►
From YouTube: 3/8/2021 - Assembly Committee on Natural Resources
Description
For agenda and additional meeting information: https://www.leg.state.nv.us/App/Calendar/A/
Videos of archived meetings are made available as a courtesy of the Nevada Legislature.
The videos are part of an ongoing effort to keep the public informed of and involved in the legislative process.
All videos are intended for personal use and are not intended for use in commercial ventures or political campaigns.
Closed Captioning is Auto-Generated and is not an official representation of what is being spoken.
A
B
D
A
Here,
thank
you.
We
have
all
members
presidents,
we
have
a
quorum
with
that
before
we
get
started
I'll,
go
through
a
few
quick
housekeeping
announcements.
A
As
usual
members,
please
remember
to
beat
yourselves
when
not
speaking,
members
of
the
public
may
participate
in
our
meetings
in
a
number
of
ways.
Information
on
how
to
participate
can
be
found
on
every
meeting
agenda
and
on
the
help
page
at
the
nevada,
legislature's
website.
You
can
find
a
link
to
the
help
page
at
a
header
on
the
top
of
every
page
on
our
website.
A
Written
comments
can
also
be
emailed
to
our
committee
email
address
before
during
or
up
to
48
hours
after
the
meeting
committee,
exhibits
or
amendments
must
be
submitted
electronically,
as
a
pdf
to
our
committee
manager
no
later
than
4
pm
on
the
business
day.
Prior
to
the
meeting,
amendments
must
include
the
bill
number,
a
statement
of
intent
and
contact
information,
all
exhibits
that
can
be
found
on
the
nevada,
legislature's
website.
A
We
ask
that
testimony
and
public
comments
be
limited
to
two
minutes,
so
we
can
accommodate
all
speakers
and
get
through
the
agenda
in
a
timely
fashion,
and
with
that
we
will
move
into
our
hearings.
For
today
we
have
three
bills.
On
the
agenda-
and
we
will
start
with
assembly
bill
89,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
wildlife,
I
will
welcome
assemblywoman
titus
and
her
co-presenters
to
present
I'll
open
up
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
89,
and
you
may
proceed
whenever
you're.
E
E
I
apologize
mr
chair.
I
suddenly
lost
connectivity
there.
So
thank
you
for
your
patience.
Thank
you,
chair
watts
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
I
am
assemblywoman
robin
titus,
representing
district
38
in
churchill,
county
and
part
of
lyon
county.
It's
my
pleasure
to
present
assembly
bill
89
today,
which
authorizes
the
transfer
of
hunting
tags
under
certain
circumstances.
As
many
of
you
know,
my
family
and
I
held
a
tricia
tradition
of
hunting
near
and
dear
to
our
hearts.
E
My
parents
taught
me
at
an
early
age
about
the
importance
of
hunting
to
maintain
appropriate
populations,
not
only
to
mention
the
taste
of
it
and
consume
consumption
on
consuming
what
we
harvest.
It
is
important
to
me
to
continue
this
tradition
and
to
share
my
family's
knowledge
with
others.
Assembly
bill
89
addresses
two
issues.
First,
some
big
game
tags
cannot
be
used
because
the
person
who
drew
the
tag
does
not
meet
certain
requisite
conditions
for
lawful
transfer.
E
Some
of
the
returning
members
might
recall
ab44
from
last
session,
which
I
introduced,
because
the
constituent
had
reached
out
to
me
to
establish
a
mentor
younger
hunters
with
a
program
to
mentor
younger
hunters
within
the
same
family.
Ultimately,
the
bill
was
indeed
passed
and
sent
to
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
of
nevada's
department
of
wildlife
to
establish
a
program
through
regulation
whereby
a
person
who
qualifies
for
an
extenuating
circumstances,
such
as
an
illness
or
injury,
may
transfer
his
or
her
tag
to
to
hunt
a
big
game
mammal
to
another.
E
E
The
measure
before
you
today
authorizes
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
to
establish
a
program
that
authorizes
any
person
to
transfer
his
or
her
big
game
tag
to
a
qualified
organization
for
use
by
person
who
is
16
years
of
age
or
younger
and
who
is
otherwise
eligible
to
hunt
or
has
a
deal,
disability
or
life-threatening
medical
condition.
With
the
chair's
permission.
E
I
would
now
like
to
put
to
my
co-sponsor
mr
kyle
davis,
representing
the
coalition
for
nevada's
wildlife,
to
continue
the
presentation
and
discuss
a
proposed
friendly
amendment,
and
I
believe
all
members
of
this
committee
have
a
copy
of
that
amendment
that
I
included
with
the
note
that
I
sent
to
everybody
and
it
should
be
also
uploaded
under
exhibits
on
our
on
our
agenda.
So
with
that,
mr
davis,
are
you
on.
F
I
am
thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
committee.
For
the
record.
My
name
is
kyle
davis.
I
am
here
today
on
behalf
of
the
coalition
for
nevada's
wildlife.
So,
first
of
all
I
want
to
thank
assemblywoman,
titus
and
the
chair
for
sponsoring
this
piece
of
legislation
and
bringing
it
forward
for
the
committee's
consideration.
F
As
dr
titus
mentioned,
you
should
have
a
proposed
amendment
that
is
loaded
on
nellis
and
was
submitted
to
the
committee
says
proposed
amendment
to
ab89
at
the
top,
and
has
my
name
at
the
top
of
it,
and
so
what
the
purpose
of
this
amendment
is
just
to
clarify
one
section
of
the
bill
as
written
and
then
also
to
adjust
for
a
situation
that
we
found
after
the
passage
of
dr
titus's
bill
from
last
session
that
she
mentioned.
F
So
when
you
look
at
the
amendment,
the
first
section
that
says
what
we
do
there
is,
we
call
we
further
put
some
more
definition
around
qualified
organization
where
it's
currently
the
bill
says
means
a
non-profit
organization
that-
and
we
add
in
demonstrates
in
their
application
to
the
commission
that
it
meets
these
criteria
and
the
reason
for
that
is
inclu
in
conversations
with
the
department
of
wildlife.
We
didn't
think
it
made
sense
for
the
commission
or
the
department
to
be
put
in
the
position
of
you
know,
trying
to
verify
information
like
well.
F
Are
we
sure
that
somebody,
you
know,
reaches
150
of
the
federally
designated
level
signifying
poverty,
that
you
know?
That's
just
that's
beyond
the
expertise
of
the
commission,
but
what
they.
F
But
what
we
can
do
here
is
ask
that
an
applicant
demonstrate
that
when
they
apply
to
be
a
qualified
organization
and
then
put
that
that
requirement
on
that
on
the
organization,
so
that's
the
first
change
that
we
have
in
the
amendment
the
second
one,
as
you
can
see,
that
other
green
language
and
what
this
does
is
to
clarify
right
now,
as
we
read
it,
the
bill
says
that
it
is
an
either
or
situate
or
that
it
they
must
mean
both
criteria,
both
experiences
for
a
person,
that's
a
teenager
or
younger,
and
then
with
a
disability
or
the
household
income
provision.
F
But
it's
not
clear
that
an
organization
could
also
just
be
an
organization
that
serves
persons
with
a
disability
or
life-threatening
medical
condition,
and
that
was
the
intent
is
that
it
could
be
an
organization
either
that
serves
youth
with
a
preference
for
those
with
not
more
than
150
percent
of
the
federal
designated
poverty
level
or
an
organization
that
serves
disabled
individuals
regardless
of
age.
