We "heart" Clean Air

Students at East Tech in Las Vegas made hundreds of "Clean Air" Valentine's for Nevada's Senators!

It’s definitely true that those working for the conservation movement, or for progressive public policy generally, can sometimes be a bit… wonkish? Obsessed? Even, dare we say it, humorless?

Fortunately, that doesn’t apply to the good volunteers and staff at the Nevada Conservation League Education Fund! We enjoy holidays as much as the next person. We just have our own take on such events as Valentine’s Day. Usually, Valentine’s Day means delivering some chocolates or flowers and a card to your sweetheart.

For us, it meant delivering hundreds of cards to Nevada’s two federal senators, and using the day to demonstrate the huge difference between the two. Nevada’s junior Senator, Dean Heller, had a terrible record on conservation and environmental issues as a back-bencher in the House of Representatives, and upon his appointment to the Senate last year, he’s continued to side with Big Oil and other polluters, even at the cost of our country’s clean air.

With legislation pending that defunds and ultimately eliminates community safeguards developed by the scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency (because clearly, clean air and water laws led to the deregulated mortgage meltdown and economic collapse, we say sarcastically), we dropped off Valentine’s hand-made by families and high-school students with a stake in protecting and preserving clean air for everyone.

On the other hand, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has been incredibly important in preserving those same laws and agencies that the polluters are trying to kill. Senator Reid gets it, and we were pleased to deliver sincere “thank you” cards to his office.

You can read a bit more about our effort here at The Nevada View.

Community rallies to save Red Rock!

Congresswoman Dina Titus speaks for protecting Red Rock Canyon from high-density development

The Nevada Conservation League is giving a huge thumbs-up to all of those who planned and participated in the Save Red Rock rally in Summerlin on Saturday, Jan. 14! That well-deserved thanks includes the more than 300 bike riders, 450 attendees, local media, the reggae band Lion Pride, Congresswoman Dina Titus and Clark County Commissioner Chris Giunchigliani, and of course Heather Fisher and all the Save Red Rock crew!

The effort shows that people from all over Clark County oppose inappropriate, high-density development next to the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area.

Also a huge "thank you" to the staff of Lifestyle Fitness, who hosted the event in their sparkling facility in Summerlin.

For more information on why the proposal to plop about 15,000 people into the midst of the conservation area is a bad idea, read about it at SaveRedRock.com.

NCL volunteers Jessica and Launce grab rays at the Red Rock Rally!

Grand Canyon decision protects tourism, water supply

This week gave us some great news for Southern Nevada and the entire Southwest: President Obama and Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced a 20-year moratorium on new uranium mining claims near the Colorado River, upstream from Lake Mead, which supplies nearly all of Southern Nevada’s drinking water.

The decision protects the health of our communities and the $700-million tourism economy centered on Grand Canyon National Park and Lake Mead National Recreation Area, so the decision was an important one for Nevada. You can read more about the decision here, and if you’d like to see the rundown of winners and losers from this decision, you can read about that here.

This may not be the end of the issue. Congressional lawmakers from Arizona and Utah (who don’t depend on the Colorado River for drinking water, natch) are trying to overturn the Obama administration decision. Nevada’s congressional delegation from both sides of the aisle should work against it. We can’t gamble with our drinking water.

If you agree, consider writing a letter to the editor of the Las Vegas Sun or Review-Journal thanking the Obama team for their decision.

Red Rock: Public Interest or Corporate Bailout?

 The effort by a succession of would-be developers to build homes in a private in-holding surrounded on three sides by the Red Rock Canyon National Conservation Area could legitimately provide us with a number of lessons: In futility, in how communities can defeat bad proposals, and most of all, in the greed and sense of self-entitlement by certain developers in our community.

No one believes that the unsustainable number of homes proposed by developer Jim Rhodes are going to be built.  He has sunk something on the order of $54 million* to buy the old gypsum mine on top of Blue Diamond Hill, and somebody – he hopes it's not him, of course! – will ultimately foot the bill for his bad bet.  We could be wrong, but in these times of corporate bailouts it seems likely that this developer will be looking for a handout.

