►
From YouTube: 3/24/2021 - 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
Thank
you
very
much.
I
want
to
welcome
everybody
to
this
meeting
of
the
assembly
committee
on
natural
resources.
Madam
secretary,
will
you
please
call
the
role.
D
A
I
am
here,
thank
you.
We
have
a
quorum.
I
will
take
note
and
we'll
make
sure
to
mark
assemblywoman
brownmay
present
as
she
arrives
members
I'll
begin
before
we
go
into
the
items
on
our
agenda
with
a
few
quick
housekeeping
announcements.
A
Let's
see
as
usual,
please
members
remember
to
meet
your
microphones
when
you're,
not
speaking
so
we
can
minimize
background
noise.
Members
of
the
public
may
participate
in
our
meetings
in
a
number
of
ways.
Information
on
how
to
do
so
can
be
found
on
every
meeting
agenda
for
our
committee,
as
well
as
on
the
help
page
at
the
nevada
legislature's
website.
You
can
find
a
link
to
the
help
page
in
a
header
at
the
top
of
every
page.
A
On
that
website,
participants
must
register
to
participate
and
can
submit
opinion
polls
or
sign
up
to
provide
comments
or
testimony
written
comments
can
also
be
emailed
to
our
committee
manager
and
the
email
for
our
committee
manager
is
posted
on
our
agendas
and
on
our
our
website
before
during
or
up
to
48
hours
after
a
meeting,
all
exhibits
and
amendments
must
be
submitted
electronically
in
pdf
form
to
our
community
manager.
No
later
than
4
pm
on
the
business
day
prior
to
the
meeting,
amendments
must
include
bill
number
statement
of
intent
and
contact
information.
A
A
Just
so
that
members
of
the
public
and
members
of
the
committee
know,
I
think
we're
going
to
start
with
our
hearings
and
then
we
will
once
we
have
assemblywoman
brownmay,
we'll
take
a
brief
pause
to
handle
our
work
session
and
we
have
a
committee
bill
introduction
to
handle
as
well
and
then
we'll
continue
with
the
rest
of
our
hearings.
A
So
with
that,
we'll
move
on
to
the
next
item
on
our
agenda,
which
I
believe
we're
going
to
do
our
bill
hearings
today,
starting
with
ab-85
and
then
moving
to
ab-84
and
then
ajr2.
A
So
with
that,
I
would
like
to
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
85,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
noxious
weeds.
I
would
like
to
welcome
assemblywoman,
heidi
swank,
former
chair
swank,
back
to
the
committee
on
natural
resources.
It's
good
to
see
you
again
and
you
may
proceed
whenever
you're
ready.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
It
is
good
to
be
back
in
assembly
natural
resources,
so
I'm
just
going
to
do
just
a
really
brief
presentation
here
and
and
then
open
up
for
questions.
So,
as
we
all
know
for
folks
who
have
been
on
natural
resources
or
even
not
just
living
in
nevada,
that
cheat
grass
is
a
major
issue
in
northern
nevada.
E
E
E
So
with
that
that
in
mind,
we
also
know
that
invasive
plant
and
noxious
weed
programs
are
run
by
the
department
of
agriculture.
The
department
of
agriculture
sets
lists
of
plants
that
are
designated
as
noxious
weeds
and
noxious
weeds
are
prioritized
for
action
against
their
spread.
They
also
receive
some
small
amount
of
funding
toward
those
efforts
to
eradicate,
or
at
least
control
the
noxious
weeds.
E
So
currently,
according
to
nrs
555.130,
that
you
see
here
in
ab-85,
cheatgrass
could
not
be
deemed
a
noxious
weed
because
of
that
little
part
in
our
statute
that
actually
dates
to
1929
and
says
that,
because
any
grass
that
is
already
established
in
the
state
cannot
be
deemed
a
noxious
weed.
E
So
what
this
bill
does
is
just
deletes
that
piece
of
language
and
allows
that
would
then
allow
the
state
quarantine
officer
to
deem
cheatgrass
or
any
other
long
established.
Invasive
like
red
brome,
which
we
have
in
southern
nevada,
is
a
problem
there.
It
could
be
deemed
a
designated
obnoxious
weed
and
therefore
have
access
to
some
small
amounts
of
funding
through
the
federal
government.
Now
this
doesn't
require
that
the
state
the
state
quarantine
officer
make
that
designation.
E
I
know
that
mr
tibbetts
is
here,
and
he
and
I
have
been
talking
about
an
amendment
that
I
know
he's
bringing,
and
so
I
think
he'll
be
in
an
opposition,
and
then
he-
and
I
have
time
set
apart
on
friday,
to
talk
it
through
and
see
if
we
can
sort
out.
If
that's
all
right
with
the
chair
and
with
that
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
presentation,
ms
swent,
and
for
the
update
on
the
discussions
regarding
the
amendment
also,
I
would
like
to
note
for
the
record
that
assemblywoman
brown
may
is
present
with
that.
A
F
Sorry
I
couldn't
get
in
that
chat.
I
just
wanna.
It's
just
a
comment,
an
observation
great,
to
see
you,
ms
swank
good,
to
know
that
you're
still
engaged
and
thank
you
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
E
Thank
you,
assemblywoman
titus
good,
to
see
you
too.
D
D
E
Thank
you
and
simon
ellison
for
that
question,
and
that
would
be
correct.
The
state
quarantine
officer
is
an
expert
in
these
sorts
of
classifications
and
would
be
able
to
through
regulation
deem
it
a
noxious
weed.
There
are
no
plans,
as
I
understand
it.
For
that
to
happen.
This
is
merely
I
don't.
This
is
really
eliminating
a
roadblock
so
that
we
can
let
the
experts
do
their
jobs
and
and
know
that
they
are,
as
I
said,
experts
in
the
area.
C
A
C
G
Good
afternoon
I'm
jake
tibbetts,
that's
j-a-k-e,
t-I-b-b
I-t-t-s
and
I'm
the
eureka
county
natural
resources
manager.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
opportu
opportunity
to
give
our
testimony.
I
am
speaking
on
behalf
of
eureka,
county
and
eureka
county.
We
have
submitted
some
written
testimony,
a
potential
proposed
amendment,
as
ms
swank
noted
already
in
communications,
with
her
to
to
get
together
to
find
something
that's
going
to
meet
the
intent
and
work
for
all
of
us.
We
too,
we
believe
in
the
intent
of
ab
85.
G
Our
concern
is
that
currently,
by
listing
cheatgrass
as
a
noxious
weed,
it
pulls
in
many
other
implications.
As
far
as
abatement
issues
there's
also
civil
penalties
in
nrs,
555
201
and
currently,
as
it
works
right
now,
when
the
state
quarantine
officer
designates
weeds
as
noxious
weeds
and
they
do
go
through
a
regular
regulatory
process
to
do
that.
G
It's
a
statewide
listing
of
those
weeds
and
I
do
manage
one
of
the
one
of
eight
weed
districts
recognize
weed
districts
under
nrs
555
in
the
state,
and
I
can
tell
you
right
now:
we
already
have
extreme
limitations
on
just
addressing
the
weeds
that
are
on
the
noxious
weed
list
if
we
were
to
have
to
add
weeds,
such
as
these
widespread
weeds
and
the
legal
obligations
that
are
in
the
statute
related
to
noxious
weeds.