F
So
we
wanted
to
clarify
that
in
the
language
and
hopeful
that
the
language
that
we've
provided
does
that
the
second
part
of
the
amendment,
if
you
look
at
the
second
section
all
this
does,
is
it
adds
in
death
as
an
extenuating
circumstance,
and
this
was
always
intended
in
the
legislation
from
last
session.
But
it
was
an
oversight
and
based
upon
and
now
legal
analysis.
F
It
needs
to
be
specifically
spelled
out
that
death
can
be
an
extenuating
circumstance
where
a
tag
can
be
transferred
among
family
members.
So
we
want
to
make
sure
to
clarify
that
situation
so
that
the
commission
can
account
for
that
going
forward,
and
with
that
I
would,
with
your
permission.
Mr
chairman,
I'd
like
to
turn
it
over
to
my
colleague,
mr
johnson,
who
can
give
a
little
bit
more
background
on
how
this
program
could
work
in
practice.
G
H
Chairman
watts,
members
of
the
natural
resource
committee,
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
participate
in
this
presentation
this
afternoon.
My
name
is
larry
johnson.
H
I've
been
heavily
involved
in
wildlife,
conservation
and
sportsman
issues
in
nevada
for
over
35
years
now,
13
years
ago,
as
one
of
the
founding
directors
of
nevada,
outdoorsman
and
wheelchairs,
we
take
handicapped
outdoors
to
experience
what
many
of
us
take
for
granted.
H
We
are
a
501c3
corporation
with
directors
located
around
the
state.
We
presently
have
cooperative
agreements
with
mining
companies
such
as
nevada,
gold
and
ken
ross,
as
well
as
some
ranchers
to
use
the
landowner
tags
for
our
hunters.
We
have
taken
our
handicapped
hunters
on
antelope
deer
elk,
pheasant
and
wild
turkey
hunts.
H
Copies
successful
law
in
states
such
as
arizona
and
new
mexico,
the
one
things
that
we
leave
our
hunts
oftentimes
with
tears
in
our
eyes,
but
with
a
such
satisfaction
that
I
cannot
describe
one
father
stated
at
his
fund's
son's
funeral
that
our
antelope
hunt
was
his
son's
finest
life
experience
and
just
10
days
ago
I
took
a
gentleman
with
stage:
4
cancer,
actually
a
middle-aged
man
stage,
4
cancer
with
an
oxygen
bottle
on
a
pheasant
hunt
in
one
of
our
all-terrain
wheelchairs.
H
A
E
Yes,
thank
you-
and
I
thank
you,
mr
davis,
mr
johnson,
for
being
part
of
this,
this
has
been
a
number
of
years
and
just
to
be
clear.
There
mr
johnson
mentioned
the
wheelchair
program,
but
there
are
several
other
groups
out
there
that
offer
these
type
of
programs
to
young
folks
there's
something
called
the
dream
catchers
program,
I
believe
out
of
winnemucca
what
what
that
is.
They
actually
have
landowners
tags
that
they
can
then
give
to
youth
that
are
in
wheelchairs
or
handicapped
or
whatever.
So
it's
not
just
a
single
program.
E
There
are
several
in
the
state,
so
we
wanted
to
make
it
open
to
multiple
organizations,
because
the
role
here
is
to
allow
those
tags
that
are
so
precious
to
get
to
be
used,
whether
it's
your
family
member,
in
a
certain
situation
or
to
a
special
group
to
help
expose
folks
to
to
the
passion
of
hunting
that
we
have
and
and
conservation,
really,
because
my
firm
belief
that
hunting
is
conservation,
so
we
heard
we're
gonna
have
endel,
I
believe,
should
be
on
on
the
line
somewhere,
which
is
the
department
of
wildlife.
E
I
know
that
we
had
early
on
in
our
presentations
of
this
committee,
endow
testified
at
the
beginning
of
session
that
pandemic.
That
pandemic
has
had
a
huge
impact
on
folks's
desire
to
experience
the
outdoors,
and
I
think
the
bill
as
amended
would
allow
us
to
expand
our
honey
access
and
give
more
folks
opportunity
to
just
do
that
and
enjoy
that.
So
I,
hopefully
you
will
support
this
bill
and
one
other
clarification.
E
Member
of
the
committee
appropriately
reached
out
to
me
and
said:
hey:
does
that
mean
anybody
under
the
age
of
16?
Isn't
there
a
limit,
and
I
did
get
clarification
to
that
question
from
the
nevada
department
of
wildlife
that
you,
you
still
have
to
be
able
to
qualify
for
a
hunting
license,
and
that
would
be
up
to
the
wildlife
commission
to
set
those
programs,
and
so
you
have
to
be.
E
You
can't
hunt
unless
you're
12
years
of
age
or
older
to
qualify
to
begin
with,
so
they
did
answer
that
question
perhaps
I'll
be
on
the
call
for
further
clarification,
and
with
that
chair
watts,
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
titus,
for
the
presentation,
as
well
as
mr
davis
and
mr
johnson.
With
that,
I
will
open
it
up
to
questions
from
committee
members.
I
believe
I
have
a
question
from
assemblywoman
cohen
to
start.
G
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation
mr
johnson
mentioned
having
more
people
interested
than
having
tags
available.
But
can
you
give
us
an
estimate
about
what
kind
of
numbers
we're
looking
at
and
that
would
be
for
any
of
you
for
because
I
know,
as
dr
titus
just
said,
there's
multiple
programs.
H
This
is,
this
is
larry
johnson.
Through
chair
watts,
we
have
approximately
15
to
20
applicants
for
every
available
tag
that
we
are
able
to
take
advantage
of.
H
E
And
if
I
might
also
add
a
little
bit
to
that
question-
and
thank
you
vice
chair
for
the
question
this
just
for
point
of
clarification-
it
does
not
expand.
The
number
of
tags
are
available.
The
number
of
tags
are
set
by
the
wildlife
commission,
based
on
the
number
of
wildlife
that
are
available
for
harvesting
and
that's
how
the
conservation
effort
is
undertaken,
and
so
there's
always
a
limited
number
of
tags
based
on
the
wildlife
status
themselves.
So
this
just
that's
one
of
the
reasons
it's
so
hard
to
get
these
tags.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
for
bringing
this
forward
assemblymember
titus.
I
remember
when
I
met
with
mr
davis
and
mr
johnson
about
this
earlier
and
how
how
much
it
just
it
makes
sense.
But
I
just
wanted
to
verify
again
as
what
was
stated
in
section
one
that
this
would
not
allow
them
for
the
tag
to
be
given
to
an
organization
that
primarily
represents
disability
individuals
and
then
allow
for
a
silent
auction
type
of
situation.
G
I
just
wanted
to
verify
that
and
have
that
on
record
if
possible,
that
this
is
really
just
to
help
individuals
who
are
who
actually
do
fit
the
criteria
of
a
disability
as
defined.
E
The
way
the
bill
language
is,
the
bill
goes,
the
the
tag
can
be
given
to
the
family
member.
That's
that
one
aspect
of
ab4
that
was
passed
last
session
on
on
designation
of
a
who
you're
going
to
give
the
tag
to,
and
then
this
bill
then
designates
it
that
it
goes
to
the
agency,
and
then
the
agency
picks
the
person
that
they're
going
to
sign
it
to
so
that
would
be
my
comment
on
that
and
then
again,
the
regulation
is
set
by
the
wildlife
commissions.
