Letters for April 25, 2019

Write now

I am very happy that the Forest Service fracking leases are being rejected in the Ruby Mountains, but the Trump Administration plans to sell BLM leases adjacent to the Ruby Lake National Wildlife Refuge. The leases are planned to be sold this June to corporate entities that care only to sell our national resources overseas for profit without any regard to the environment, wildlife or the citizens in the state of Nevada.

Please write your representatives to object to this rape of one of the 500 globally important birding areas, as listed by the American Bird Conservancy.

Roberta Moose


Which side’s argument?

Re “Guns” (letters, April 11):

On Joel Tyning’s letter to the editor, his point that only bad guys will acquire guns without getting a required background check suggests that should be an argument for background checks, not against them. The police would then know that anyone who had a gun but had not had a background check prior to acquiring that gun is a bad guy. And since that person violated the law in acquiring that gun, he or she could be arrested, charged, tried and imprisoned.

Bad guy off the street, thanks to a universal background check law.

Michael Powell


Hold it

Re “Climate change,” (letters, April 18):

There is no relation between current solar activity and rapid global warming. Middlebrook’s letter is a dangerous denial of the human/fossil fuel cause of current global warming which presents a grave danger to the earth as it now exists.

See https://bit.ly/2UySa0y

F.M. Irwin


Re “Climate change,” (letters, April 18)

Nice numbers, facts and citing.

Last year, an estimated 38.2 billion tons of CO2 from fossil fuels were deposited into the atmosphere world wide (CBS News). OK, possibly fossil fuel burning isn’t causing all of the change in climate we’re seeing. It does beg the question, however, why are we continuing to shit in our nest?

If more funding and effort were to be put into perfecting cleaner and renewable energy now, fossil fuels could be greatly reduced within a decade. Our air would be safer to breathe, new industries could take a firm hold, and we could brag about leaving the planet better off for future generations.

What is the negative here?

Wayne Tuma


Re “Climate change,” (letters, April 18)

Letter-writer Jeff Middlebrook is correct in that the sun does power a planet’s climate system. However, its atmosphere also has a profound impact.

For example, although Mercury is closer to the sun, Venus is hotter because its atmosphere is mostly carbon dioxide. In its report, “America’s Climate Choices,” the National Academy of Sciences states that climate change “is very likely caused primarily by the emission of greenhouse gases from human activities,” and it calls for strong national action and international cooperation to address it.

The NAS contends that this is wise risk management, because climate impacts will last for hundreds to thousands of years, but climate action can be scaled back if it is shown to be more stringent than what is needed. Let’s urge our members of Congress to work together and find a path to slow climate change.

Terry Hansen

Hales Corners, Wisconsin

Insure what?

As a Nevadan, I understand gambling, and it seems health care is right in there. In this case, the insurance industry is the House, and we are all playing craps. If we bet the line and our number comes up (illness), we get paid. If our number doesn’t hit, we lose all our money.

Maybe we’d be better off betting “don’t come” and hoping our number doesn’t roll.

Even better perhaps to put our in$urance premium$ into a growing fund for health care rather than a CEO’s deep, dusty pockets.

Either way the house always wins & the rest of us eventually crap out.

We need health “care,” not health “in$urance.”

Craig Bergland