We
do
think
it
could
cause
some
undue
consideration,
so
we
do
believe
there's
a
way
to
get
there.
G
We're
proposing
an
amendment
to
create
some
new
type
of
designation
called
something
like
weeds
for
strategic
control
or
something
like
that.
That
would
again
empower
the
state
quarantine
officer
to
list
these
fire
prone
weeds
that
we're
trying
to
target
in
very
specific
geographic
areas
to
keep
those
that
cheat
grass
or
whatever
else
out
of
that
area.
G
A
Thank
you,
mr
tibbetts,
and
look
forward
to
getting
some
follow-up
on
the
continued
conversations
between
you
and
the
bill
sponsor
with
that.
We'll
move
on
to
the
next
caller
in
opposition.
C
H
H
If
I
correctly
understand
the
criteria
for
picking
from
the
three
options
we
are
here
today
to
testify,
in
opposition
to
ab-85
farm
bureau
strongly
supports
increased
efforts
and
effectiveness
in
controlling
noxious
weeds.
We
also
strongly
support
efforts
and
effectiveness
in
reversing
the
explosive
expansion
of
cheat
grass
dominance
that
has
led
to
the
disastrous
effects
on
wildfire
conditions.
H
Now,
when
you
put
the
entire
section
of
nrs
555
and
the
noxious
weeds
into
perspective,
there
are
significant
and
severe
consequences
for
how
noxious
weak
control
measures
are
applied
on
private
property
owners,
as
though,
in
those
instances
when
noxious
weed
problems
are
capable
of
being
correctable,
we
support
the
responsibilities
that
the
current
law
call
for.
We
don't
believe
that
all
weeds,
especially
cheatgrass,
can
be
corrected
by
noxious
weed
law
as
envisioned
in
ab-85.
H
We
believe
that
ab-85
will
necessarily
improve
or
will
not
necessarily
improve
the
end
results.
At
the
same
time,
we
think
that
there
could
be
negative
consequences,
taking
out
the
safety
provisions
for
applying
noxious
wheat
authorities
in
cases
where
specific
weed
control
isn't
practical
or
possibly
impossible.
Thanks
for
your
time
this
afternoon,.
A
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
testimony
and
for
following
the
the
guidelines
for
providing
testimony,
which
is
to
testify
in
opposition.
If
you
do
not
support
the
measure
as
written
so
much
appreciation
for
that,
mr
busterman,
we'll
go
on
to
the
next
caller
in
opposition.
A
A
I
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
just
got
the
letter
of
the
comments
from
nevada
mining
association
and
have
you
looked
at
that
because
they
mentioned
ranching
and
not
only
the
public
lands
but
also
the
private
lands?
Have
you
looked
at
that
at
all,
as
cattlemen's
association.
I
F
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
for
the
department
of
ag.
In
recent
years
the
cheatgrass
been
considered
under
the
grazing
permits,
especially
in
springtime
now
and
and
on
these
grazing
allotments.
F
They
can
now
bring
their
cattle
in
at
certain
times
a
year
to
graze
this
off,
because
it's
edible
at
that
small
amount
of
time,
and
I'm
just
wondering
if
this
is
decided
that
this
is
a
noxious
weed.
Will
that
change
any
of
those
grazing
permits
and
all
because
cheatgraph
was
rich.
I
have
an
original
document
and
cheatgraph
was
first
introduced
because
it
really
was
going
to
be
for
grazing,
and
I
still
have
copies
of
that
original
document
released
by
the
department
of
ag.
I
Mr
chair
megan
brown
for
the
record
to
assemblyman
assemblywoman
titus.
I
am
don't
administer
blm
grazing
permits
or
u.s
forest
service
permits,
so
I
am
not
sure
how
that
change
of
designation
and
calculation
would
affect
grazing
permits
all
right.
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
bts
well,
assemblywoman
swank
has
brought
her
traditional
efficiency
back
to
the
committee.
Are
there
any
closing
remarks
that
you
you'd
like
to
make
miss
swing.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Just
briefly
again,
mr
tibbetts
and
I
will
meet
on
friday
and
I
would
say
in
response
to
mr
busselman's
testimony,
while
it's
always
good
to
hear
from
mr
busselman
that
these
aren't
removing
any
safety
provisions,
we
have
a
state
quarantine
officer
because
they
are
an
expert
in
this
area
and
can
make
those
judgments
that
state
quarantine
officer
is
our
safety
provision
here
in
the
state
of
nevada.
So
I
think
that
also
to
emphasize
that
this
does
not
change
anything
going
forward.
E
It
just
allows
the
state
engineer
to
do
their
job
to
do
their
sorry,
to
stay
engineer,
wrong
bill,
the
state,
quarantine
officer
to
do
their
job
and
and
moving
forward
instead
of
putting
that
piece
in
legislation.
When
really
we
should
let
the
science
dictate
that.
So
with
that,
thank
you
so
much.
It's
always
good
to
be
in
assembly,
natural
resources
still
by
home,
and
I
look
forward
to
working
with
mr
tibbetts
to
hone
this
bill.
A
Thank
you
very
much
miss
swank
and
we,
I
think
we
will
have
a
couple
more
bills
from
the
division
of
water
resources.
If
you'd
like
to
speak
about
the
state
engineer
with
that
I'll
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill,
85
members
we're
now
going
to
move
to
our
voting
items
for
today
we're
going
to
start
with
a
bill
draft
introduction.
A
A
So
with
that
we
have
before
us
bdr
51-559,
which
revisions
revises
provisions
governing
the
production
and
sale
of
eggs
and
egg
products.
So
with
that,
do
we
have
a
motion
to
introduce
this
bill.
A
All
right,
I
believe
I
got
a
first
from
vice
chair
cohen.
Who
did
we
have
okay,
we
had
a
second
from
assemblywoman
titus.
Is
there
any
discussion
on
the
motion.
I
J
A
Yes,
thank
you.
That
motion
carries
unanimously.
I
appreciate
that
we'll
now
move
on
to
the
work
session
and
before
we
get
into
the
work
session
itself.
I
would
like
the
committee
to
reconsider
assembly
bill
34,
which
we
heard
on
february
22nd
and
voted
on
march
10th.
It's
come
to
my
attention
since
then
that
the
bill
needs
an
additional
amendment,
so
the
purpose
of
this
reconsideration
would
be
to
remove
language
that
authorizes
the
imposition
of
a
fee.
A
A
A
D
J
A
Yes,
thank
you
that
motion
carry
so
having
taken
the
action
to
reconsider
assembly
bill
34,
we'll
start
our
work
session
with
assembly
bill
34.
A
So
I
don't
believe
that
we
need
any
additional
explanation
for
mr
stinisbeck
on
on
this
one.
So
are
there
any
questions
from
members?
First,
before
we
do
a
motion.
