►
From YouTube: 4/21/2021 - 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
Ear,
thank
you
please
mark
assemblywomanhansen
as
excused
and
please
mark
assemblywoman,
gonzalez
and
carlton
present
when
they
arrive
just
for
members
of
the
public.
As
you
know,
the
legislative
building
is
now
open
at
limited
capacity.
If
you
wish
to
participate
during
meetings
in
person,
you
must
register
on
nellis
and
follow
the
related
instructions.
A
We
are
also
still
allowing
virtual
participation
in
our
meetings.
Members
before
we
begin
as
a
quick
reminder,
since
we're
back
in
the
committee
room,
please
be
sure
to
press
the
mic
button
to
unmute
yourself
so
that
we
can
properly
broadcast
what
you
are
saying
as
well
to
our
our
folks
that
are
joining
us
online.
Please
remember
to
mute
your
electronic
devices
as
well,
and
also
we
will
be
having
everyone
wear
their
mask
during
the
the
duration
of
our
meetings
here.
A
A
For
today,
members,
we
have
three
bills
on
our
agenda
to
hear
and
I
believe
we'll
take
them
in
order
today
we
will
start
with
senate
bill
23,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
state
conservation
commission.
I
believe
we
have
mister
echo
going
from
dcnr
ready
to
present
the
bill.
Mr
ichiquin,
whenever
you
are
ready,
you
may
proceed
I'll
now
open
the
hearing.
C
Afternoon
chairwatch,
member
of
the
assembly
committee
on
natural
resources,
my
name
is
dominique
ichigon,
I'm
a
deputy
director
with
the
nevada
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources.
Thank
you
for
having
me
today
to
present
and
introduce
senate
bill
23,
I'm
hoping
that
this
might
be
the
simplest
legislative
proposal.
You
consider
this
session,
as
sb
23
simply
proposes
to
move
a
single
word
in
statute.
C
C
These
three
areas
consist
of
counties
and
area
boundary
lines,
follow
the
county
lines
exactly
sp
23
would
move
mineral
county
from
area
3
to
area
2
in
statute.
The
purpose
of
sb
23
is
to
resolve
a
boundary
conflict
that
currently
exists
within
the
mason
conservation
district
boundary
and
the
area
boundary
between
areas.
Two
and
three
slide
three
shows
the
mason
valley,
conservation,
district
boundary
in
light
blue,
which
encompasses
a
portion
of
lion
county
and
the
entirety
of
minnow
county
and
thereby
straddles
areas.
C
Two
and
three,
which
you
can
see
the
boundary
of
here
in
the
hard
red
line,
and
you
can
see
how
that
line.
Bisects
the
center
of
mason
valley
conservation,
district,
this
boundary
conflict
is
confusing
and
it
has
caused
the
nevada
association
of
conservation
districts
to
recommend
that
the
governor
appoint
a
mason
valley,
conservation,
district
supervisor
to
the
state
conservation
commission
to
represent
area
2
only
to
later
learn
that
the
supervisor
was
ineligible
because
the
supervisor
actually
resided
in
the
area.
C
This
boundary
change
will
also
promote
congruency
in
locally
led
conservation
and
support
efforts
to
better
manage
resources
across
the
walker
river
watershed
here
slide.
4
shows
the
area
of
boundaries
should
sb
23
be
passed
into
law.
This
completes
my
testimony
and
I
would
be
happy
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank
you.
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
This
is
my
district,
as
you
I'm
sure,
well
aware,
since
I
live
along
the
walker
river
actually
and
that
waka
river
is
in
the
mason
valley
district
and
then
it
just
in
my
mind.
This
does
make
sense
and
surprise
it
hasn't
been
done
earlier
in
that
the
walk
river
ends
up
in
walker
lake,
which
is
then
in
mineral
county,
and
it's
been
a
source
of
an
issue
and
you've
presented
in
the
past.
Some
of
the
water
conservation
concerns
that
you
had
and
trying
to
fix
some
of
this.
D
A
I
do
have
one
very
quick
clarifying
question,
mr
echo,
going
just
to
be
clear.
There
is
nobody
representing,
let's
see
here,
there's
nobody
representing
area
3
who
is
based
in
mineral
county,
currently
correct,
so
this
would
not
create
any
issues
with
the
the
current
makeup
by
making
this
adjustment.
C
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
to
keep
the
record
clear,
we'll
move
on
to
testimony
and
opposition
of
senate
bill
23.,
seeing
none.
A
E
Chair
at
this
time,
there
are
no
in
the
queue.
A
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that
I'll
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
23
and
we'll
open
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
53,
which
makes
various
changes
relating
to
the
division
of
state
parks
of
the
state
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources,
and
I
do
believe
we
have
a
representative
from
state
parks
with
us.
I
will
open
the
hearing.
You
may
proceed
whenever
you're
ready.
