Off road racing in Clark county is over

snoreracer

Well-Known Member
Posts
4,140
Reaction
2,691
Senator Cortez Masto Introduces Southern Nevada Economic Development and Conservation Act that will eliminate Off road racing in Clark county
I didn't think this would happen this fast but here it is , the end of racing in Clark county . Turning over the yellow (disposal) areas to the county will eliminate BAP and Rage . The OHV areas are crap as there is a 100 vehicle cap at Nelson hills The Laughlin OHV is a area that will work for bikes but no loop for cars and the sandy valley is a mountain that will not support racing , The county will take the land from Sloan to Jean and the area south will be gone with a ACEC they call special management area. Call Masto's office and tell her you don't want it and tell your senator not to support it

P: (702) 388-5020 F: (702) 388-5030
 

Attachments

  • 02.22.21 Southern Nevada Land Management - Working Map - Reduced (1).pdf
    1.6 MB · Views: 223

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,772
Reaction
8,927
She introduced the bill, she isn't gonna change her mind because you call. You need to pay her off like the Sierra Club, CBD, etc... do with campaign donations or you need to campaign to vote her out and replace her with someone who appreciated the financial activity races bring to some of these areas.
 

RYAN COHEE

Well-Known Member
Posts
1,980
Reaction
1,289
It is only a matter of time before the left shuts down all Ohv areas. I always found it strange how anyone who loves Off-road racing or Ohv would vote Democrat ?
I think within 10 years the only place to race will be Baja or private land .
 

michael.gonzalez

Well-Known Member
Posts
3,499
Reaction
1,219
She introduced the bill, she isn't gonna change her mind because you call. You need to pay her off like the Sierra Club, CBD, etc... do with campaign donations or you need to campaign to vote her out and replace her with someone who appreciated the financial activity races bring to some of these areas.
If only there was a wealthy man to give her a "small" donation of a few million dollars to sway the bill in our favor. But who?!?
 

J Prich

Well-Known Member
Posts
7,573
Reaction
9,131
@Bro_Gill is 100% correct that writing to Cortez-Masto asking her to not support the bill she has spent years working on and now proposed in Congress is a complete dead end. It's important to keep in mind that this is a Congressional bill, not a local issue. That means it order to pass and become law it needs support from Congressfolks and Senators from around the country, not just Nevada.

The timing of this bill is not a coincidence given the Dems now have a majority in both chambers but for what it's worth there is still value in writing to your OWN representatives to ask them not to support this bill. Here is the actual bill that was proposed:

 
Last edited:

Bro_Gill

Well-Known Member
Posts
13,772
Reaction
8,927
It has not passed yet, so it shouldn't affect a race at the end of the month, but if it looks like it is going to pass after committee movement and ground support, you can bet that a lawsuit or request for a court order will be presented by some environmental nazis to stop any action that would otherwise not be legal after passage. And the ACEC is a disputable designation. ACECs were originally part of the Wilderness Bill created to designate lands that could be designated wilderness after a 5 year study was done. The area they are wanting to designate as an ACEC CAN NEVER be designated wilderness under the legal definition of the law. But reality is, people like her need to go. You can bet she has received some great donations from the usual suspects that want to ban people from nature.
 

E.Hagle

Well-Known Member
Posts
232
Reaction
367
What has their research shown that justifies shutting down a massive part of the desert?
 

Lucho

Well-Known Member
Posts
2,724
Reaction
297
Oh, Boy. We just came back from laying out a great odd-road course of about 170 miles long, and everywhere we went in California it was either closed or heavily redragged, so you can't cross. The BLM is checkerboarding more land every day. I went around that course no more than a year ago an d over half of the fences were not up. Now you see BLM fencing or Fish and Wildlife all along. It is terrible what they are doing to the OHV sport and community.
The great thing we have here (Cal City & East Kern) is a large desert area of "Unmaintained" County Roads that we can use. Without them and certain BLM lands controlled, there would be no OHV enjoyment. It is horrible what they are doing to a legitimate sport, we better-than-normal financial traffic that benefits for all our communities.
The areas that are open YOU MUST PROTECT THEM AT ANY COSTS. KEEP THEM CLEAN, SAFE, DO NOT ALLOW THEM TO CLOSE THEM DOWN. BE VIGILANT WHEN A TAKE-OVER IS PROPOSED. WE HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO USE OUR OPEN DESERTS!!! - ALL US OR POST HERE, IF YOU NEED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.
 