A
All
right
hearing,
none,
we
would
take
a
motion
to
amend
and
do
pass
assembly
bill,
34
and
just
to
be
clear.
The
motion
to
amend
and
do
pass
would
include
the
original
amendments
in
our
first
work
session,
as
well
as
the
additional
amendment
to
remove
the
authority
provided
on
nellis.
So.
A
D
E
J
A
Yes,
that
motion
carries,
I
assigned
the
floor
statement
to
assemblywoman
gonzalez
originally,
so
we
will
keep
that
floor
statement
assignments.
A
K
K
Lastly,
the
bill
removes
the
definition
of
small
business
and
instead
requires
the
board
to
review
claims
to
define
the
term
by
regulation.
K
There
have
been
two
proposed
amendments
to
this
bill,
the
first
by
a
division
of
environmental
protection
and
the
second
by
the
nevada,
patrol
marketers
and
convenience
store
association,
and
both
amendments
make
changes
to
the
disbursements
of
the
fund
for
cleaning
up
discharge
of
petroleum.
A
Members
seeing
none,
I
would
accept
an
motion
to
amend
and
do
pass
assembly
bill.
40.
A
L
A
I
believe
that
concludes
our
work
session.
Thank
you,
committee,
members,
and
with
that
we
will
move
back
into
our
hearings
and
I
believe
the
next
item
that
we'll
hear
is
assembly
bill
84,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
wildfires,
I'd
like
to
welcome
senator
scheible
as
well
as
jaina
moon
with
the
nature
conservancy
to
present
assembly
bill
84,
and
you
may
begin
whenever
you're
ready.
M
Thank
you
so
much
chair
watts,
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
national
resources
for
the
record.
I
am
senator
melanie
scheibel
and
I
represent
senate
district
9
in
clark
county,
I'm
here
today
to
present
assembly
bill
84,
which
authorizes
the
state
forester
fire
warden,
with
certain
approval
to
enter
into
public
private
partnerships
to
address
the
threat
of
catastrophic
wildfires
with
me
today.
To
present
the
bill
is
jaina,
moan,
director
of
external
affairs,
with
the
nature
conservancy.
M
Thank
you,
assembly
84
was
proposed
by
the
committee
to
conduct
an
interim
study
concerning
wildfires.
It
was
my
pleasure
to
serve
as
the
vice
chair
of
that
committee
during
the
2019-2020
interim.
As
you
may
know,
the
committee
was
created
in
2019
by
assembly
concurrent
resolution
iv,
and
the
committee
was
tasked
with
considering
methods
of
reducing
wildfire
fuels,
issues
related
to
early
responses
to
wildfires
and
economic
impact
of
wildfires
on
the
state
and
local
communities.
M
While
studying
wildfires
this
past
interim,
it
became
clear
that
we
needed
to
harness
all
resources
available,
including
the
private
sector.
Former
assemblywoman,
heidi
swank,
chair
of
the
chair
of
the
committee,
recommended
the
concept
in
ab-84,
and
the
committee
unanimously
voted
to
request
the
bill.
Draft
hundreds
of
wildfires
occur
each
year
in
nevada.
In
recent
years
we
have
experienced
especially
devastating
wildfires,
the
2018
martin
and
sugarloaf
fires
along
near
burned.
M
Nearly
1
million
acres
of
land
in
northeast
nevada,
extremely
dry
conditions
caused
in
part
by
climate
change,
along
with
the
spread
of
invasive
plants
like
cheatgrass
and
increased
housing.
Development
in
the
wildland
urban
interface
have
left
the
state
particularly
vulnerable
to
dangerous
fire
seasons
because
of
nevada's
large
proportion
of
public
lands.
Several
agencies
share
responsibility
for
wildfire
prevention
and
suppression
in
the
state,
while
it's
often
local
governments
that
first
respond
to
a
wildfire,
wildfire
prevention
and
suppression
is
usually
done
in
coordination
with
state,
federal
and
other
partners.
M
As
we
look
into
the
future,
the
threat
of
catastrophic
wildfires
will
only
increase.
Therefore,
we
must
remain
vigilant
and
find
new
ways
of
addressing
this
ever-increasing
threat.
Assembly
bill
84
seeks
to
do
this
by
authorizing
the
state
to
enter
into
public-private
partnerships,
specifically
ab-84
authorizes
such
public-private
partnerships
to
address,
without
limitation
investment
in
wildfire
prevention,
restoration
infrastructure
and
workforce
development
for
enhancing
landscape
resiliency
against
the
threat
of
wildfires,
and
with
the
chairs
permission,
I
would
now
like
to
turn
it
over
to
jaden
my
co-presenter
to
provide
some
more
information
about
this
bill.
N
Thank
you,
senator
scheibel,
for
the
introduction
and
thank
you
chair
watts
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
My
name
is
jayna
moan
and
I'm
the
external
affairs
director
for
the
nature
conservancy
in
nevada,
I'm
here
today
with
my
colleague
mickey
hazelwood.
I
am
here
to
present
assembly
bill
84
and
mickey
will
present
assembly
joint
resolution
ii.
Both
the
bill
and
the
resolution
originated
from
the
interim
committee
to
con
to
conduct
a
study
on
wildfire.
As
you
just
heard.
We
thank
that
committee
for
their
work
in
the
interim.
N
Their
hearings
daylighted
a
number
of
opportunities
for
enhancing
wildfire
prevention,
readiness,
response
and
restoration
efforts.
As
the
committee
was
wrapping
up
its
meetings,
assemblywoman
swank
asked
the
nature
conservancy.
If
we
had
any
ideas
that
would
help
the
state
address
the
issue
of
wildfire,
but
that
did
not
require
a
financial
outlay.
At
that
time
we
were
in
the
thick
of
the
covid
pandemic
and
the
outlook
for
state
revenue
was
grim
assembly
bill,
84
and
assembly.
N
Joint
resolution
ii
are
two
ideas
that
resulted
from
our
discussion
with
assemblywoman
swank
in
response
to
this
question
and
we're
pleased
to
be
here
to
co-present
them
to
you
today
for
the
next
few
minutes.
I
just
want
to
share
why
we
think
public-private
partnerships
are
a
useful
tool
for
addressing
wildfire
threat.
Public-Private
partnerships
or
ppps
are
financial
and
legal
arrangements
that
use
private
investment
to
fund
or
provide
public
goods
or
services.
Ppps
are
frequently
used
to
develop
transportation
and
infrastructure
projects
in
nevada.
There
are
three
places
in
statute.
N
N
In
these
instances,
ppps
were
established
to
help
finance
large
infrastructure
or
renovation
projects
with
ab84
we
are
proposing
that
they
can
be
used
to
address
wildfire
threat.
We
know
we
need
to
reduce
fuel
loads
and
enhance
healthy
soils
in
our
forest
and
rangelands.
These
activities
are
large
natural
infrastructure
endeavors.
So
the
rationale
behind
ab-84
is
that
a
public-private
partnership
model
can
help
leverage
public
funds
with
private
investment
in
wildfire
threat
reduction
and
landscape.
Resiliency
enhancement.
N
Ppps
have
also
been
successfully
used
to
implement
forest
restoration
on
a
large
landscape
level.