 But in the meantime, the community has to oppose his goal, which ostensibly is to force Clark County and federal governments to give a big thumbs-up to his atrocity, in violation of existing zoning, in opposition to the residents who live in the area, and against the wishes of the people of Southern Nevada (who for some reason seem to like Red Rock without shopping centers, condos, and the traffic that dense development will bring).

 The developer is now demanding that the Clark County Commission waive two conditions to which the developer had earlier agreed. One waiver would build a road from the never-to-be development to State Route 159, which runs through the heart of the conservation area. (It’s the road that we take to get to the Loop Road and Visitors Center and to Blue Diamond.) The developer last year agreed that there would be no access to SR 159, and it was obvious then to many observers that he had no intention of honoring his commitment. And indeed, he has not.

 The developer has also applied for seven federal rights-of-way or land uses that he needs to complete this ill-begotten monument to hubris, including a “primary access” that ultimately would be a six (6) lane parkway up the steep incline on the east side of Blue Diamond Hill, in full view of the entire Las Vegas Valley. Additionally, the developer plans to somehow grab federal land to build parks, police and fire stations, water storage points, etc. This may be how the developer has done business in the past, but not in a situation in which the community is overwhelmingly opposed to a project.

 And of course, the developer expects the Clark County Commission to help him win approval from the federal government by serving as the intermediary applicant for the land-swaps and right of ways. Why the commission would act against the wishes and best interests of the community is a mystery, but the developer says, imperiously, that the county “MUST” apply on his behalf.

 To which we say, "Nuh-uh."

The county is under no obligation whatsoever to apply for the developer to federal authorities for these land uses.  To do so would give a “tacit imprimatur by the county commission for the major project process,” to quote one county land-use adviser. That clearly would not be in the public interest. The county is under no obligation to bail this developer out.

Conservation groups and outdoor recreationists may have led the opposition to this boondoggle, but this effort to build next door to Red Rock has brought the entire community together. Business groups, the residents of the Blue Diamond area, and voters from throughout Clark County who use and love Red Rock Canyon are united in their opposition. They will watch carefully to see which commissioners represent the people of Clark County – and which serve the interest of Jim Rhodes.

We have a couple of opportunities to show our support for protecting Red Rock Canyon. Saturday, there will be a rally, music, speakers and fun walks, runs and bike rides. And Wednesday, the County Commission is scheduled to hear the issue. You can learn about both events in detail by clicking here on the Save Red Rock website.

* An alert reader points out that the cost is actually greater than the $40 million first noted in this blog post.

Public Lands, Clean Energy and Commonsense Safeguards = Jobs for Nevadans

As the holiday season nears, we have a lot to be thankful for in Nevada, even in the midst of a struggling economy.  Clean air, clean water, and wide open spaces are abundant in Nevada—and we need to thank those leaders in Nevada who make our way of life possible. Their support for industry safeguards, promotion of our clean energy economy, and protecting our natural heritage are keys to ensuring we have safe and healthy communities.

But we need all of our leaders on board! 

We need to speak to all of our leaders about the role our public treasures, such as Red Rock, Tule Springs, and Gold Butte in southern Nevada, play in our local economy.  Investments in public lands continue to increase tourism and the demand for cycling, hiking, and hunting equipment. 

As a matter of fact, the business of providing access and equipment to our amazing outdoors should play a stronger role in our economic recovery.   The equipment sales, tour guides, and ancillary goods and services of visiting Red Rock Canyon, Lake Mead, and other public lands contribute an estimated $1.8 billion to the state’s economy.  We need to offer the same protections to Gold Butte and Tule Springs to ensure this industry maintains and increases these vital economic contributions.  Check out a recent letter to President Obama from 100 economists on the economic potential of public lands at Headwaters Economics’ website. 

Also, the notion that regulations are somehow preventing businesses from hiring more employees is the most alarming.  

Businesses hire workers based on demand for products and services.  ALL of our leaders should trust the scientists and health professionals who create commonsense safeguards—not the lobbyists and CEOs of large corporations.       