F
F
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
Through
you
to
someone
anderson,
I
would
point
to
the
the
fir
number
one
in
the
first
part
of
the
bill
where
it
says
that
the
the
transfer
is
to
an
eligible
qualified
organization
for
use
by
a
person
who,
so
I
think,
that's
the
important
line
there
is
that
the
bill
does
restrict
that
it
would
be
used
by
somebody
who
meets
this
criteria
as
opposed
to
auctioned
off
to
benefit
the
organization
generally.
G
A
I
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you,
assemblywoman,
titus
and
and
chairman
watts,
for
I
think
you
guys
are
on
this
bill
to
get
you
for
bringing
this
bill,
and
maybe
just
a
question
you.
Maybe
you
addressed
this
a
little
bit.
I
had
some
internet
issues
right
when
you
first
started
your
testimony,
assemblywoman
titus,
but
just
for
the
edification
of
those
who
might
be
new
to
natural
resources.
I
Perhaps
someone
that's
here
could
give
us
an
idea
of
the
numbers
of
tags
say
in
a
deer
hunt
that
are
available
versus
how
many
apply.
I
just
thought
it
might
be
a
good
idea
to
give
an
idea
of
how
how
limited
those
tags
are,
and
they
get
even
more
limited
depending
on
the
species
like
bighorn
sheep
things
like
that,
it
might
just
be
a
good
idea
to
maybe
discuss
some
numbers
to
give
an
appreciation
how
these
tags
are,
are
coveted
and
then
for
an
individual
to
be
able
to
transfer
it.
A
Handsome
this
is
chair
watts.
If
it's
all
right
with
you,
we
do
have
the
department
of
wildlife
on
and
they'll
be
able
to
provide
some
brief
comments
in
in
neutral
and
I'd.
Ask
I'd:
ask
the
department
if
they
could
address
that
briefly
when
they
make
their
comments.
So
that's,
I
think,
that's
the
best
way
to
proceed
on
that
question.
A
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Do
members
have
any
other
questions
for
the
sponsors
of
assembly
bill
89.
A
Hearing
none
I'll.
Thank
you
for
bringing
the
bill
forward.
I,
as
somebody
who
got
into
hunting
and
fishing
as
an
adult,
especially
appreciate
the
efforts
that
are
placed
on
recruitment
of
young
people
and
providing
opportunities
to
everyone.
A
That's
been
discussed
in
the
presentation
from
the
department
earlier
this
session
recruiting
and
retaining
new
sportsmen
and
women,
and
I
think,
providing
opportunities
particularly
to
this
population
of
people
who
have
disabilities
is
is
well
worthwhile.
So
thank
you
again
for
bringing
it
forward
with
that.
We're
gonna
go
ahead
and
move
into
testimony
on
assembly
bill
89.
A
As
a
reminder.
In
order
to
provide
testimony,
you
must
register
advan
in
advance
on
the
legislative
website
where
you'll
be
provided
with
the
information
to
call
in
again,
we
ask
that
folks
providing
testimony.
Please
limit
themselves
to
two
minutes
so
that
we
can
get
through
all
speakers
in
a
timely
manner.
With
that,
I
will
turn
it
over
to
broadcast
production
services,
and
we
will
start
by
seeing
if
we
have
anyone
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
89.
J
J
G
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
emily
walsh
today
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
conservation
league.
We
are
in
support
of
ab-89,
and
we
appreciate
dr
titus
and
the
chairman
for
bringing
the
bill
forward.
Nevada
has
incredible
outdoor
opportunities
and
organizations
like
the
ones
mentioned
today,
offer
experience
for
experience
with
ford
nevadans
that
may
not
otherwise
be
able
to
get
out
and
participate
in
these
activities.
G
G
J
Chair
there
are
no
colors
in
support
at
this
time.
J
L
L
The
legislative
committee
of
the
board
of
wildlife
commissioners
supports
ab-89
and
will
ask
the
full
commission
to
consider
supporting
it
at
our
march
19
and
20
meetings,
we'd
like
to
thank
the
bill's
sponsors,
chair
watts
and
dr
titus
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
We
supported
a
similar
bill
last
session
and,
as
a
result,
passed
a
tag,
transfer
regulation
for
sportsmen
with
extenuating
circumstances,
as
you've
heard,
nevada's
big
game
tags
are
coveted.
Mentoring
helps
to
propagate
our
tradition
of
hunting
and
conservation.
L
Over
the
years
we've
had
several
community
advisory
boards.
Sportsmen
and
ngos
seek
support
and
or
petition
the
commission
to
authorize
a
tag
transfer
to
a
person
with
a
disability
or
youth
to
introduce
the
sport
to
a
new
sportsman,
who
has
limitations
and
may
not
otherwise
have
the
opportunity
to
enjoy
and
experience
a
hunt
of
this
magnitude.
L
A
Thank
you
for
your
testimony.
We
will
have
your
testimony
assigned
as
support.
We
understand
that
sometimes
there
are
technical
difficulties
that
come
up
in
these
digital
meetings.
So
thank
you
for
for
calling
in
and
getting
through.
We
will
go
back
to
opposition
and
bps.
Can
we
see
if
we
have
anybody
wishing
to
testify
in
opposition
to
assembly
bill
89.
J
J
A
Thank
you
with
that.
We
will
move
to
testimony
in
the
neutral
position
for
assembly
bill
89
and
before
we
go
to
the
phone,
I
will
ask
director
wasley
and
anyone
else
from
the
department
of
wildlife
who
wants
to
address
assemblywoman
hanson's
question
and
provide
any
other
additional
information
or
remarks
about
this
bill
that
you
would
like
to
do,
go
ahead
and
proceed
when
ready.
M
Thank
you,
chair
watts,
for
the
record
tony
wasley
director
for
department
of
wildlife.
The
department
would
certainly
like
to
express
our
appreciation
for
assemblywoman's
titus
and
introducing
this.
We
feel
that
it's
clear
in
the
language
that
the
commission
would
have
certainly
clear
direction
in
developing
a
program.
M
We
appreciate
the
inclusion
of,
or
consideration
of
some
of,
the
amendment
language
that's
been
offered
and,
as
has
been
stated
and
and
questions
asked
regarding
the
rarity
of
these
tags,
we've
quickly
pulled
some
data.
I've
got
deputy
director
jack
robb
here,
prepared
to
testify,
with
some
some
of
the
most
current
data,
to
express
exactly
how
that
demand
outpaces
the
supply
for
those
tags,
so
chair
watts,
if
I
might
turn
it
over
to
deputy
director
jack,
rob
to
share
some
of
the
most
recent
data
with
you.
D
D
Opportunities
go.
Hunting
is
overwhelming
when
you
hear
the
numbers
we
had
last
year
in
our
big
game
application
period,
we
had
approximately
80
500
people
apply
and
you
can
apply
for
more
than
one
animal
in
a
big
game
draw,
so
they
put
in
just
shy
of
350
000
applications
for
what,
in
turn
is
just
shy
of
30
000,
big
game
opportunities
to
get
in
the
field?
D
Some
of
these
I'm
looking
at
a
spreadsheet,
I
have
thirteen
thousand
seven
hundred.
Sixty
three
applications
from
resident
hunters
came
in
for
1606
opportunities
to
take
a
boil.
D
If
you
look
at
nelson
desert,
bighorn
sheep
9261
applications
for
262
tags.
Those
are
pure
applications
when
you
couple
in
the
people
that
put
in
for
just
bonus
points
because
there's
an
expressed
desire
to
hunt
in
the
future
on
bowl
elk
is
20.