Effective
forest
restoration
treatments
seek
to
avoid
stand,
replacing
fires
by
reducing
fuel
loads
through
mechanical
treatments
and
prescribed
fire,
but
to
be
effective,
forest
restoration
needs
to
be
done
at
a
large
scale
and
requires
substantial
investment.
The
national
forest
foundation
has
just
helped
establish
public-private
partnerships
to
provide
long-term
funding
for
forest
restoration
work,
and
I
have
two
examples
of
successful
efforts.
N
First
is
the
yuba
fund
in
sierra
county
california,
which
is
a
partnership
between
the
yuba
water
authority,
the
tahoe
national
forest
and
ngo
called
blue
forest
conservation
and
the
california
department
of
forestry
and
fire
protection.
The
ppp
is
funded
by
a
forest
resilience
bond
financed
by
collective
contributions
from
the
partners
and
has
taken
a
lead
on
implementing
projects
on
over
5
000
acres
in
the
yuba
river
watershed
treatments
are
designed
to
reduce
surface
and
ladder
fuels
to
a
level
that
would
allow
for
safe
fire
suppression
and
improve
wildlife
habitat.
N
The
second
example
is
the
northern
arizona
forest
fund,
where
a
power
and
water
utility,
the
salt
river
project
partnered
with
the
national
forest
foundation
to
implement
forest
restoration
projects
in
the
headwaters
of
the
salt
and
verde
rivers.
These
are,
they
are
a
source
of
drinking
water
for
the
phoenix
metropolitan
area.
The
source
of
revenue
for
the
forest
fund
is
a
mixture
of
public
and
private
revenue
generated
from
forest
restoration
investment
packages.
N
The
fund
is
used
to
implement
on
the
ground,
restoration
and
fuel
reduction
projects.
The
ppp
model
is
also
being
used
to
enhance
resiliency
in
rangelands
in
2020.
A
public-private
partnership
called
the
cheatgrass
challenge
was
launched
in
idaho
in
its
in
this
inaugural
year.
The
challenge
selected
six
restoration
projects
in
sagebrush
habitat
to
receive
a
total
of
750
000
of
investment
generated
from
a
mix
of
federal
and
state
agency
funds
and
private
investments,
in
addition
to
establishing
innovating,
innovative
funding
mechanisms
for
forest
restoration.
These
public-private
partnerships
help
provide
jobs
and
connect
communities
to
their
watersheds.
N
In
closing,
we
think
that
public-private
partnerships
are
a
useful
mechanism
for
addressing
the
threat
of
wildfire
in
both
our
forests
and
rangelands.
Ab-84
will
give
nevada's
fire
orbin
the
ability
to
enter
into
and
manage
public-private
partnerships,
and
it
will
be
another
tool
in
our
box
for
tackling
this
complex
problem.
We
hope
that
you
will
support
this
bill
and
we
are
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you
so
much
for
having
me
here
today.
A
F
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
ask
a
question.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
As
a
member
of
the
interim
committee
on
on
wildfires,
I
think
it's
critical
that
we
make
some
progress
in
saving
our
nevada
lands,
and
I
do
believe
that
those
who
testify
and
present
this
bill
really
care
about
helping
preserve
our
nevada
wildlands.
The
question
involved
so
conceptually
I'm
actually
supportive
of
the
state
forester
on
entering
into
some
ppe's,
also
mousse,
memorandums
of
understanding.
F
It's
another
thing
that
that
they
need
to
do
in
their
job
and
in
their
scope.
We
certainly
heard
testimony
on
that
during
the
committee
meetings.
My
question,
however,
is
wanting
to
make
sure
that
it
goes
on
the
record
that
there
they
cannot
he
or
she
whoever
our
state
forester
is.
F
This
does
not
allow
them
to
commit
any
state
dollars
that
it's
just
understanding
that
it
would
be
private
dollars
that
are
used
here
and
that
that
there's
any
state
dollars
that
would
have
to
go
through
the
normal
process
of
either
ifc
or
coming
back
to
the
finance
committees.
And
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that's
clear
that
this
is
just
an
agreement
to
do
work
or
maybe
accept
fund.
But
we
can't
obligate
our
state
funds
with
this.
M
For
the
record,
and
without
having
run
that
exact
question
by
legal,
I
would
agree.
That
is
my
understanding
of
the
bill.
I
could
foresee
a
circumstance
in
which
we
would
want
to
pay
a
private
organization
to
do
something
like
fuel
abatement
or
something
like
that,
but
just
to
your
point,
it
would
have
to
go
through
the
normal
process
to
get
an
allocation
or
have
to
be
part
of
the
department
of
forestry's
budget.
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
really
enjoyed
the
presentation.
I
think
that
was
great,
but
I
do
have
a
couple
questions.
Will
this
allow
bill
allow
first
responders
to
be
on
the
ground
like
ranchers
or
construction
workers
around
there,
if
their
first
responders
on
the
on
the
they
won't
get
fined
or
or
for
crossing
the
lines?
That
kind
of
thing
that's
my
first
one,
and
does
that
also
include
removal
of
brush
and
debris
that
that
helps
build
up
to
the
fuel
for
for
these
fires?
Could
you
answer
that?
N
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison
for
the
record,
jaina
moan,
and
I
yes
it
for
to
answer
your
second
question.
It
would
include
the
addressing
the
reduction
of
fuel
load
prior
to
a
fire
and
that's
what
our
interest
was
in
in
discussing
this
bill.
And
I'm
sorry
can
you
repeat
your
first
question:
assemblyman.
D
Thank
you
and
what
it
is
is
you
know,
like
blm
did
a
few
years
back
what
they
did
was
said:
okay,
the
first
responders
there
would
probably
be
ranchers
or
whatever
they
could
actually
start
putting
the
fire
out
right
then,
and
there,
instead
of
waiting
until
a
a
team
come
in.
So
would
this
feel
allowed
for
that
because
the
first
responders
it
sometimes
can
can
get
a
wrap
around
these
fires.
N
Thank
you,
assemblyman
ellison
for
the
record,
jaina
moan,
and
I
I
believe
that
any
sort
of
agreement
that
would
pertain
to
who
could
participate
in
certain
activities
would
be
worked
out
by
the
specific
public-private
partnership
that
the
fire
warden
would
have
entered
into.
This
bill
simply
gives
the
authorization
for
the
fire
warden
to
enter
into
such
agreements,
but
any
sort
of
partners
that
would
respond
to
a
fire
or
be
on
the
ground
or
conduct
any
of
the
activities
under
that
partnership
would
be
specified
by
that
individual
agreement.
N
However,
that's
not
to
say
that
a
a
public
private
partnership
couldn't
be
formed
to
that
included,
first
responders
and
ranchers,
and
members
of
that
community.
That
is
similar
to
the
example
I
provided
in
san
diego,
where
there
was
a
public-private
partnership
that
worked
or,
and
and
also
the
one
in
the
yuba
water
authority
as
well.