In fact, these commonsense safeguards that protect the air we breathe and the water we drink lead to a healthier workforce with fewer sick days and higher productivity.  And they actually create jobs.  A new Ceres Study notes that new regulations from the EPA will actually create an estimated 1.5 million highly skilled, well paying jobs over the next five years.

Finally, it’s fair to say that Nevada’s bet on clean energy is paying off and we need to double down on our investment.  We should ask all of our elected officials to lead, not follow, on the development of our state’s abundant clean energy resources, and while they are at it, push back on the fossil-fueled rhetoric that claims clean energy isn’t the answer to our country’s energy needs.  We don’t mine coal, or drill for much oil in Nevada, so why do some of our leaders insist on doing the bidding of these polluting industries? Instead of selling out to Big Oil, our leaders should support investments in new technologies that will both help Nevadans lower their energy costs and put so many of our neighbors back to work.

The economic downturn in Nevada provides us with a chance to rethink our values and priorities.  There are tremendous economic opportunities ahead for Nevada. We must continue to increase our stake in clean energy investments and move away from dirty, polluting fuels.  We must expand our outdoor recreation industry by protecting some of our most treasured public lands.  We must turn the challenges of climate change into opportunities for new businesses and technologies.  We must do all of this for the benefit of our economy today-- and for the health and livelihood of future generations.

We need our Congressional delegation to support investments in clean energy and public lands.   And we cannot let special interests and corporate polluters use this opening to promote their own dangerous agenda. 

Contact Senator Harry Reid and Congresswoman Shelley Berkley to thank them for their support:

Senator Harry Reid
1-866-SEN-REID (736-7343)
http://reid.senate.gov/contact/index.cfm

Congresswoman Shelley Berkley
(702) 220-9823
http://berkley.house.gov/contact/email-me

And then Ask Senator Dean Heller and Congressmen Joe Heck and Mark Amodei to represent your best interests instead of voting for policies that favor corporate polluters and protect Big Oil profits:

Senator Dean Heller
202-224-6244
http://heller.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/contact?p=contact-form

Congressman Mark Amodei
(775) 686-5760
https://amodei.house.gov/contact-me/email-me

Congressman Joe Heck
(702) 387-4941
https://heck.house.gov/contact-me/email-me

The House Continues Assault on Public Protections

It’s a simple question:  Would you rather have scientists and public health professionals making decisions on issues that directly impact your well-being or should Congress be in charge?

So far in December, the House of Representatives chose Congress over public health professionals.  They want to increase their own power – adding to the bureaucratic process – while continuing their assault on commonsense safeguards that keep our air, water, food, and workplaces safe.   Reps. Heck and Amodei from Nevada joined House leaders in voting for these radical bills which limit the scientists and public health professionals in enforcing rules on corporate polluters, pharmaceutical companies, and more.

H.R. 10 (passed by the House on 12/7/11) This bill requires Congressional approval on all major rules of the executive branch before they may take effect.   Instead of addressing concerns associated with questionable business practices and spurring innovation in technology to meet standards that protect our health, these issues will get caught up in the partisan Congressional gridlock.  

H.R. 3010 (passed by the House on 12/2/11) This bill changes and expands the cost –benefit analysis process that is already included in rule-making and open the process to judicial review.  It would force agencies to choose the least costly option.  This bill favors corporate profits over individual well-being.

H.R. 527 (passed by the House on 12/1/11) This bill would impose unneeded and costly analytical and procedural requirements on agencies that would prevent them from performing their statutory responsibilities. It would also create needless regulatory and legal uncertainty and increase costs for businesses and further impede the implementation of commonsense protections for the American public, according to the White House. 

These bills do the bidding of big business with potentially devastating impacts on the lives and well-being of people in Nevada and across this country.   They increase government costs and expand the federal bureaucracy.   And Congress should not be slowing down the rule-making process so corporations can maximize their profits without regard to the public.  

Show Heck and Amodei that you are paying attention!  Tell them to let public health professionals and scientists make these decisions – NOT CONGRESS!

