71°F
weather icon Windy

Land fund vital to conservation, Nevada

To the editor:

In your Oct. 12 editorial (“Why does Washington need more real estate?”) there seems to be a lot missing from the argument that your readers should understand.

Nevada’s opportunities to generate economic growth and to expand urban areas are predicated on federal laws that allow for the identification and disposal, or sale, of public lands which allow that growth. The revenues from these sales are used for numerous purposes intended to offset the loss of wildlife habitats and other resource uses on public lands through conservation actions.

Some examples of how the proceeds from sales of public lands in Clark County were used include the Springs Preserve in Las Vegas, the Red Rock Canyon Visitors Center west of the city, trail projects that improve access for everyone on our public lands, and consolidation of private inholdings on public lands that challenge both private landowners and public land management agencies.

There is no acre-for-acre mandate in any of these laws. In fact, Nevada’s public lands have dropped from nearly 90 percent several decades ago to a little more than 85 percent.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund is a separate program that uses offshore oil production royalties to provide state and federal agencies the dollars they need for land conservation actions. An example is funding for the Department of Wildlife to manage our wildlife heritage for the benefit of everyone.

I love wildlife, whether I am watching it or hunting it. Many other Nevadans and visitors do as well. Funds are also used for conservation easements that pay private landholders to keep lands under current use, for example as grazing pasture, because of the auxiliary benefits for wildlife.

This really is a no-brainer: If you want to see Nevada and its wildlife take another blow, then you can pursue defunding the fund. On the other hand, if you like to visit Nevada’s beautiful places and see wildlife, or if you want tourists to come here to do the same, then you need to oppose Utah Rep. Rob Bishop’s misguided proposal.

John Tull

Reno

The writer is conservation director for the Nevada Wilderness Project.

Dial down

To the editor:

In his Oct. 14 letter to the editor, James Moldenhauer commented on the new cellphone law. He objects to government intrusion in the use of cellphones while driving. As a victim of near misses due to irresponsible cellphone use by others, I am delighted to see this reckless behavior stopped.

While I agree, in principle, with freedom from government intrusion, there are times when the government has to step in for the common good. Prevention is much better than accidents. After all, your freedom to swing your arm stops where my nose begins.

If drivers won’t observe this voluntarily, then they deserve to be fined or jailed.

M.C. Mills

Las Vegas

What jobs?

To the editor:

In a recent article by Bloomberg News, the following facts were disclosed:

Goldman Sachs’ compensation expense, which includes salaries, bonuses, stock awards and benefits, was equivalent to $292,836 for each of the company’s 34,200 workers as of Sept. 30. A year earlier Goldman Sachs employed 35,400 people, who shared about $13.1 billion, or $370,706 each, for the nine-month period.

JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s compensation expense, which includes salaries, bonuses and benefits, was enough to give each of the division’s employees $289,611 for the nine-month period.

The average compensation figures are derived by dividing the overall compensation pool by the number of employees, and they don’t represent individual workers’ actual pay.

While it is sad to see that the average compensation of Goldman Sachs employees declined from $370,706 per year to “only” $292,836 per year, I still noted there were a lot of people earning more than $250,000.

The Republicans in Congress oppose the Democrats’ attempts to raise taxes on those earning more than $250,000 per year because these people are the “job creators.” So I was wondering how many of Goldman Sachs’ 34,200 people created how many jobs over the past year.

JPMorgan Chase is an even bigger company, and the same question holds true.

How about it, Republicans? Please provide some real numbers showing how many jobs were created by these banking employees earning more than $250,000 per year — you know, the “job creators.”

David Adams

Las Vegas

Tables turned

To the editor:

On Tuesday, Steve Sebelius wrote a sarcastic column welcoming participants of the Republican presidential debate to Nevada. Mr. Sebelius made the point that Nevada embodied everything Republicans claim to love: low taxes, low regulation (we even allow prostitution) and few public employees per capita. In the most recent governor’s race, both parties ran on no-tax platforms. “Nevada is pretty much a Republican paradise,” Mr. Sebelius wrote.

He then claimed this “Republican paradise” has not worked out very well, as Nevada leads the nation in unemployment and foreclosure rates. He claimed that all the states around Nevada have higher taxes and more regulation, but lower unemployment and foreclosure rates. He then asked, “Why, having tried the things you say should have taken us to the economic promised land, are we so miserable?”

I would like to ask Mr. Sebelius why, after Democrats took control of both houses of Congress in 2006 and the presidency in 2008, things haven’t worked out better for the nation? Does he really think bailouts of Freddie and Fannie, commercial and investment banks, insurance and the auto industries has been good policy? Does he really think deficit spending adding trillions to our national debt is good policy? Does he think ObamaCare is good policy?

President Obama and Democrats have reshaped America according to their progressive dreams more than they ever could have hoped for. It seems only fair to turn the tables. Welcome to America, Mr. Sebelius. Is it everything you hoped it would be?

Matt Thorley

Las Vegas

Don't miss the big stories. Like us on Facebook.
THE LATEST
LETTER: Chuck Schumer has his say

Sen. Schumer and other Democrats are critical of Mr. Netanyahu and his wartime policies. It does not indicate a decrease in their support of Israel.

LETTER: Tragic Las Vegas pedestrian death could have been avoided

A short walk from the accident site was a well-lit crosswalk with long, clear, straight approaches that would have allowed any driver, even one driving at high speed, to be alert to a pedestrian.

LETTER: Democrats for democracy?

The key element of a democracy is for the populace to be free to elect their representatives. Democrats are obviously opposed to that.