D
D
N
Some
thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblyman
ellison
for
the
record,
jaina
moan-
and
you
know
there
are
currently
six
projects
that
have
been
funded
by
that
cheat
grass
challenge
and
they
range
from
restoration
improvements
to
reseeding
projects
to
to,
I
think,
there's
also
a
pj
project
in
there
as
well.
So
the
the
projects
with
that
particular
challenge
are
selected
each
year
by
the
partners
involved
in
the
cheat
rest
challenge,
and
they
also
select
how
to
spend
that
that
fund
that
they
have
collectively
contributed
to.
D
A
Thank
you
very
much,
and
I
know
that
we
do
have
the
state
forester
fire
warden
on.
I
believe
we'll
wait
until
we
get
to
neutral
and
then
you
know
allow
the
forest
to
fire
warden
to
address
any
of
these
items
that
may
have
come
up
and
provide
additional
opportunity.
If
anyone
asked
questions
for
ms
casey
do
we
have,
I
believe
we
have
a
question
from
vice
chair,
cohen,.
I
Thank
you,
sharon
and
thank
you
both
for
the
presentation.
I
have
a
question
about
the
the
process
I
guess
of
the
the
entering
into
or
negotiating
and
entering
into
etc
the
public
private
partnerships.
I
A
I
would
just
I'll
let
the
sponsors
speak
to
how
they
envision
the
process
working
and
then
I'd
ask
that
you
follow
up
specifically
with
the
forester
fire
warden
about
the
dag
issue
in
in
neutral.
Okay.
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you.
N
Thank
you
vice
chair
cohen,
for
that
question.
I
I
I
honestly
cannot
say
what
the
specific
process
would
be.
I
would
imagine
it
would
be
a
contractual
arrangement
that
would
go
through
the
typical
channels
of
contractual
agreements,
the
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources
enters
into,
but
I
look
forward
to
hearing
the
state
forester's
answer
to
that
question.
I
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and,
and
thank
you
senator
as
well
as
excuse
me
for
bringing
this
on
up.
I'm
concerned
that
my
question
is
going
to
be
a
very
newbie
simplistic
question.
So
if
we
need
to
do
this
offline,
I'm
more
than
happy
to
have
a
conversation
away
from
the
committee
about
this.
With
these
agreements,
are
they
long-term
agreements
or
are
they
just
a
short-term
agreement,
or
is
that
part
of
the
negotiation
process
when
it
is
entering
into
these
agreements?.
N
I
think
thank
you,
assemblywoman
ellison
for
the
record
chain
of
moan,
and
it's
it's
a.
It
depends
at
what
the
purpose
of
the
agreement
is
for.
Certainly
there
are
a
lot
of
times.
Public
private
partnerships
are
entered
into
for
transportation
infrastructure
and,
in
that
case,
in
one
that
is
cited
that
was
authorized
in
statute
in
nrs.
N
It
was
authorized
for
the
boulder
city
bypass
project,
and
so
that's
a
finite
project
with
a
certain
length
of
time,
and
so
these
these
public-private
partnerships
can
be
long-term
endeavors
a
lot
of
times.
I
think
the
forest
funding
restoration
efforts
are
longer-term
endeavors
because
in
those
efforts
they're
seeking
to
build
up
a
forest,
a
fund
to
help
fund
restoration
and
restoration
efforts
also
take
time,
and
so
that
I
can
imagine
that
those
agreements
would
extend
multiple
years
with
options
for
parties
to
come
and
go.
I
Thank
you
very
that
clarifies
a
few
of
the
questions
that
I
had
because
my
mind,
I'm
thinking.
So,
if
it's
a
long
term,
if
it's
a
25-year
process,
let's
just
say
like
I
don't
know
if
the
yuba
fire
shed
is
like
that,
but
I
know
that
that's
been
around
for
some
time.
Is
there
ever
any
sort
of
legislative
oversight
or
governor
oversight
or
other
committee
or
public
body
oversight
with
it,
or
does
it
continue
to
be
an
agreement
that
the
oversight
is
only
within
that
department?
I
guess
is,
is
the
secondary
question.
A
Which
I
do
yes
I'll,
allow
the
sponsors
to
respond.
Although
I'd
note
that
contracts
are
subject
to
internal
controls
of
the
agencies
and
we
as
the
legislature
get
reviews
of
the
internal
controls
and
processes
that
agencies
have
from
the
audit
division
and
then
also
in
general,
practices
would
be
subject
to
legislative
audits
as
well.
So
I
just
wanted
to
note
that,
and
if
the
sponsors
have
anything
they'd
wish
to
add
on
that
point,.
A
Thank
you.
One
other
note
is
that
you
know,
while
the
department
would
or
the
division
would
oversee
those
programs,
there
are
frequently
either
formal
reports.
This
is
it's
not
listed
as
a
requirement
under
this
legislation,
but
we
also
have
various
interim
and
and
bodies
during
the
session
to
which
we
get
reports
on
on
activities.
So
that's
another
venue
for
information
on
on
how
certain
programs
are
proceeding
with
that.
Are
there
any
other
questions
for
members.
C
G
Thank
you,
jake
tibbetts,
j-a-k-e,
t-I-b-b
I-t-t-s,
the
natural
resource
manager
for
eureka,
county
speaking
on
behalf
of
eureka
county.
So,
mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
thank
you
again
for
the
opportunity.
Eureka
county
does
support
ab-84
as
written.
We
note
that
the
best
wildfire
response
and
and
risk
reduction
efforts
they
have
local
buy-in
and
they're
locally
led.
We
see
great
opportunities
in
this
bill
to
assist
local
fire
districts,
fire
response
agencies
and
groups
like
our
two
firewise
communities.
G
C
J
Good
afternoon,
mr
chair
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
keith
lee
last
name
lee
lee,
I'm
the
lobbyist
of
the
alert,
wildfire
systems,
dba
wildfire,
live
wildfire,
live
is
nevada
corporation,
which,
in
conjunction
with
unr,
is
deploying
and
operating
cameras
that
detect
confirm
and
the
system
fighting
wildfires.
J
This
technology
was
developed
by
a
team
at
the
university
of
nevada,
seismo
seismological
lab
the
fire
system.
Camera
fire
camera
system
began
in
213
with
a
alert,
tahoe
fire
camera
and
has
grown
to
more
than
5
800
cameras
in
five
states.
We
support
ab-84,
allowing
the
state
forester
fireward
to
expand
her
authority
to
contract
with
private
companies.
J
To
establish
partnerships
to
assist
in
the
battle
against
wildfires
is
crucial
to
the
success
in
prevention,
early
detection,
suppression
mitigation
and
identify
identification
causes
wildfire
and,
as
an
aside
mr
chairman,
I
might
say
that
this
concept
of
private
public
partnerships
has
worked
well
in
the
state
of
california,
where
over
time,
the
independently
owned
utilities
and
cal
fire
and
other
state
agencies
have
entered
into
these
contracts
that
that
have
allowed
the
disbursement
and
employment
of
almost
800
cameras.
So
we
certainly
support
this.