Water Costs Money, Water Pipelines Costs More

This blog has already discussed the environmental impacts and bad economics of Southern Nevada Water Authority’s proposal to pump 127,000 acre-feet per year of groundwater from Spring, Cave, Dry Lake, and Delamar Valleys. 

However, it is necessary to further explore just how much money this project will cost. 

This is a moment when the agenda of conservationists, who fear the ecological damage predicted by independent scientists, and businesses, struggling with high costs and low margins, coincide.

According to an independent financial analysis that SNWA was forced to do by regulators, residential water fees could nearly triple. And for businesses, many of which already pay hundreds or thousands per month for water, bills could more than double. A typical water bill could soar from $299 to almost $750 a month, eating into razor-thin profit margins for restaurants, bars, and other small businesses.

SNWA says the $15 billion price tag for its pipeline is a “worst-case scenario,” but that’s not what the study, from respected analysts Hobbs Ong and Associates, says.  And how many public works projects, especially of this scale, ever come in under budget?

Read more about the issue:

• Business Week Article
• Fox in Las Vegas Story
• And read the full “Ability to Finance Report” here: http://bit.ly/uQPLix

And then take Action!

Add your voice to those in the business community who say we cannot afford an unnecessary and hugely expensive pipeline to bankruptcy.

1. If you own a business and want to sign on to our letter expressing concerns, please send an email to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it . 
2. If you would like to express your opposition to SNWA’s Water Grab, please submit your comments to the State Engineer’s office. 

Stick it where the Sun DOES Shine

Most Nevadans agree: there should be a continued investment in clean energy.  We want affordable energy that creates jobs without being forced to breathe the pollutants that come from burning fossil fuels.  Unfortunately, there are a few obstacles the solar industry faces in competing with dirty coal. After all, fossil fuels had about 100 years head start. 

One obstacle – the time-consuming permitting process for projects on federal lands – is being addressed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Department of Energy (DOE) by the development of solar energy zones. 

Solar energy zones are designated spaces in Nevada and across the southwest with high potential for solar energy generation and low impacts on the environment.  This approach provides certainty for developers, investors, and consumers while protecting the concerns of environmental organizations.  It is certainly beneficial to the species and resources in Nevada.

The BLM and DOE will hold a public meeting in Las Vegas on the Supplement to the Draft Solar Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) to provide an overview of the document, respond to questions, and take public comments.  The supplement to the PEIS takes in to account more than 80,000 comments submitted during the first round of hearings to best protect our environment, as well as the interests of the solar industry. 

Join NCL at the meeting and express your support for the supplement to the PEIS for its balanced approach to clean energy production.  

Wednesday, November 30, 2011,
6:00 PM – Open House to Review Plans
7:00 PM – Public Meeting Begins
Ramada Las Vegas
325 East Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89169
More information and to register to speak here! 

It's time for you to STOP RECYCLING!

Okay, don’t actually stop recycling.  But focus on REDUCING and REUSING to limit the amount of products needed to be recycled and/or taken to a landfill… and unless you are interested in creating a new island the size of Texas in the middle of the Pacific, please the limit the amount of plastic bottles (especially H2O bottles) that end up in our oceans. 

Rebel Recycling at UNLV hosted a screening of the film “TAPPED” followed by a panel (moderated by NCL’s very own Scot Rutledge) on the economic, social, and political concerns associated with the bottled water industry.   The facts are frightening. 

In case you weren’t able to join us – or have yet to see the film – we’ve listed some of the main points that will make you think twice before grabbing your next bottle of water:

• A good amount of the bottled water sold is simply filtered tap water.  You are paying anywhere from 240 to 10,000 times the amount for the bottled water than you would if you filled a glass from your tap. 
• Private companies control claims to public sources of water.  Companies set up shop in small towns and pay minimal costs, if any, for the rights to pump water.  In most cases, they can take as much water as they want which leaves these towns with less and less water for the community’s needs.
• Tap water is safer than bottled water!  In most cities, tap water is subject to daily testing by multiple agencies and officials and those reports must be made available to the public.  Bottled water is subject to regulations enforced by a single staffer in the FDA.  Companies are supposed to self-test their products, but they are not required to make those reports available. 
• Bottled water sold in the same state as it is produced is not regulated at all! The FDA only “regulates” interstate sale and 60-70 percent of bottled water is consumed in the same state the water was bottled in. 
• Most plastic bottles are made with PET or BPA which increases our dependence on oil and increases the likelihood of ingesting dangerous chemicals.   The plants that process this chemical, such as the Koch Brother’s Flint Hills refinery in Corpus Christie, Texas poison the air and groundwater of that community with dangerous carcinogens like benzene.

