Sheriff asks to use Caswell County landfill for training and shooting range; neighbors press noise, scheduling conditions

Sheriff Tony Durden asked the Caswell County Board of Commissioners to allow the sheriff’s office to use county landfill property for a training facility and shooting range but the board took no formal action at the meeting.

The request drew public comment from nearby residents, who urged strict conditions on any approval. Phil Barfield, a county resident, urged the board to require “reducing noise at the source” through vegetation and sound barriers and suggested limits including a facilities permit under the county UDO, published schedules and a two‑year probationary period. Chip Atwater, who said his property sits about 2,000 feet from the proposed area, said he opposed the site and asked to be involved earlier in planning: “I still feel like I would like to be involved at some point in time in the planning rather than just have it brought before y’all before a vote later on.”

Caswell County Sheriff Tony Durden presented an updated proposal with noise measurements, berm plans and cost estimates and introduced Detective Clayton Myers, the department’s assistant training coordinator and a certified firing range instructor, to answer technical questions. Detective Myers reported field decibel tests from an October/November series with 12 shooters on site and told commissioners: “We found that the 9 millimeters were at 53.9. The 12 gauge shotguns were at 48.1, and the patrol rifles were at 50.6.” Durden said proposed berms would be 18 feet—above the 10‑foot minimum he cited—and that the plan includes planting shrubbery to absorb sound.

Speakers and others at the meeting highlighted technical and operational questions left unresolved: why one ambient reading taken on a different date registered higher than another, how traffic noise compared with gunfire at nearby locations, whether outside agencies would be allowed to use the range and, if so, whether their insurance would cover operations at the site. Durden said he expects outside agencies’ insurance would cover training offsite but said the county attorney should confirm coverage. He also said the sheriff would not ask the county for additional operating funds now and that, if funds are needed later, the department would seek assets such as forfeiture funds rather than county general revenue.

Public commenters and commissioners called out cost uncertainty. One public speaker noted the project’s initial estimate under $3,000 but said later materials suggest costs could exceed $15,000 when gravel and supervision are included; during the sheriff’s presentation staff reviewed line items and structure estimates that together could bring the total toward the mid‑five-figure range. The sheriff outlined a 40‑hour, $40/hour cap on a contractor’s services for earthwork oversight and said permanent structures could wait if funding is not available.

No motion to approve use of landfill was made. The record shows the topic had been tabled after an earlier public hearing (Aug. 5 of the prior year) and was placed on the current meeting for updates and further review. Commissioners asked follow‑up questions; staff and the sheriff’s office will supply additional technical details and legal review of insurance and permitting before any formal decision.

If the board later considers formal approval it will need permits under the county Unified Development Ordinance and to reconcile community conditions raised at the meeting: limits on users, published shooting schedules, hours of operation, specified berm and noise‑mitigation construction, and a complaints procedure with public review for changes.