J
A
C
O
C-H-R-I-S-T-I-C-A-B-R-E-R-A,
I'm
the
policy
and
advocacy
director
for
the
nevada
conservation
league
here
in
ape
here's
a
port
of
ab-84
science
tells
us
that
climate
change
is
making
the
west
hotter
and
drier
contributing
to
larger,
more
intense
wildfires
and
last
year's
fire
season
set
new
records
in
terms
of
geographic
scale,
fire
fire
intensity
and
races
spread.
These
wildfires
have
disastrous
impacts
on
natural
areas
and
wildlife,
habitat
and
the
pollution
effects
from
snoke
are
hazardous
to
our
health.
Encouraging
collaboration
and
partnerships
will
help
our
state
better
mitigate
and
respond
to
wildfire,
and
we
urge
your
support.
C
H
Thank
you
for
the
record.
My
name
is
doug
buffleman
d-o-u-g
b-u-s-s
b-u-s-s-e-l-m-a-n,
I'm
the
executive
vice
president
of
nevada
farm
bureau.
We
are
testifying
today
in
support
of
ab-84
nevada.
Farm
bureau
has
policy
in
favor
of
empowering
local
officials
to
work
cooperatively
with
state
and
federal
agencies
and
other
public
firefighting
agencies
to
establish
local
management
programs
plans
and
organized
efforts.
We
support
the
state
forest
fire
warden
and
the
empowerment
necessary
for
local
entities
through
the
agreements
and
subsequent
authorities
presented
in
ab-84.
A
Thank
you
with
that.
We'll
move
to
testimony
in
neutral
on
assembly
bill
84.
Before
we
go
to
the
phones,
I
want
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
our
state,
forester
fire,
warden
casey
casey,
to
make
any
comments
that
she'd
like
to
and
then
to
open
it
to
any
questions,
additional
questions
that
members
may
have
so
miss
casey.
Please
proceed
whenever
you're
ready.
P
Thank
you,
chair
members
of
the
committee.
I
will
just
try
to
answer
a
couple
of
the
questions
in
in
one
lump
sum
here.
We
do
have
a
process
for
contracts
or
or
agreements
that
go
through
our
both
our
assigned,
dag
and
also
either
the
the
right
avenue
if
it's
board
of
examiners
for
some
or
and
or
ifc.
So
there
is
a
legislative
review
process
for
all
of
our
stuff.
Our
assigned
dag,
actually
reviews
all
of
our
contracts
and
works
on
the
language
with
ourselves
and
the
proponents.
P
A
good
example
of
that
was
our
nv
energy
agreement.
That
kind
of
falls
under
this.
They
worked
very
closely
with
nb
energy's,
dags
or
lawyers
to
get
the
language
correct
all
the
way
down
to
our
sub-grant
agreements.
We
do
sub-grants
with
different
communities,
so
he
reviews
all
of
our
sub-grant
forms.
So
all
of
that
is
done
through
that
process,
and
this
we
understand
that
this
wouldn't
commit
any
funds
of
the
state
unless
we
went
through
the
process.
P
So
as
far
as
allowing
first
responders
ranchers
to
respond
to
fires,
that's
something
we
currently
do
both
through
our
rural
fire
protection
association
statutes.
Also,
through
our
agreement
with
the
federal
agencies,
we
work
very
closely
with
them.
In
addition,
through
provisions
for
emergency
response,
we're
allowed
to
make
emergency
contracts
with
ranchers
if
they
have
equipment
that
we
need,
we
can
sign
them
up
on
site
as
well
all
approved
processes
going
through
the
process
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
additional
questions
if
there
or
if
I
missed
any.
A
D
Thank
you
and
I
think
he
answered
all
my
questions
other
than
pruning
and
underbrush.
The
young
lady
did
say
a
great
deal
on
that.
Is
that
something
you're
gonna
expand
on
in
the
future?
You
think
you
know,
not
only
does
it
protect
sage
grouse,
it
protects
the
habitat,
but
pruning
and
and
removal
of
brush
around
trees
is
is
devastating
to
the
force.
Can
you
answer
that?
Is
that
something
you're
going
to
increase
or
just
leave
it
the
way
it
is.
P
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Assemblyman
ellison
again
for
the
record
kckc
state
forester
fire
warden,
it's
different
on
every
project,
every
project
that
we
look
at,
where
you
know
we're
working
in
partnership
with
usually
private
landowners
or
public.
You
know
blm
forest
service
department
of
defense,
whoever
the
landowner
might
be
so
we're
continuously
looking
before
we
ever
do
a
project.
We
do
a
project
plan,
we're
looking
at
what
are
our
goals
and
objectives?
P
What
are
our
resource
objectives
if
we're
looking
for
increased
water
supply,
if
we're
looking
for
a
decrease
in,
say
noxious,
weeds
cheatgrass,
if
we're
looking
for
forest
health
improvements,
usually
we're
looking
at
multiple
objectives,
considering
habitat
and
cultural
resources
as
well.
So
all
of
our
projects
go
through
a
very
thorough
vetting
process.
P
Looking
and
we
write
this
up
so
that
everybody's
aware
of
how
this
project
should
be
implemented.
So
it's
hard
to
say
whether
we'll
do
more
or
less
we
do
do
pruning
projects,
it's
more
likely
that
we
would
do
a
thinning
project
than
a
pruning
project.
We
learned
a
long
time
ago.
Pruning
sometimes
brings
a
dinner
bell
for
bugs
and
insects
and
disease,
so
so
we're
constantly
looking
at,
what's
going
to
be
most
effective
for
the
objectives
that
we
need
to
meet.
A
You
thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
questions
for
miss
casey
all
right?
Thank
you
very
much
for
joining
us
and
making
yourself
available
with
that.
We'll
move
on
broadcast
production
services
to
see
if
anyone
is
on
the
phone
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
neutral
on
assembly,
bill
84.
C
N
Thank
you,
chair
watts,
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record.
This
is
jaina
moan
and
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
so
much
for
your
consideration
of
this
bill.
We
do
think
that
public-private
partnerships
are
a
good
tool
that
we
can
use
for
our
toolbox
for
fighting
wildfire,
and
I
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
present
the
bill
again.
Thank
you
and
I'll
turn
it
over
to
senator
scheible.
M
Thank
you,
and
I
will
just
echo
ms
moan's
gratitude
to
all
of
you
for
hearing
this
bill
today
and
engaging
with
us
asking
questions.
We
appreciate
it
and
I
hope
that
you
will
support
it
going
forward.
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that.
I
will
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
bill
84
and
we'll
open
the
hearing
on
assembly
joint
resolution
2,
which
recognizes
that
forest
health
and
water
quality
are
inextricably
linked
and
we
will
welcome
senator
scheible
as
well
as
ms
hazelwood
from
the
nature
conservancy.
A
M
Well,
thank
you,
chair
watts,
and
members
of
the
assembly
committee
on
natural
resources.
I
am
still
melanie
schaible
and
I
still
represent
senate
district
9
in
clark
county
and
it's
my
pleasure
to
present
assembly
joint
resolution
2,
which
recognizes
that
forest
health
and
water
quality
are
inextricably
linked.
The
resolution
is
also
one
of
the
measures
proposed
by
the
committee
to
conduct
an
interim
study
concerning
wildfires.