YOUR ACTIONS CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!  Stop buying bottled water.  Without consumers, companies will stop producing it.   This battle can only be won by reducing demand.   As you can see from the facts above, your seemingly benign action of drinking bottled water is wrecking havoc with our health and our environment.

And if you want to be a bigger part of the solution, there are some great resources and campaigns available in southern Nevada. 

• My Water Revolution is a group of middle school students trying end the use of bottled water at different schools in the Clark County School Districts.  So far, Tarkanian Middle School is enjoying free, filtered water without the dangers and pollution of bottled water. 
• UNLV is in the process of installing hydration stations all over campus where you can refill your reusable bottles and canteens.
• Planning an event – the Food and Water Watch prepared this resource to help make your event bottle-free.  

One Senator’s Dangerous Assault on Public Health

The Cross-State Air Pollution rule was only finalized in July but it is already under attack. This safeguard – younger than many of children with asthma that it will save – will reduce the amount of smog and soot-forming pollution dumped each year into the air we breathe.  

However, the US Senate looks to take action on S.J. Res. 27 or the Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval.  This dangerous resolution which voids the Cross-State Air Pollution rule is sponsored by the Tea Party’s favorite senator, Rand Paul.

Senator Paul is using an obscure procedural move to force a vote that would block the EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution rule, a critical environmental protection that specifically targets the pollution that crosses state borders. This assault on clean air would roll back public health protections and let polluters continue to dump their toxic pollution into our air.

The Obama Administration released a statement in opposition to S.J. Res. 27; noting this resolution would cause substantial harm to public health and undermine our Nation's longstanding commitment to clean up pollution from power plants.

Senator Paul's dirty air plan will lead to as many as 34,000 premature deaths, 15,000 heart attacks, and 400,000 asthma attacks annually. Check out this TV advertisement the League of Conservation Voters recently ran in Kentucky on Senator Paul’s dangerous legislation. 

Nevada faces fewer risks from cross-state air pollution, but this deliberate attack on the public health is just the next step in an all out war on the air we breathe and the water we drink.  We cannot allow our Senators to favor the special interest polluters.     

Conservation goes to the movies!

This Wednesday, our partners at Nevada Wilderness Project wrap up their state-wide tour of the Wild & Scenic Film Festival with the final screenings at the Rio in Las Vegas.  

The films you’ll see (complete list here) are a part of a national touring film festival which focuses on inspiring environmental awareness, conservation and wilderness appreciation.

One movie focuses on clean energy here in Nevada.  “Walking the Line: New Energy in the Old West” is the story of one man’s stunning quest to walk across Nevada while exploring the effects of renewable energy on the fragile desert landscape and wildlife.

Another film examines a different pressing issue in Nevada.  “Crossroads – Sage Grouse” takes a look at the challenges this species faces in Montana and Nevada.  Their numbers here in Nevada have greatly declined due to loss, fragmentation and degradation of the grassy, big-sage habitats it needs.

Join NCL for this fun and exciting way to support conservation issues!

Wednesday, November 2nd
The Rio, Brazilia Room
6:00 p.m. – Live music, tasty food and micro-brews
7:00 p.m. – Films Begin 
Buy your tickets online and save a couple of bucks.

There might be something in the drinking water...

Las Vegas depends on the Colorado River – and more and more, the Colorado River depends on us.

The river is our lifeline, providing a clean, reliable source of water. Everyone who lives or visits here uses its bounty. But like other rivers around the United States and the world, some industries consider rivers convenient toilets.