855
total
people,
when
you
include
the
bonus
points
for
that
1606
tags
available
and
14
421
applicants
for
desert
bighorn
sheep.
D
When
you
include
the
bonus
points
for
that
262
opportunities
each
year,
pretty
much
everybody
of
those
80
500
people
put
in
for
mule
deer,
that's
pretty
much
a
given
and
that's
just
under
50
percent
of
the
total
tags
giving
out.
So
you
can
see,
there's
a
tremendous
demand.
D
We
have
a
coveted
resource,
we
have
a
quality
resource
and
to
get
these
tags
into
people's
hands,
they
can
use
and
that's
that's
what
we
strive
for
all
the
time.
So
if
there's
any
further
questions,
I'm
available
with
more
data
and
more
numbers,
if
there's
any
further
questions.
A
Thank
you,
mr
rob.
If
there's
nothing
else
from
the
department,
then
I
will
open
it
up
to
members
in
case
they
have
any
additional
questions
for
the
department
of
wildlife.
E
I
I'm
sorry
I'm
trying
to,
should
I
go
to
skype
and
ask
the
question
raise
my
hand.
I've
had
a
day
today.
Thank
you,
mr
rob
and
mr
wasley
for
the
information
and,
and
just
this
is
not
really
about
the
bill.
This
is
more
just
information.
I
think,
is
so
helpful
for
those
of
us
on
natural
resources
to
understand
game
management
which
fascinates
me
of
those
tags
that
you
give
out.
Based
on
how
many
apply.
I
I
think
it
would
be
interesting
to
just
briefly
the
reason
the
tags
are
limited
is
because
you
only
allow
for
a
certain
amount
of
harvest
of
the
population
so
so
to
to
manage
the
population
in
a
healthy
manner,
which
I
greatly
respect,
so
maybe
just
a
little
insight
into
the
reason
the
tag
numbers
are
limited
are
based
on
herd
numbers.
If
I'm
not
mistaken
that
you
guys
keep
statistics
on
so
that
you're,
always
kind
of
keeping
that
tension
of
the
harvest
is
in
a
healthy
proportion
to
what
the
population
could
can
sustain
and
reproduce.
M
For
the
record,
tony
wasley,
thank
you,
so
many
women
handsome
chair
watts
through
you
to
assemblywoman
you're
exactly
right
and
it
varies
given
the
species
and
we
we
have
guidelines
that
are
approved
by
our
commission,
that
provide
the
agency
guidance
and
in
terms
of
establishing
those
quotas.
And
so,
if
we
look
at
bighorn
sheep,
for
example,
we
have
a
guideline
that
sets
harvest
levels.
You
know
not
to
exceed
50
percent
of
the
rams
six
years
of
age
or
greater.
M
M
30
bucks
per
100
does,
for
example,
might
be
a
reasonable
target,
no
pun
intended
for
mule
deer,
an
elk
might
be
considerably
higher
and
it
may
range
considerably
across
the
landscape,
depending
on
how
local
counties
desire
to
see
those
populations
managed.
M
We
also
have
some
female
harvest
and
those
harvests
are
typically
intended
to
be
population
controlling
measures,
and
so,
for
example,
if
we
have
agreements
with
the
bureau
of
land
management
of
the
forest
service
in
conjunction
with
the
livestock
industry,
that
sets
a
specified
number
for
an
elk
population,
the
most
effective
way
to
reduce
that
population
would
be
through
female
harvest.
We
also
have
bighorn
ewe
hunts
to
keep
those
populations
from
experiencing
density,
dependent,
epizootic
disease
outbreaks
and
so
you're
exactly
right.
I
A
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
hanson.
As
someone
who
sat
on
the
accounting
advisory
board
and
looked
through
much
of
the
surveys
and
science
that
went
into
this,
I
certainly
appreciate
the
work
that
goes
into
setting
all
of
those
quotas
and
levels.
I
believe
we
have
a
question
from
assemblyman
ellison
briefly,.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chair
and
mr
chair.
I
just
want
to
get
on
the
record:
we're
not
going
to
be
creating
any
kind
of
other
tags,
we're
just
allowing
the
tags
to
be
transferred
over
to
the
other
groups.
So
you
know
people
that
might
be
listening.
Thinking
well,
we're
gonna,
we're
gonna,
add
a
bunch
of
tags
out
there.
That's
not
the
truth.
What
we're
doing
is
allowing
them
to
be
transferred
to
another
individual
or
another
group,
and
is
that
correct?
Mr
chairman,.
A
A
J
A
Thank
you
with
that
that
ends
testimony,
and
I
will
turn
it
over
to
the
sponsors
of
the
bill
to
make
a
very
brief
closing
statement.
E
Hopefully
you
can
support
this
bill
and
one
last
marcus
and
that
not
all
I
have
a
lot
of
points
out
there
waiting
for
that
sheep
tag
that
I've
never
gotten
yet
that
I've
got
like
11
points
there
and
if
I
should
fall
down
and
break
my
leg
before
that,
I
want
to
be
able
to
give
it
to
one
of
my
kids,
so
I
I
appreciate
all
the
thought
about
this.
I
also
want
to
put
on
record
that
not
all
tags
are
successful.
Some
of
these
hunts
are
actually
only
50
percent
successful.
E
A
Thank
you
with
that.
We
are
going
to
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
89.
Thank
you
again
to
the
presenters
for
bringing
this
bill
forward
with
that
we're
going
to
open
the
hearing
on
our
next
bill
on
the
agenda,
which
is
assembly
bill
103,
which
revises
provisions
governing
the
preservation
of
certain
prehistoric
sites,
and
with
that
we
will
welcome
another
member
of
the
committee,
assemblywoman
martinez
and
her
co-presenters
to
to
present
assembly
bill
103.
So
whenever
you're
ready,
you
may
proceed.
Welcome.
N
Good
afternoon,
chair
watts
and
members
of
the
assembly
on
natural
resource
committee
of
natural
resources
for
the
record,
I'm
assemblywoman,
susie
martinez
and
I
represent
assembly
district
12.
and
I'm
pleased
to
present
assembly
bill
103
for
your
consideration.
N
N
senate
bill
244
in
2017,
provided
that
a
person
should
not
knowingly
excavate
a
prehistoric
native
american
burial
site
on
private
lands
without
first
obtaining
a
permit
from
the
museum
director
of
the
nevada
state
museum.
However,
a
person
who
is
engaging
in
a
lawful
activity
on
private
lands,
including
without
limitation,
construction,
mining
lodging
or
farming,
is
not
required
to
obtain
a
permit
to
engage
in
that
lawful
activity.
N
N
N
O
So
good
afternoon,
mr
chairman
and
committee
members,
thank
you
for
your
time
and
opportunity
for
me
to
present
our
perspective
and
thoughts.
My
name
is
michonne
r
eben.
I'm
I
manage
the
cultural
resource
program
for
the
renal
sparks
indian
colony.
The
renal
parcel
and
colony
is
in
support
of
the
proposed
legislation
in
ab103
as
the
cultural
resource
manager.
My
duties
include
the
protection,
preservation
and
mana
and
respectful
management
of
native
american
ancestral
human
remains,
funerary
objects,
cultural
resources
and
traditional
cultural
properties.
O
Our
rich
history
and
heritage
have
been
passed
down
from
our
ancestors,
many
of
whom
are
buried
throughout
the
state
of
nevada
in
their
final
resting
places.