J Prich

Well-Known Member
Posts
7,573
Reaction
9,131
It has not passed yet, so it shouldn't affect a race at the end of the month, but if it looks like it is going to pass after committee movement and ground support, you can bet that a lawsuit or request for a court order will be presented by some environmental nazis to stop any action that would otherwise not be legal after passage. And the ACEC is a disputable designation. ACECs were originally part of the Wilderness Bill created to designate lands that could be designated wilderness after a 5 year study was done. The area they are wanting to designate as an ACEC CAN NEVER be designated wilderness under the legal definition of the law. But reality is, people like her need to go. You can bet she has received some great donations from the usual suspects that want to ban people from nature.
My personal opinion in looking over the provisions is that this is really not that much about protecting land. I don't think this bill is being driven by environmentalists and in fact part of the reason it's taken a few years of back and forth to get this bill refined was because of green groups opposition. My personal view is that this is actually about getting approval for expanded development in several different corridors. This would open up that land between Sloan and state line for additional development as well as expand other areas around the valley where housing and industrial development can happen.

My view is the expanded land closure for environmental concerns is actually a mitigation, to help offset enviro groups opposition to the development expansion. In simple terms it's a trade off. In order to get enviro groups on board for more land development they are offering up additional closures to appease them. At the end of the day I guess it doesn't really matter who gets what or why but the bottom line is this bill ropes several different groups in to the agenda to give them something in order to get consensus, but leaves the OHV community out in the cold.
 

R. Gross

Well-Known Member
Posts
221
Reaction
253
My personal opinion in looking over the provisions is that this is really not that much about protecting land. I don't think this bill is being driven by environmentalists and in fact part of the reason it's taken a few years of back and forth to get this bill refined was because of green groups opposition. My personal view is that this is actually about getting approval for expanded development in several different corridors. This would open up that land between Sloan and state line for additional development as well as expand other areas around the valley where housing and industrial development can happen.

My view is the expanded land closure for environmental concerns is actually a mitigation, to help offset enviro groups opposition to the development expansion. In simple terms it's a trade off. In order to get enviro groups on board for more land development they are offering up additional closures to appease them. At the end of the day I guess it doesn't really matter who gets what or why but the bottom line is this bill ropes several different groups in to the agenda to give them something in order to get consensus, but leaves the OHV community out in the cold.
Hit the nail on the head Prich. Here in Vegas as you know we have developed in the North all the way to the Sheep Mountain Range and Indian Res off of Hwy 95 and Apex is a no go anymore, Pretty much all the way to Red Rock in the West. Sunrise Mountain to the East. Boulder is full of solar panels so the only direction to go is along the I-15 corridor. I am sure the short version as you said is that she will propose giving the enviro groups land that is less likely or harder to develop to get them on board to not object while she wants the land adjacent to the I-15 corridor. She came to our office in 2016 looking for campaign money and we politely told her to pound sand. Without land to develop her well runs dry. Those politicians don't become millionairs like Harry Reid off of salaries. I can guarantee she has been greased by developers better than a 10 year old CV. My opinion.
 

DirtDgr

Well-Known Member
Posts
384
Reaction
224
They don't need "research" They don't understand what we do and they don't like the fact that we make dust or tracks in the desert. So since they don't like it, we mustn't do it!
Oh make no mistake. It is us they hate. The desert they could really care less about. After all they want a blanket of solar panels over the whole damn place if they get their way. You and I on the other hand they despise our kind of people. There is a lot of conservatives out in the desert with freedom having fun. They hate all of us like they hate Trump. Obsessed and deranged. When we suffer it makes them happy. They love nothing more. That is the driving force and they will never stop.
 
Top