The uranium mining industry, which has a terrible record in the West for polluting water sources with all kinds of radioactive and toxic waste, wants to set up shop on the Arizona Strip about 90 minutes northeast of Las Vegas, literally a stone’s throw from the Colorado.

Senator McCain is leading the fight for these special interest polluters – at the expense of southern Nevada’s health and economic vitality.

Of course the industry promises that this time, they won’t contaminate our water. Not that they care that much about the issue. The miners and their advocates – who, oddly, don’t seem to depend on the water the way we do – are more concerned about profit than water quality.

The uranium miners are fighting the Obama administration and in Congress for the right to dig up and process their toxic product right now. The Obama administration, meanwhile, is considering a 20-year moratorium on uranium mining on the Arizona Strip. That’s not only a good idea for our water supply in Southern Nevada, but it also makes economic sense. We are the gateway to the Grand Canyon National Park.

How many visitors want to pay to see piles of mine tailings? It certainly isn’t good for tourism, either.

We need a long-term moratorium on uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.  We need to protect the main source of drinking water for southern Nevada.  We need to provide more reasons to visit our region and stay an extra day to explore our natural attractions.  It’s time to make sure these needs take priority over those of the special interest polluters.  We need a long term moratorium on uranium mining near the Grand Canyon.  We need to protect the main source of drinking water for southern Nevada.  We need to provide more reasons to visit our region and stay an extra day to explore our natural attractions. 

It is time to make sure these needs take priority over those of the special interest polluters.

UPDATE: The Bureau of Land Management released the latest Environmental Impact Statement and plans to continue with a 20 year moratorium on new mining claims in the area. 

Focusing on Core Values and other thoughts from the Project New West Summit

Nevada moved back into the political spotlight this week thanks to the Project New West (PNW) Summit and GOP Debate both held in Las Vegas. Nevada’s first in the west role in presidential primaries draws attention to the region’s unique wants and needs. And now that CNN and the rest of the national media packed up their belongings and headed east, those of us still in Nevada need to take this opportunity to focus on what really matters in the West. It’s time to fight for those values.

The PNW Summit covered a lot of national topics; improving education, the changing demographics of our communities, and rebuilding the economy by investing in technology and clean energy. These issues, viewed through the western lens, provided two key take-aways.

Investments in the clean energy & technology industries are working - and are putting people back to work. Throughout The West, private and public investments are providing clean energy sources that protect our health from pollution. The clean energy industry creates good jobs that lessen our dependence on foreign fossil fuels.

While coal, natural gas, and even oil exist in some of the western states, they do not exist in Nevada. THERE IS NO REASON for Nevadans to pay billions of dollars each year on out-of-state coal for energy when solar and geothermal resources exist in abundance across the state.

Protecting public lands creates jobs. Recreational tourism is a huge part of our region’s economy. In fact, it is the 2nd largest industry in Colorado where overnight visitors spent more than $8.8 billion in 2010.

Nevadans and tourists alike enjoy Lake Tahoe, Great Basin National Park, world class ski resorts, and amazing trails. Countless convention goers and international visitors spend an extra day in our state to hike Red Rock and even visit the Grand Canyon. We should be creating more outdoor industry opportunities by protecting Gold Butte (Nevada’s piece of the Grand Canyon), Tule Springs, and other wonders.

The jobs created are not just ski lift operators and campsite managers. These jobs are in bicycle and recreational equipment rentals, in clothing distribution facilities like the Patagonia outlet in Reno, at hotels and restaurants from the Las Vegas Strip to Lake Tahoe– and everywhere in between.

The West is the new battleground, swing state heartland. This provides Nevadans and Westerners an excellent chance to make our issues national priorities. This is not about partisan politics. It is about uniting the people who share our values in the West and letting them know it’s important to fight for these priorities.

The Land and Water Conservation Fund’s Contributions to Nevada

It’s no surprise the Clark County Commission recently passed a resolution urging Congress to fully fund the Land and Water Conservation Fund.   This fund – paid for by offshore gas and oil drilling revenues and not taxpayer dollars – improves the quality of life for residents and visitors by investing in our great outdoors. 