The
core
theme
of
ab103
is
to
ensure
protection
of
our
ancestors
final
resting
place
where
they
were
originally
buried
and
to
ensure
nevada
tribes
are
part
of
the
discussions
and
decisions
made
affecting
the
management,
treatment
and
disposition
of
native
american
ancestral
human
remains.
O
We
believe
that
ab-103
is
another
significant
step
for
the
state
to
recognize
that
tribes
too,
have
a
standing
in
regards
to
our
cultural
heritage.
The
understanding
of
native
american
culture
has
often
been
reduced
to
a
collection
of
unearthed
artifacts,
with
science,
providing
its
own
theories
and
opinions
and
has
much
of
the
time
disincluded
native
peoples.
O
There
are
snippets
of
appearances
in
western
tv
shows
and
movies,
resulting
in
inaccurate
stereotypes
of
native
life.
Past
native
culture
is
far
richer
and
more
complex
than
is
generally
appreciated.
Native
american
remains
and
sacred
objects
were
desecrated
by
early
pioneers
and
settlers,
but
what
remains
buried
throughout
the
state
is
still
important
to
contemporary
native
society.
O
Our
native
ancestral
remains
and
items
should
be
respected,
just
as
any
other
human
remains
are
respected
in
any
cemetery.
Today,
in
native
american
culture,
when
an
individual
dies,
there
are
several
significant
aspects
to
the
transition
from
the
physical
world
to
the
spiritual
world.
First,
there
are
certain
rights
and
traditions
that
take
place
at
the
time
of
death,
then
during
the
dead's
journey
to
the
spirit
world
and
at
the
place
of
burial.
O
In
addition,
the
relatives
that
are
left
behind
partake
in
important
ceremonies
for
the
loss
of
our
dead
relative
when
the
dead
is
laid
to
its
eternal
resting
place
here
on
earth.
That
is
where
they
are
to
remain
to
remain
undisturbed.
These
same
ancestors
were
buried
in
their
traditional
societies
in
a
traditional
way.
These
are
considered
cemeteries.
O
The
current
existing
tribal
communities
still
carry
on
these
traditions
and
we
are
very
spiritually
connected
to
these
age-old
customs.
Our
dead
ancestors
have
a
direct
connection
to
our
communities,
to
the
earth
and
to
us
as
the
living
every
year.
I've
have
several
renal
citizens
call
me
and
some
polite
me.
Some
politely
offer
their
cultural
findings
on
their
private
property
to
the
real
sparks
in
the
colony,
and
then
I
have
others
ask
if
we
can
purchase
our
ancestral
items
back.
The
latter
part
is
offensive
and
disturbing
our
culture
is
not
for
sale.
O
For
far
too
long
native
american
culture
has
been
minimized,
theorized
and
placed
on
display.
It
seems
that
our
culture
is
glorified,
and
then
it
becomes
a
curiosity.
Although
ab103
is
limited
to
native
american
human
remains.
There
is
no
protection
for
our
cultural
items,
and
this
is
something
we'd
like
to
change.
In
the
future.
O
We
are
requesting
respectful
communication
with
private
landowners
to
identify
any
potential
adverse
impacts
to
our
buried
ancestors
and
then
to
cooperatively,
decide
the
appropriate
protection
and
disposition
of
them.
Our
spiritual
practices
and
relationship
with
our
past
relatives
has
the
same,
meaningful
connection
that
you
all
have
to
your
ancestors.
O
A
A
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
assignment
martinez,
for
bringing
this
bill
forward,
definitely
appreciate
the
concept
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
By
has
even
I,
I
definitely
appreciate
that
living
in
a
rural
community
with
multiple
areas
of
historic
preservation
in
my
area.
I
have
a
question
regarding
the
comment
regarding
cemeteries,
and
I
was
just
wondering
maybe
legal
could
help
us
with
this.
E
E
We
need
to
say
that
this
is
their
cemetery
and
it
would
have
already
fall
under
any
particular
laws
that
we
already
have
about
decimating
or
moving
the
cemetery.
A
P
I
guess
I
don't
have
an
answer
specifically
to
the
question,
but
what
I
would
say
is
the
statutes
consider
these
areas
to
be
prehistoric
sites
and
that's
how
they're
set
up
in
chapter
381
of
the
nevada,
revised
statutes.
They
go
to
previous
law
related
to
inadvertent
findings.
You
know
if
someone
is
doing
a
development
and
they
happen
to
dig
up
remains.
There's
a
decision
made
of
whether
or
not
those
are
contemporary
remains
or
they
are
prehistoric
remains.
P
If
the
decision
is
that
they're
contemporary,
then
it
falls
under
law
enforcement
investigation
and
then
you
know
disposition
of
those
remains.
If
it's
made
it's
a
decision
that
it's
prehistoric,
then
that's
when
the
tribes
are
engaged
to
look
for
disposition
of
those
items
so
they're
not
included
under
the
cemetery
statutes.
Specifically,
it's
prehistoric.
E
So
just
a
clarification,
then,
what
determine
when
you
say
it's
a
grave
site
like
our
cemeteries
is
what
if
somebody
was
just
happen
to
died
there,
because
they
were
wounded
as
opposed
to
an
official
burial
site.
What's
the
distinction
there.
P
So
there
are
ways
to
for
the
record
marlin,
mcdade
williams.
There
are
ways
to
analyze
the
remains
to
determine
what
their
ancestry
is
and
in
legislation
that
was
enacted
in
2017
and
michonne
would
have
more
technical.
But
you
know
there
was
a
decision
finally
to
recognize
that
these
are
human
remains
and
you
shouldn't
be
conducting
testing
on
them
as
if
they
were
not
human
remains,
and
so
there
is,
and
you
can
still
test,
but
it's
not
invasive
testing
at
this
point,
so
it
really
is
an
analysis
of
the
area
itself.
P
Often
when
native
natives
were
buried,
they
were
buried
with
funerary
objects,
items
that
belonged
specifically
to
them,
so
those
are
decisions
that
are
made
as
the
site
is
worked
through
to
determine
how
it's
classified
essentially
and
to
determine
which
tribes
to
to
consult
with
great.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
titus
and,
additionally,
a
quick
note
from
our
legal
counsel.
That,
indeed,
is
it's
classified
separately,
not
as
similar
to
what
ms
mcdade
williams
just
shared.
They
are
classified
as
prehistoric,
burial
sites,
not
as
official
cemeteries
and
there's
a
statutory
distinction
between
those
two.
G
Thank
you
sharon
and
thank
you
all
for
the
presentation.
Looking
at
the
the
nude
language,
I
have
a
question
about
the
word
known
as
a
known:
prehistoric,
indian,
burial
site.
G
Sorry,
my
phone's
ringing
first
time
all
session
anyway
mike
my
concern
is
that
we're
using
the
word
known,
but
we
already
know
that
in
that
around
that
area,
that
there's
a
burial
site
and
what
does
it
take
to
be
known
and
is
there
any
way
to
determine
if
the
the
land
that
is
being
excavated
now,
even
if
you
don't
know
that
that
there
are
remains
there,
is
there
a
way
to
determine
if
there
are
remains
there?
Do
you
see
what
I'm
saying.
P
So
this
is
marlon
mcdade
williams,
so
under
current
law,
if
there
is
a
finding,
it's
called
an
inadvertent
finding
and
under
chapter
381
of
the
nrs.
