BLM just doing its job on off-road closures

To the editor:

The Bureau of Land Management must address the confusion resulting from recent articles and editorials regarding long-standing closures of certain public lands within the Las Vegas Valley to off-highway vehicle (OHV) use.

The Las Vegas Valley OHV closure has been in place since 1998 due to increasing health risks to the public resulting from high levels of dust in the air. Dust levels within the valley exceeded air quality standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency. The closure was implemented in conjunction with the Clark County Air Quality Division, which is the agency responsible for enforcing EPA regulations.

Due to congressional designation and related management plans, off-highway vehicle regulations are also in place for Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area, Sloan Canyon National Conservation Area and wilderness areas.

Outside of the closure area, off-highway vehicles can use existing roads and trails within the BLM-managed public land. Popular areas include: Big Dune, Jean/Roach Dry Lake Bed Area, Eldorado Valley, Nelson Hills and Nellis Dunes. Maps are available for the public at the BLM office at 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive.

The BLM takes its multiple-use mission very seriously, and off-highway vehicles are one of many ways to enjoy the Southern Nevada landscape. Please visit our Web site at www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/fo/lvfo.html for more information and maps.

Juan Palma

LAS VEGAS

THE WRITER IS MANAGER OF THE BLM’S LAS VEGAS FIELD OFFICE

New sanctuary

To the editor:

So a local Hispanic advocacy group wants a “sanctuary city” for the illegal immigrants (Review-Journal, Thursday). Well, I have good news for them. All they have to do is contact me and I will show them the way to a whole “sanctuary country.”

Where, pray tell, might that be? A very short distance south of Las Vegas — a place called Mexico. Are you surprised?

I can guarantee that if they go to Mexico, they will not be locked up or deported.

Now that you know the way, will you go? I think not.

Charles Jamison

OVERTON

Photo shoot

To the editor:

In reply to Sherman Frederick’s recent column on the Las Vegas Beltway:

Shame on Mr. Frederick for detouring down the surveillance camera road. The ends never justify the means. And, by the way, what are the ends? Lives or money? Let’s examine the logic.

We are told that speed limits are set by studies conducted in order to find the safest speed for a roadway. The end is to save lives. If the majority of people are passing you, then perhaps the limit should be raised.

How many traffic accidents did you observe on your drive that morning? The higher speed may be just as safe as the one posted.

If, though, speed enforcement is actually just a mechanism for revenue enhancement, then don’t waste our time with signs, public relations campaigns and speed traps. Eliminate the human factor, automate speed enforcement and take all the money and pay our teachers to educate the ever-increasing number of children overburdening our local public school system.

As a Nevadan, aren’t you tired of people moving here and telling you how to live your life? If they liked it so much where they were, why did they move here?

In Europe, gas is $4 to $6.50 a gallon. Why shouldn’t we be paying the same to save the environment?

In England, they have surveillance cameras everywhere. They’ll be in their homes next. But why should anyone care, as long as they’re not breaking the law?

In California, it’s a crime to own many types of guns. Forget the Bill of Rights. It’s outdated.

And now, Mr. Frederick is begging for a piece of Phoenix in Las Vegas?

We’re getting there, in all the above-mentioned instances. Give it time — and more government.

Karen De Shazer

TOPOCK, ARIZ.

God debate

To the editor:

Kudos to the Review-Journal for printing Christopher Hitchens’ commentary concerning secularism and faith (Friday). Mr. Hitchens dispels a couple of the myths surrounding secularism, including the notion that our separation of church and faith is somehow either an accident or an error, and that secular states are more horrible than religious ones. Unfortunately, he does so in an obscure way that I fear many will not penetrate.

Nevertheless, there is an ocean of misunderstandings concerning secularism and atheism, and I welcome Mr. Hitchens’ contribution to reducing them, and the Review-Journal’s own contribution through the airing of such articles.

Carl Kaun

HENDERSON

THE WRITER IS PRESIDENT OF THE HUMANIST ASSOCIATION OF LAS VEGAS.