

While the topic is important, I cannot follow the professional critics all the way to the top and offer five stars. On the other hand, I think the general audience is too harsh when they offer only three stars.

 

I want to find a position in the middle. I think this film deserves a rating of four stars (80 percent).

 

REFERENCES

 

# 1. Books

 

** The Great Bisbee deportation of July 12, 1917 compiled and edited by Robert E. Hanson (1990)

 

** Borderline Americans: Racial Division and Labor War in the Arizona Borderlands by Catherine Benton-Cohen (2009)

 

** Bisbee: Queen of the Copper Camps by Lynn Bailey (2010)

 

** Forging the Copper Collar: Arizona’s Labor-Management War of 1901-1921 by James W. Byrkit (2016)

 

** I’ll Forget It When I Die: The Bisbee Deportation of 1917 by Mitchell Abidor (2021)

 

# 2. Film and video

Fire in the Hole: Mine Wars of the West

Part one = 57 minutes

Part two = 57 minutes

PBS, Utah – 15 December 2015

 

*****

The Bisbee deportation of July 1917

Marching the strikers to the train

*****

 

The Bisbee deportation of July 1917

Loading the strikers on the train

 

*****

Sheriff Harry Cornwall Wheeler

(1875-1925)

 The lawman who was in charge of 

the illegal deportation of the strikers

*****