The
landowner
is
required
to
notify
the
state
office
of
historic
preservation
and
that
office
at
some
point
catalogs
that
finding
they
keep
a
database
they're
they're
aware
of
where
these
sites
are
located.
P
It's
not
a
publicly
accessible
database,
but
often
the
landowner
through
that
process
of
discovery
or
an
intermittent
finding
is
aware
of
that
site
and
at
the
point
that
it
becomes
catalog,
it's
known,
although
known,
is
in
the
new
language,
it's
simply
carried
forward
from
section
one
of
nrs
381.196.
P
You
know
it's
not
a
new
standard
for
a
landowner
to
meet
if
they
do
not.
If
they're
not
aware
of
the
site,
which
you
know
could
happen
in
a
sale
or
a
transfer
of
the
property
and
information
didn't
get
carried
forward,
that
there
was
a
site
there.
It
could
then
happen
again
in
an
inadvertent
discovery,
in
which
case
I
believe
it's
chapter
383
kicks
in.
P
For
that
landowner
to
then
catalog
you
know
be
required
to
work
with
the
state
office
of
historic
preservation
to
catalog
the
site,
and
at
that
point
again
then
it
becomes
known.
P
Yeah
so
martin
mcdade
williams,
so
this
particular
bill
just
addresses
the
one
section
of
the
law
that
was
enacted
in
200
2017
as
it
relates
to
an
exception.
P
So
at
the
time
we
had
worked
with
the
nevada,
mining
association,
southern
nevada,
water
authority
and
story
county
to
ensure
that
if
you
had
100
acre
property,
let's
say-
and
there
was
a
known
burial
site
on
the
northeast
corner
and
they
were
developing
land
on
the
southwest
corner
that
they
would
not
be
required
to
get
a
burial
permit
because
they
weren't
intending
to
excavate
at
the
burial
site.
So,
instead
of
this,
what
we
thought
was
an
exception
language
clarification.
P
It
got
interpreted
that
there
was
an
exemption
so
that
a
landowner
didn't
need
a
permit
at
all
to
excavate
the
burial
site.
So
this
legislation
in
front
of
you
simply
makes
that
clarification
to
say
that
as
long
as
the
activity
occurs
only
on
a
portion
of
the
private
land
that
does
not
contain
the
known
site,
then
they
don't
have
to
get
the
permit.
A
C
Yeah
say
that
that
you
did
have
somebody
that
was
private
property.
They
didn't
know
that
there
was
a
burial
site
there
and,
and
they
started
getting
ready
to
do
construction
and
find
it
can
never
remain
to
be
moved
or
does
it
have
to
stay
there.
P
O
Okay,
thank
you
michonne.
Even
for
the
record,
you
know
there's
a
couple
things
that
can
take
place.
That's
why,
in
my
testimonial
I
talked
about
the
a
collaboration
and
working
with
the
private
owner
and
and
deciding
in
cooperation
with
that
private
owner
and
the
tribe
that
we
make
that
decision
together.
O
What
can
be
the
most
most
respectful
way,
and
usually
I
just
would
like
to
say
that
we
would
like
to
keep
in
place
and
so
that
when
we
say
in
place,
if
that
can
mean
several
things,
it
could
be
within
the
same
area,
just
maybe
put
them
down
deeper
or
maybe
even
the
private
landowner
saying
okay.
Well,
I
can
move
my
shed
or
I
can
move
my
construction
over
here,
another
side.
A
Thank
you
missy.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
ellison,
and
I
would
also
just
remind
them
that
that
an
unknowing
would
be
an
inadvertent
discovery
and
a
different
portion
of
statute
would
apply,
as
ms
mcdave
williams
indicated
in
her
previous
response.
A
Members
seeing
none
thank
you
so
much
for
your
presentation
of
the
bill
with
that.
We
will
now
move
on
to
testimony
we'll
begin
with
testimony
in
support
of
assembly
bill
103
with
that
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
broadcast
production
services
to
see
if
we
have
anybody
in
the
queue
wishing
to
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
103.
J
C
C
It
is
understandable
and
it
should
be
understood
everyone
today
that
if
there
are
any
known
burial
sites
that
the
property
owner
should
be
working
with
the
responsible
parties
to
make
sure
that
those
known
burial
sites
are
respected
and
anything
possible
is
done
to
respect.
Those
remains.
Thank
you
for
this
bill
and
thank
we
want
to
thank
some
of
the
women,
martinez
and
constandine
for
bringing
forth
this
bill
have
a
good
day.
A
A
N
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
As
we
had
heard
on
the
floor
during
the
session,
the
second
session
week
of
session
native
americans
have
made
tremendous
contributions
to
nevada.
They
even
played
an
important
role
in
the
creation
of
our
statehood.
Native
american
burial
sites
are
sacred
and
warrant
our
respect
and
our
protection.
I
would
also
like
to
thank
nishan
and
marla
for
co-presenting
with
me,
and
I
thank
the
committee
for
your
consideration
of
this
bill.
Thank
you.
N
Thank
you
chair
good
afternoon,
sir
watts
and
the
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
natural
resources
for
the
record,
I'm
assemblywoman
susie
martinez
and
I'm
pleased
to
present
assembly
bill
170
for
your
consideration.
N
The
bill
also
revised
timelines
notices
and
hearing
processes
resulting
from
impoundments
horrific
cases
of
animal
cruelty,
often
make
the
news,
but
we
rarely
hear
about
what
happens
to
the
surviving
animals
once
the
perpetrators
are
cited
or
arrested.
More
needs
to
be
done
to
protect
these
animals.
They
need
to
be
protected
and
properly
cared
for
once
they
are
removed
from
these
unfortunate
situations.
N
Assembly
bill
170,
is
an
important
step
in
this
direction.
The
bill
requires
a
person
who
was
lawfully
issued
a
citation
for
certain
crimes
involving
animals
to
be
notified
of
his
or
her
rights
to
request
a
hearing
additional.
Additionally,
the
bill
also
clarifies
that
a
hearing
involving
such
crimes
must
be
held
in
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction.
N
As
I
previously
mentioned,
there
are
three
friendly
amendments
that
have
been
proposed
and
should
be
available
on
nellis
for
the
committee's
review.
With
the
chair's
permission,
I
would
now
like
to
turn
over
to
jeff
dixon
from
the
humane
society
of
the
united
states.
We'll
go
into
more
detail
about
the
bill.
Q
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
martinez,
for
sponsoring
this
bill
and
everybody
who
helped
to
improve
it.
Chair
watts
vice
chair,
cohen
members
of
the
committee
on
natural
resources.
Q
I
am
jeff
dixon,
the
nevada
state
director
for
the
humane
society
of
the
united
states
and
as
assembly
member
martinez
said,
this
is
a
bill
that
is
needed
in
order
to
clean
up
a
few
oversights
that
were
discovered
in
implementing
the
2019
bill,
sb
342,
which
was
sponsored
by
senator
scheible
and
which
went
through
the
judiciary,
committees
that
bill
that
bill
dealt
with
two
situations
where
animals
had
been
impounded
and
where
their
owner
was
arrested.
Q
The
second
situation
is
when
the
animal
is
impounded
because
the
owner
is
arrested
and
detained
for
anything
else,
and
the
owner
needs
to
be
able
to
locate
their
animal
and
either
make
arrangements
to
have
the
animal
picked
up
or
to
know
where
to
go
when
they
are
released
from
custody.
Q
Q
The
state,
as
it
sounds,
is
not
specific
enough
and
the
the
signs
were
never
made.