M
One
amendment
to
the
resolution
has
been
proposed
by
the
nature
conservancy
and
it
is
available
on
nellis.
There
is
also
an
amendment
proposed
by
eureka
county
and
I
consider
both
to
be
friendly
amendments
with
me
today.
To
present
the
resolution
is
nikki
hazelwood
eastern
sierra
nevada
program
director
with
the
nature
conservancy
and
with
the
chairs
permission
I'll
first
provide
a
brief
background
on
the
bill
and
a
summary
of
the
resolution
before
I
turn
it
over
to
my
co-presenter,
mr
hazelwood,
for
further
discussion.
M
All
right,
as
you
know,
from
the
presentation
you
just
heard
during
the
2019-2020
interim,
the
committee
to
conduct
an
interim
study
concerning
wildfires
her
testimony
on
the
catastrophic
impacts
that
wildfires
have
on
various
environments,
including
watersheds
and
conservation
science
practices
that
might
aid
wildfire
management.
M
Healthy
forests
work
as
an
organic
filter
to
keep
sediment
and
other
contaminants
out
of
water.
They
also
operate
as
natural
sponges
by
collecting
precipitation.
The
ability
of
forests
to
aid
in
the
filtration
of
water
provides
enormous
benefits
to
the
ecosystem
and
the
public
health
of
our
communities,
as
it
reduces
the
need
for
water
treatment.
The
loss
or
degradation
of
forests
negatively
impacts
water
quality
in
watersheds
and
increases
the
risk
of
depleted
groundwater
levels.
L
Thank
you
for
that
introduction,
senator
scheible
for
the
record.
I
am
mickey
hazelwood
eastern
share
nevada
program
director
for
the
nato
conservancy.
Thank
you,
chair
watts
and
members
of
the
committee
for
the
opportunity
to
speak
with
you
today.
The
nation
conservancy
is
encouraged
by
the
introduction
assembly
because
it
addresses
an
issue
we
believe
is
highly
important
to
nevada
and
nevada.
L
L
Most
recently,
that
work
is
focused
on
restoration
of
the
headwaters
forest,
in
collaboration
with
the
forest
service,
trekkie
meadows,
water
authority,
the
national
forest
foundation
and
others,
because
we
realize,
if
we
really
want
to
have
clean,
healthy
rivers
and
streams,
we
need
to
work
to
protect
them
at
their
various
horses.
L
L
L
L
the
image
in
the
center.
There
is
a
snippet
of
the
more
than
150
000
acres
burned
at
high
intensity.
During
that
event,
the
image
on
the
right
is
of
the
water
quality
pre-post
fire
runoff
from
the
landscapes
upstream,
the
watershed.
L
L
I
drove
past
trailhead
after
trailhead
places
that
I
used
to
go
many
years
ago
and
not
a
car
in
sight,
sign
of
human
life
or
much
life
at
all,
and
I
stood
in
los
alamos
where
this
picture
on
the
left
was,
and
you
know,
pumping
gas
in
my
rental
car
and
looking
up
at
the
burn
slopes.
L
L
It
was
confirmed
for
me
that
events
like
this
could
potentially
happen
here
at
home
in
the
summer
of
2018,
a
thunderstorm
dropped
rain
on
splintered
fire
star
of
topaz
and
fortunately
the
sludge
you
see
here
that
came
off
that
relatively
small
burns
car
didn't
make
it
into
the
lake.
However,
it
did
shut
down
395
for
the
better
part
of
a
24-hour
period.
It
impacted
the
businesses
here
in
topaz
and,
as
we've
seen
in
recent
years
of
the
large
rangeland
were
mentioned
earlier
across
the
state.
L
L
L
You
know,
as
we
discussed,
that
gradual
release
of
snowmelt
into
our
systems
allows
us
to
have
water
in
those
systems
at
the
driest
times
a
year.
We
need
that
water
the
most
and
then
we
also
wanted
to
include
quantity
as
well
as
quality
in
the
language
in
this
resolution,
because
you
know
again,
what
I
just
mentioned
is
an
example
of
that,
where
healthy
systems
meter
out
the
release
of
this
water
and
provide
adequate
quantities
at
times
we
needed
unhealthy
landscapes,
burned
landscapes
likely
won't
do
that.
L
L
We
hope
that
this
resolution
will
serve
as
a
tool
as
a
key
that
could
open
the
door
to
additional
resources
for
our
collective
efforts
to
restore
and
manage
our
watershed
into
the
future.
So
again,
we
want
to
thank
each
of
you
for
considering
assembly
joint
resolution
too.
We
hope
that
you'll
support
it
and
again.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much.
The
presentation
with
that
we'll
open
it
up
to
questions
from
members
of
the
committee
and,
I
believe,
we'll
start
with
assemblyman
titus.
F
F
I
just
want
to
clarify
that
this
particular
resolution
won't
be
contrary
to
contracts
and
agreements
that
we've
had
for
our
sage
grouse
program,
the
juniper
sage
interface.
F
So
my
heart
aches,
when
I
see
those
trees
being
just
lopped
off-
and
they
continue
to
do
so-
and
they
have
done
so
with
the
understanding
that
potentially
it
will
increase
habitat
for
sage
grouse.
F
We
all
know
that
the
habitat's
disappearing,
mostly
because
of
forest
fires,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
that
it's
not
running
contrary
to
any
contracts
we
might
have
with
our
federal
partners
or
private
partners
that
we
already
have
to
cut
down
these
trees,
and
you
know
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear
that
one.
What
we're
trying
to
do
on
one
hand,
doesn't
interfere.
What
we're
trying
to
do,
on
the
other
hand,.
L
Mickey
hazelwood
for
the
record.
I
am
not
aware
of
any
potential
conflicts
between
those
efforts
and
the
solution.
You
know
the
way
I
understand
it.
This
is
a
non-binding
resolution,
just
acknowledging
these
connectivities
and
landscapes,
but
if
senator
scheibel
or
anyone
else
would
like
to
come
in,
I
defer
to
them.
M
So
senator
scheible
for
the
record-
and
I
also
did
not
see
any
potential
conflicts
in
reading
the
bill
and
thinking
about
the
sage,
grouse
habitat
management
that
we've
done
in
the
past,
and
I
would
also
agree
with
mr
hazelwood
that
this
is
a
resolution.
M
So
it
sets
forth
principle
guiding
principles
if
it
were
to
be
read
in
tandem
with
a
legally
binding
contract
or
another
piece
of
our
statute,
then
then
that
would
generally
prevail.
Nice
and
I
might
when
I
say
that
I
mean
the
statute
or
contract,
not
the
resolution.
F
A
Thank
you
for
that
question
and
I'll
also
note
that,
particularly
with
the
additions
proposed
by
eureka
county,
the
resolution
does
not
prioritize
forests
and
trees
over
other
management
strategies
that
could
assist
in
in
promoting
healthy
watersheds.
A
Is
there
anything
else,
since
there
is
a
bit
of
a
legal
question,
is
there
any
additional
clarification
that
you'd
like
to
add?
Mr
amber.