The LWCF has increased the enjoyment of the outdoors in communities across Nevada; from Zephyr Cove and Sand Harbor at Lake Tahoe to Red Rock Canyon and Valley of Fire, and many places in between.   The field lights at Sunset Park, the restrooms at Valley of Fire, and the campgrounds, the swimming pools, and the tennis courts in much of the state were paid for by the LWCF.   

The LWCF’s contributions are irreplaceable.  But don’t take our word for it. Check out a larger list of LWCF appropriations for projects across Nevada.   Or watch this video that helps you visualize the increase in quality of life thanks to this fund. 

Additionally, we will see a substantial reduction in SNPLMA funds, another source of local funding for these amazing parks and conservation areas, so LWCF funding has become an even more critical investment for Nevada!

The real surprise is that anyone would be against the LWCF; that the Clark County Commission would even need to pass a resolution urging Congress to support it.  However, the House of Representatives is considering legislation  – including H.R. 2584 last July – that would drastically cut LWCF appropriations by as much as 80% percent.   Can you imagine removing 80% of the amenities at parks in across the state?  How about blocking off 80% of Red Rock Canyon and only using 20% of Lake Mead?     

Fortunately for Nevadans, the Clark County Commission gets it.  The real question is whether or not Reps. Heck and Amodei understand the impact of these potential cuts to the LWCF.

The Environmental Impacts of SNWA's Water Grab

Rural Nevada, the Great Basin, is an enigma for much of the America. It’s the big red blotch on your cell phone coverage plans, north of Las Vegas and between Reno and Salt Lake City. It has the most remote, loneliest and scenically amazing parts of the continental United States tucked into its 13,000-foot peaks and deep valleys.

And here in Las Vegas, or for our neighbors in Salt Lake City and San Francisco, it’s on our doorstep. Big horn sheep, pronghorn antelope, and a multitude of trout species inhabit the Great Basin. Seeing those animals (and for the trout, finding them in a camp frying pan!) is an amazing moment. But equally amazing is seeing the huge Great Basin valleys, from the snow-covered peaks with glacier ice to the wide valleys that seem to go on forever, filled with farms and wild springs and streams sustaining cottonwoods, waterfowl and wildlife of all kinds. It is simply breathtaking, unique in the world, and a testimony to our shared American assets that we must sustain for future generations.

Unfortunately, the Great Basin is under siege. A Las Vegas water agency, the Southern Nevada Water Authority, has been working for the last 30 years to drill, pump and pipe the “unused” water of the Great Basin to our southern Nevada metropolis. “Unused” is a word in Nevada law that indicates that it doesn’t make money. “Unused” water doesn’t spin slot machines. “Unused” water doesn’t build vacant subdivisions in the desert. “Unused” water doesn’t pay lobbyists, lawyers and water-agency managers.

Instead, “unused” water supports rare and federally protected wildlife. It sustains the deep green wetlands of the Great Basin’s valley floors, the springs bringing life-giving water to wildlife, to the agriculture sustaining dairy herds in rural Nevada that provide city school children with milk every day.  The impacts are obvious.

This proposal comes as Las Vegas is diversifying its economy by selling what we have in abundance: The Great Outdoors. Rural Nevada, Lincoln and White Pine counties, and the Great Basin National Park should be on the itinerary of everyone looking to explore our great United States. Eco-tourism isn’t just a buzzword. It’s a product that southern Nevada is uniquely positioned to sell to the world: a gateway to lands unknown by many who venture out in search of something bigger than themselves.

But don’t tell that to the Southern Nevada Water Authority, for which the Great Basin is negotiable for the sake of developing a resource bank for new home construction. (As if Las Vegas home values needed any further devaluation.)

Despite a safe and reliable water supply from the Colorado River, a supply that is protected by international and interstate agreements, and despite conservation efforts that mean Las Vegas only uses two-thirds of its allocation from the river, SNWA insists that Las Vegas needs a $15 billion project to take the water that sustains rural Nevada for uncertain urban growth.

The simple fact of the matter is that working families of Las Vegas don’t need the Water Grab, and we don’t support destroying rural Nevada to pay for it.