So
here
in
subsection,
two
of
section
one,
the
department
of
agriculture
is
assigned
that
responsibility
after
the
bill
was
released.
We
learned
that
that
responsibility
needs
to
be
further
divided
between
the
department,
who
shall
create
the
sign
and
the
local
jail
operator,
who
shall
post
and
maintain
the
sign
that
is
covered
in
the
amendment
that
director
aunt.
Q
There
was
no
case
and
the
court
would
not
administer
the
hearing
without
anything
like
that
to
go
off
of
so
here
we
have
added
citations
and
I've
been
in
contact
with
animal
control
about
that
capital
partners
has
an
amendment
further
clarifying
citation
authority
for
their
for
the
situation
at
nevada,
humane
society
in
carson
city,
which
contracts
with
that
local
government
and
we've
also
clarified
that
the
hearing
is
to
happen
in
a
court
of
competent
jurisdiction.
Q
Q
I'm
not
a
lawyer
but
preponderance
of
the
evidence.
As
I
understand
it
does
not
fit
all
situations,
so
we
remove
that
and
the
court
will
use
their
evidentiary
standard
yeah
and
then
section
tape.
Two
makes
a
change
that
conforms
with
section
three,
and
that
is
the
bill.
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions.
A
Thank
you,
mr
dixon,
and
assemble
martinez.
For
that.
All
right
with
that
does
any
members
have
questions
for
the
presenters
of
the.
A
Bill
all
right
going
once
going
twice.
My
video
froze
up
a
little
bit,
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure
I
gave
everyone
an
opportunity
with
that.
Thank
you
for
your
presentation.
We
will
now
move
on
to
testimony
on
assembly
bill
170,
we'll
start
with
testimony
in
support
broadcast
production
services.
Can
you
see
if
we
have
anyone
which
can
testify
in
support
of
assembly
bill
170
in
the
keel.
J
A
J
R
R
Now
I
own
horses,
I
pay
a
livestock
head
tax
to
the
department
of
agriculture
on
these
horses.
That's
as
a
livestock
head
task.
I
have
a
registered
brand
with
the
state
of
nevada
and
it
is
to
be
used
on
horses
or
on
cattle,
as
that
brand
is
is
defined
now
under
here.
I
and,
as
I
understand
it
under
section
569.0085
livestock
is
defined
as
all
horses,
mules,
burrows
and
asses
or
animals
of
the
equine
species.
A
Thank
you
for
your
calling
in
and
providing
this
question.
I
will
ask
the
sponsors
of
the
bill
to
follow
up
offline.
We
do
not
use
testimony
for
a
back
and
forth
debate
or
forum.
A
J
K
Yes,
good
afternoon,
my
name
for
the
record
is
chris
bott
at
chris
v
is
in
victor
a-u-g-h-d,
and
I
have
some
concerns
with
the
bill.
I
have
not
been
able
to
see
the
amendments.
I've
been
online,
but
I'm
not
seeing
them.
So
I
one
of
my
concerns
may
have
been
addressed
with
the
amendment
and
that
had
to
do
with
the
standards.
K
The
evidentiary
standards-
and
I
also
did
have
a
concern
with
the
fact
that
there
was
no
definition
here
in
the
court
of
confident
jurisdiction,
language
and
it
sounds
like
maybe
that
has
been
addressed
as
well.
K
I
am
concerned
in
section
2,
with
the
expanded
ability
for
rescue
organizations
to
be
able
to
seize
animals
just
based
on
a
citation
being
issued
or
an
arrest
happening
with
no
finding
of
guilt,
because
by
the
time
that
case
is
adjudicated.
Those
animals
are
gone
according
to
this
bill
now
because
they
have
the
right
to
dispose
of
those
animals
as
they
see
fit,
meaning
the
rescue
organizations
or
the
shelter.
So
I
do
have
a
concern
with
due
process
filled
with
the
bill.
K
I
also
like
I
said,
did
have
a
very
big
concern
with
the
preponderance
of
the
evidence,
because,
when
you're
dealing
with
constitutional
issues
with
regard
to
challenging
the
legality
of
an
action
that
the
state
has
taken
against
you,
that
is
a
much
tougher
standard
than
preponderance
of
the
evidence,
which
is
only
used
in
civil
cases,
as
is
a
criminal
citation
or
a
criminal
charge.
It
is
the
state's
burden
of
beyond
a
reasonable
doubt.
So
I
had
some
you're
very
much
concerned.
J
S
Good
afternoon
this
is
kendra
burchie
k-e-n-d-r-a
b-e-r-t-s-c-h-y,
with
the
washoe
county
public
defender's
office
good
afternoon,
chair
watts
and
members
of
the
committee
I'm
testifying
today
on
behalf
of
my
office,
as
well
as
for
john
pirro,
with
the
clark
county
public
defender's
office.
As
several
members
of
this
committee
know,
we
had
a
very
rigorous
discussion
regarding
this
bill
last
session
and
the
changes
that
were
brought
forward
with
the
last
bill.
I
want
to
thank
assemblywoman
martinez
for
meeting
with
us
to
discuss
our
concerns.
S
Our
main
concern
is
regarding
the
standard
and,
unfortunately,
removing
the
standard
for
the
burden
of
proof
does
not
alleviate
our
concerns.
It
only
increases
them.
We
had
agreed
to
negotiations
to
have
the
standard
of
proof
being
by
a
clear
and
convincing
evidence,
and
so,
as
you
should
have
seen
on
the
amendment
and
nellis,
that
is
what
we
are
requesting.
S
Some
of
the
other
additions
and
concerns
that
had
been
raised
at
the
last
during
the
last
session
were
because
these
hearings
are
occurring
prior
to
the
criminal
case,
and
these
individuals
aren't
appointed
attorneys
in
the
civil
case.
We
do
not
represent
them,
they
do
not
have
counsel.
So
we
want
to
ensure
that
the
person
can
advocate
for
themselves,
however,
ensure
that
whatever
they
say,
isn't
used
against
them
in
the
criminal
trial.
S
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
money,
ms
burchie,
and
for
bringing
some
memories
of
the
judiciary
committee
back
to
me
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
caller
in
opposition.
A
Thank
you
with
that,
we'll
move
on
to
testimony
in
the
neutral
position.
I
believe
we
have
the
department
of
agriculture
here
so
I'd
like
to
give
them
a
moment
and
see
if
they
have
any
comments,
they'd
like
to
make
and
then
we'll
see,
if
anyone
has
any
questions
for
them
before
we
open
it
up
to
everyone.
G
Else,
thank
you,
chairman
watts,
and
members
of
the
committee.
This
is
jennifer
ott,
director
of
the
department
of
agriculture.
I
appreciate
your
time.
I
think
our
amendment
is
fairly
straightforward.
G
We
are
happy
to
run
the
lead
on
creating
this
signage
as
part
of
the
bill,
but
we
wanted
to
save
a
little
state
dollars
by
running
these
signs
all
over
the
state
and
posting
them
so
we're
requesting
that
the
detention
facilities
are
posting
them
and
maintaining
them.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
All
right
seeing
none
broadcast
production
services.
Can
we
please
see
if
anyone
is
called
in
to
provide
testimony
in
the
neutral
position
on
assembly
bill
170.
A
Thank
you.
That
concludes
testimony
and
the
for
the
bill
presenters.
We
did
get
a
couple
of
questions
that
came
in
after
we
opened
up
testimony,
so
I'm
gonna
allow
those
questions
to
go
through
briefly.
