TO THE EDITOR:

This is the comment I would have made to the BLM had they not shut down the comment period before most of us ever knew there even was a project: 

There is a better way… than permitting NV Energy to bulldoze thousands of acres of pristine desert when solar facilities could be installed on reservoirs and harm nothing – especially when there are side benefits. If this solar facility were to be installed on Lake Mead, it would reduce evaporation losses of critically needed water. Allowing this project on land is permitting localized extinction. It is the BLM’s inherent responsibility to consider other options. 

As big as this solar project is, it would only cover a fraction of Lake Mead. And if done right, it could be beneficial to tourism. From the ground, a solar facility on Lake Mead could just look like an island. Done right, it could feel like an island – a sustainable island, complete with a Ranger Station and charging facilities for electric boats. We could even consider recreation facilities that would shade even more of the lake. 

In the long term, as the technology is developed, evaporated water might even be recovered from the air above the lake. A floating solar facility would be the perfect place to do this. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology gave a design award to the concept of building a solar facility on Lake Mead to provide solar power to desalination plants on the coast in exchange for California sharing some of it’s water allotment from the Colorado River with Southern Nevada. The concept is sound. And if the SNWA could get more water from the Colorado River, there would be less need for the Las Vegas Watergrab. 

This could save the environment of much of Rural Nevada – which the BLM has oversight of. This should be a priority for the BLM! Solar facilities are being built on water all over the world. Here’s the BLM’s chance to give NV Energy a more environmentally and economically sound option. And with the water saved from evaporation, it would be the more profitable option too.

Rick Spilsbury

TO THE EDITOR:

Please read my article again! Mr. VanCamp can stay at that location “till the cows come in”! I am certainly not against the location of his business or his right to be there!

My complaint is about the demeaning, trashy signs that he is displaying in a public area. And Vivian, you would be surprised how many people, with no other agenda than pride in their community, are disgusted by this blatant disregard of civility.

Once again, it’s not about the location of Mr. VanCamp’s business. Of course he has every right to be there. IT’S ABOUT THE EMBARRASSING SIGNAGE!!

Bert Woywod

TO THE EDITOR:

Eureka County Sheriff, Jessie Watts sent Governor Steve Sisolak a letter earlier this month.  The letter is dated January 7, 2020, describing Watts discontent on Sisolak’s signing of the controversial gun law, AB291,

According to Watts letter, he explains that he wrote a letter to Sisolak in February of 2019 stating his disgrace of how Sisolak and others politicians used October 1’s shooting tragedy to create new, unconstitutional laws.

“Our founding fathers were genius when they wrote the document you are walking all over and swore to protect and defend.  That document is the Constitution of the United States of America,” Watts explains.

Probably one of the most impactful new laws of the 71 that became effective January 1, is AB291.  When Sisolak signed the bill into law in October of last year, it was called the One October Bill.  Sisolak had signed the ban into law alongside the bill’s democratic Assemblywoman Sandra Jauregui. Jauregui is a survivor of One October.

What is AB291?  It is a law that bans bump stock modifications and institutes so-called “red flag” laws. “Red flag” laws allow people to petition the courts to temporarily take away guns from family members who could be considered dangerous. The law allows family members, household members and law enforcement to petition the courts. If the court decides to take away a firearm, the subject of the confiscation has to turn them over or the court will issue a warrant to seize the guns. The law also bans bump stocks.Watts letter goes on to state that he will be fighting AB291, “until there is no fight left in me.  This law and others you have signed into law violates the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendment rights of the people of Nevada.”

During a televised event last year, Sisolak stated, “Everybody knows about what happened here and this is  going to go a long way towards keeping our community safer. It’s reasonable. No one can object to any of this: the banning of bump stocks, the safe storage, blood alcohol level being reduced for people that are carrying guns. I’m proud to have signed this and it’s fitting that we did it here,”

Watts remains strong in his stance stating, “As the duly elected Sheriff of Eureka County, it is my duty and responsibility to stand with my citizens and against you and unconstitutional government overreach.  My distain for politicians, including you, for passing gun laws because they’ve made a campaign promise hasn’t changed.”

Sheriff Jessie Watts

EDITOR’S NOTE: Sheriff Watts has not received any response via telephone, email or mail from Governor Sisolaks’ office to date.