A
All
right,
seeing
none
thank
you
again
for
the
presentation
and
we
will
move
on
to
testimony
we'll
start
with
testimony
in
support
of
ajr2
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
broadcast
production
services,
see
if
we
have
anyone
wishing
to
provide
testimony
and
support.
C
G
G
Eureka
county
does
support
ajr2
as
written,
but
we
point
out
that
healthy
rangelands
they
carry
the
same,
stated
benefits
of
healthy
forests
and
since
most
of
the
land
mass
in
nevada
is
rangeland,
it
seems
that
this
linkage
should
also
be
promoted
further.
Overall
soil
health,
regardless
of
the
land
classification,
is
very
important
for
water
quality
and
quantity.
G
G
So
please
also
consider
that
as
you're
moving
forward
with
ajr2,
we'd
also
suggest
specifically
naming
conservation
districts,
in
addition
to
just
state
agencies
and
local
governments,
because
conservation
districts
are
recognized
in
nrs
548
as
being
the
local
link
to
local
communities
for
all
renewable
natural
resource
conservation.
Matters.
G
We'd
also
suggest
a
focus
on
specifically
including
private
landowners
and
land
users
in
the
mix
and
then
focusing
on
collaborative
and
voluntary
programs
and
identifying
and
implementing
these
programs
in
the
constraints
of
our
current
appropriations
and
funding.
I'll
note
that
we
did
provide
written
testimony.
G
That
includes
a
proposed
amendment
and
in
that
written
testimony,
there's
some
links
in
there
if
anybody's
interested
on
information
in
this
nation
or
nationwide
healthy
soil
legislation
and
policy
initiative
to
see
what
other
states
have
done
in
this
related
to
soil
health
and
as
you've
heard,
our
potential
amendment
has
been
considered
a
friendly
amendment.
I
want
to
thank
senator
scheible
for
that
and
also
tnc,
and
we
look
forward
to
helping
push
this
across
the
finish
line,
mr
chair
and
I'm
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
if
you'd
allow
it
and
again.
I
Thank
you
sharon.
Thank
you,
mr
tibbetts.
I
I
was
going
through
the
proposed
amendment
and
I
just
was
a
little
confused
and
want
to
make
sure
I've
got
this
correct.
You've
got
the
orange
double
underline,
which
is
which
is
deleted
language
from
the
original
bill
and
proposed
to
be
retained
in
the
amendment.
G
A
Thanks
for
the
clarification,
I
believe
I
believe
the
color
would
be
green,
additional
language
added
since
the
original
draft,
but
I
think
now
we've
got
it
clear
that
it
would
be
in
a
an
addition
of
length
of
new
language,
so
I
think
that
is
sufficient.
Any
other
questions
for
mr
tibbetts.
A
Seeing
none
thank
you
very
much
again
for
your
testimony
and
for
providing
your
amendment,
sir.
We'll
move
on
to
the
next
caller
in
support.
C
O
K-A-R-A-S-T-E-E-L-A-N-D
for
the
record
good
afternoon,
chair
and
committee
members,
thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
provide
testimony
today.
I'm
a
hydrologist
with
the
truckee
meadows
water
authority.
Tumel
is
a
municipal
water
purveyor
for
reno
and
sparks
serving
over
425
000
customers
in
the
region.
It's
my
pleasure
to
be
here
today
in
support
of
ajr2
on
behalf
of
tumwa.
O
O
On
average,
over
85
percent
of
our
community's
drinking
water
comes
from
the
truckee
river.
We
rely
on
a
healthy
watershed
to
provide
a
clean
water
source
for
the
community,
since
tumwa
does
not
own
most
of
the
land
surrounding
its
source.
Water
areas,
collaboration
with
other
organizations
to
ensure
that
the
region's
water
supply
contin
continues
to
be
of
excellent
quality.
By
working
cooperatively
with
community
organizations,
we
have
improved
the
protection
of
the
region's
drinking
water
supply.
O
Independence.
Lake
in
california
provides
another
great
example
of
our
partnership
with
the
nature
conservancy.
This
lake
is
an
essential
drought.
Supply
for
the
truckee
meadows
tomo
has
helped
fund
the
nature.
Conservancy's
management
efforts
to
improve
forest
health
around
the
lake,
such
as
mechanical
thinning
and
prescribed
burning,
maintaining
the
integrity
of
the
forced
ecosystem
surrounding
independence
lake
is
key
to
maintaining
good
water
quality.
O
In
addition
to
this
effort,
temple
provides
funding
to
many
agencies
and
organizations
throughout
the
watershed
for
forest
management
and
restoration
via
grant
through
the
truckee
river
fund.
These
partnerships
are
one
part
of
tumwa's,
larger
source
water
protection
program
to
ensure
continued
protection
of
the
region's
surface
water
and
groundwater
resources.
O
C
O
O
Forests
play
a
critical
role
in
collecting
filtering
and
storing
water,
which
is
directly
tied
to
water
quality.
However,
our
forests
are
threatened
by
drought,
heat
and
wildfire,
all
of
which
are
exasperated
by
climate
change,
to
understand
the
thrust
of
climate
change
and
wildfire
on
our
forests
and
our
water
resources,
we
need
cooperation
and
coordination
among
land
managers
and
water
purus.
O
A
A
A
So
if
somebody
does
flag
me
down
in
the
meantime
dps
can
we
move
to
anyone
on
the
phone
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
the
neutral
position.
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that
I'll
turn
it
back
over
to
the
presenters
to
provide
any
closing
remarks
that
they'd
like
to
make.
L
For
the
record,
ricky
hazelwood,
thank
you,
chair
watts.
I
would
like
to
say
in
closing
that
I,
in
the
nature,
conservancy
support
eureka
county's
proposed
amendment
says
I
mentioned
earlier.
We
have
seen
the
impacts
from
rangeland
fires
on
our
water
resources
and
there's
an
inextricable
link
there
too.
Again
we
support
those
proposed
amendments.
L
M
And
I'd
like
to
echo
mr
hazel
with
thanks
and
thank
all
of
you
for
sticking
with
us
through
this
presentation,
engaging
with
questions
and
for
considering
the
bill.
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that.
I
will
close
the
hearing
on
assembly
joint
resolution
too.
I
believe
that
takes
us
to
the
last
item
on
our
agenda,
which
is
public
comment
as
a
reminder
just
with
testimony.
In
order
to
provide
public
comment,
you
must
register
in
advance
to
get
the
call-in
information
and
we
ask
that
anyone
wishing
to
provide
public
comment
limit
their
remarks
to
two
minutes
and
that
they
do
not
discuss
matters
that
have
already
been
brought
up
during
the
hearings.
A
A
All
right,
thank
you,
broadcast
production
services
for
all
your
assistance
and
making
sure
that
members
of
the
public
could
participate
and
that
our
presenters
could
present
their
bills
today.
Members.
Thank
you
all
for
your
time
and
attention.
We
had
a
pretty
healthy
agenda
with
work
session
items
and
three
bill
hearings,
and
I
think
we
got
through
it
very
efficiently.
So
I
just
appreciate
you
all
for
that.