I
think
we
have
from
titus.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
apologize
for
not
jumping
in
quicker
to
ask
my
question
prior
to
the
opposition,
support
a
neutral
testimony.
E
My
question
again
is:
is
related
actually
some
of
the
the
comments
that
were
made
in
testimony
or
against,
and
that
is
the
due
process
and
I'm
concerned
about
the
timing
of
say
the
disposal
of
these
animals
and
if
a
citation
is
issued,
then
that's
one
thing,
but
if
they're
arrested
and
found
not
guilty,
then
then
the
person
I'm
worried
that
will
they
lose
their
animals
is
the
potential
that
the
animal
could
be
disposed
of,
even
though
that
person's
been
found
not
guilty.
So
what's
that
due
process
there
is,
is
there?
E
Will
there
be
a
delay,
make
sure
this
plays
out
again?
Some
of
these
animals
are,
or
I
think
most
animals
are
near
and
dear
to
these
folks
and
and
again
I'm
not,
I
don't
I
I
support
the
bill
conceptually.
I
believe
that
people
who
are
cruel
to
animals
should
again
have
there
should
be
some
ramifications
to
that,
but
I'm
just
worried
about
the
due
process.
E
Whoever,
whoever
can
answer
that
would,
is
there
possible
that
these
animals
could
be
disposed
of
before
that
person
is
found
not
guilty.
A
Q
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblymember
titus.
This
is
jeff
dixon
for
the
record.
Yes
to
answer
your
question,
the
the
tension.
That's
there
is
that
the
court
process
takes
a
long
time
and
these
animals
can
sit
in
the
shelter
for
a
long
time
and,
as
you
know,
in
a
rural
area.
Sometimes
these
shelters
are
very
limited
in
space
and
even
the
ones
in
our
urban
areas
and
to
have
one
or
many
animals
there
for
a
long
time.
Q
It
takes
a
lot
of
resources
and,
if
the,
if
the
part,
if
it's,
if
after
it's
adjudicated
the
person,
is
guilty,
then
they're
sort
of
on
they
give
up
the
animals
anyway.
Q
What
we
wanted
to
do
is
to
give
them
a
chance
to
get
their
animals
back
separate
from
their
case
and
to
be
able
to
say
why
they
should
get
their
animals
back,
and
you
know
that
that's
what
we
came
up
with
this
actually
was
an
alternative
to
a
to
a
process
whereby
somebody
who
was
accused
of
one
of
these
crimes
in
nrs,
574.70
or
nrs
574.100,
where
they
would
put
up
a
bond
for
you,
know,
say
30
days,
and
then
that
would
cover
the
cost
of
caring
for
the
animal
in
the
shelter
to
at
least
help
those
shelters
out,
but
that
we
felt
was
had
a
bias
against
the
poor
and
that
you
know
that
would
really
your
your
ability
to
keep
your
animals
would
largely
depend
on
your
ability
to
pay
for
that
bond.
Q
E
I
Thank
you
chair
for
a
second
chance,
and
it's
good
to
see
you
assemblywoman
martinez
and
several
of
you
I
haven't
seen
in
a
while
mr
dixon,
your
cat
made
our
day.
So
thank
you
in
here.
I
My
question,
if
mindy
elliot
is
still
on
the
line
is
in
regards
to
the
amendment
that
was
offered
up
by
the
nevada,
humane
society
in
the
addition
of,
in
section
one
of
the
new
sub
six,
where
an
animal
control
officer
may,
if
employed
or
officially
designated
by
a
city
or
county,
prepare
sign
and
serve
a
citation
to
enforce
an
ordinance
of
the
city
or
county
etc.
I
Do
so
are
we
giving
new
powers
to
animal
control
to
I'm
not
familiar
if
they
issue
citations
already
because
it
says
may,
depending
on
where
they're
employed?
I
just
have
some
concerns
about.
You
know
who
handles
that
process
now?
Are
we
now
giving
them
law
enforcement
sort
of
capabilities
that
they
didn't
have
before.
T
I'm
going
to
defer
thank
you,
assemblywoman
hanson,
for
the
question
and
through
you,
chair,
watts,
to
assemblywoman
hanson,
I'm
going
to
defer
to
greg
hall
who's
on
the
phone
and
or
is
on
zoom,
and
he
has
he's
a
ceo
of
the
humane
society
and
he
can
respond,
and
I
can
follow
up
with
any.
C
Questions
you
mindy
and
thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblywoman
hanson,
it's
a
good
question,
how
it
relates
to
nevada,
humane
society
and
our
animal
control
officers
by
contract,
we're
not
fully
doing
our
job
with
our
animal
control
efforts
if
we're
not
writing
the
citations.
So
what
we
presently
do
is
we
go
out
and
we
investigate
and
we
look
to
see
if
there's
a
basis
for
issuing
a
citation
and
then
we
call
the
sheriff's
department
and
have
someone
come
out
and
actually
do
that.
C
T
And
if
I
could
thank
you,
thank
you
assemblywoman
hanson
through
you,
mr
chair,
to
assemblywoman
hanson.
We
are
the
animal
control
in
carson
city.
We
are
under
contract
to
provide
those
services
throughout
the
carson
city
area
and,
unfortunately,
because
we
are
not
employees
of
the
city,
it
is,
as
mr
hall
alluded
to,
we
have
to
contact
a
sheriff
in
order
to
issue
a
citation
because
we're
not
officially
employees
of
the
city.
This
amendment
would
provide
us
the
opportunity,
rather
than
taking
a
sheriff
off
the
beat.
T
G
G
Do
the
so
so
are
there
any
guidelines
about
what
constitutes
a
rescue
organization?
Does
it
have
to
have
a
501
c
3
before
an
animal
is
turned
over
to
it?
Anything
like
that
just
because
I
know
I've
been
rescued,
most
of
my
adult
life
and
volunteering
with
groups,
and-
and
there
are
a
lot
of
groups
that
kind
of
come
and
go.
So
how
do
we
know
what
these
groups.
G
A
Thank
you
for
that.
Please
follow
up
with
that
information
if
you
provide
it
to
our
committee
staff,
we'll
make
sure
that
all
the
members
receive
it
as
well
for
their
information
all
right
with
all
of
that
is
there
any
brief
closing
remarks
that
the
sponsor
of
the
bill
would
like
to
make.
N
Thank
you
chair.
Just
this
legislation
is
very
important
step
in
protecting
animals
by
providing
technical
changes
in
the
bipartisan
legislation
that
was
passed
in
2019.
N
N
A
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
presentation
of
assembly
bill
170,
and
with
that
I
will
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
170..
That
brings
us
to
the
last
item
on
our
agenda
for
today,
which
is
public
comments
again.
In
order
to
provide
public
comment,
you
must
sign
up
on
the
legislative
website
where
you'll
receive
the
information
to
call
in.
We
ask
anyone
providing
public
comment
to
please
limit
their
remarks
to
two
minutes
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
broadcast
production
services.
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
broadcast
production
services
for
all
your
assistance
to
making
sure
that
members
of
the
public
could
participate
in
today's
meeting
and
thank
you
all
to
the
members
for
allowing
us
to
get
through
three.
I
think
substantial
bill
hearings
with
questions
in
90
minutes.
I
appreciate
you
with
that.
That
concludes
our
meeting.
For
today.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
on
wednesday
march
10th
at
4
p.m.
This
meeting
is.