F
F
Please
allow
me
to
provide
a
bit
of
backstory
to
explain
why
passing
senate
bill
53
is
critical
to
the
operation
of
nevada
state
parks.
Nrs
407.0765
establishes
a
utility
surcharge
account
that
the
nevada
division
of
state
parks
usually
utilizes,
to
make
repairs
to
water
sewer
and
electrical
systems
within
the
various
state
parks.
The
utility
surcharge
account
is
funded
through
a
portion
of
the
park,
entrance
fees
and
annual
permit
sales
that
occur
at
specific
parks.
Currently,
the
utility
surcharge
accounts
are
park
specific
as
a
result.
F
The
original
intent
of
this
structure
was
to
ensure
that
smaller
parks
did
not
have
their
accounts
emptied
by
busier
parks
with
larger
utility
infrastructures,
which
in
turn
are
subject
to
higher
use
and
more
wear
and
tear
the
the
opposite
has
proven
to
be
the
case,
because
these
these
funds
may
only
be
spent
at
the
park
where
it
was
actually
collected.
Smaller
parks
never
build
enough
balances
to
handle
large
utility
infrastructure
failures.
F
It
is
absolutely
critical
to
maintain
balances
and
build
flexibility
into
the
utility
surcharge
account
and
although
it
is
impossible
to
predict
when
or
where
a
catastrophic
failure
will
happen,
such
as
when
a
septic
system
will
fail,
it
is
certain
such
failures
occur
during
the
busiest
time
of
the
year,
making
it
more
crucial
to
make
immediate
repairs
senate
bill.
53
would
allow
the
division
to
utilize.
F
The
utility
surcharge
account
to
make
repairs
within
the
region
where
the
fees
are
collected
rather
than
at
the
individual
parks
senate
bill
53
will
allow
the
region,
managers
and
facility
managers
to
better
utilize
these
resources
to
make
immediate
repairs
at
any
of
the
parks
within
their
respective
region,
and
not
just
the
larger
parks
with
the
bigger
utility
surcharge
account
balances
senate
bill.
53
includes
language,
making
it
clear
that
the
division
will
collect
fees
in
all
areas
that
the
division
manages.
F
The
current
language
calls
out
parks
specifically
when,
in
reality,
the
division
manages
recreation
areas,
historic
sites,
historic
parks
as
well
as
we
have
our
region
offices
and
division
offices
where
we
currently
sell
annual
permits
senate
bill.
53
also
seeks
to
include
communication
systems
within
the
definition
of
qualifying
utilities.
F
Maintaining
inadequate
communications
at
a
state
park
is
every
bit
as
critical
to
the
park.
Operations
as
the
water,
sewer
or
electrical
systems,
and
telecommunications,
internet
and
radio
systems
are
essential
to
our
park.
Operations
to
ensure
our
staff
are
in
a
position
to
provide
adequate
public
safety
to
park.
Visitors
and
communication
systems
can
be
expensive
to
fix
and
require
immediate
repair
when
they
do
go
down.
F
Since
these
types
of
communication
system
failures
are
not
a
regular
occurrence,
funding
does
not.
It
currently
exists
in
the
division's
operating
budget
to
make
necessary
repairs
when
there
are
issues
within
the
communication
systems
and
the
passage
of
senate
bill.
53
would
correct
that.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
The
committee
may
have.
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
this
is
a
question,
so
we
already
have
a
fee
that
is
charged
to
get
into
these
parks,
and
I
just
need
some
clarification,
so
your
this
is,
it
will
be
a
new
fee
on
top
of
the
entrance
fee,
or
is
it
a
fee?
That's
specific.
D
F
Jonathan
bridges
for
the
record.
Thank
you,
assemblyman
titus.
There
are
no
new
fees
to
our
park
visitors,
so
we're
actually
already
collecting
this
fee.
The
bill
is
simply
allowing
us
to
utilize
that
surcharge
at
a
region
level
instead
of
just
a
park
level.
If
that
answers
your
question.
Oh.
D
I
see
so
right
now,
any
fees
collected
at
a
park
can
be
used
for
multiple
purposes
throughout
the
state,
not
just
at
that
park
or
that's
just
the
reverse
you're.
Only
if
you
collect
a
fee
at
a
park
you're
just
using
it
at
that
park.
F
Jonathan
bridges
for
the
record,
so,
for
example,
the
southern
region
has
five
state
parks
right
now.
If
someone
comes
into
valley
of
fire
and
they
pay
their
interest
fee,
a
dollar
out
of
that
entrance
fee
goes
into.
The
third
party
account
correct
the
bill
which
so
that
the
dollar
from
the
interest
fee
from
any
of
the
parts
in
the
southern
region
would
go
into
a
region
account
okay,
so
that
it
can
be
used
at
any
of
the
parts
within
that
respective
region.
D
So
how
will
you
handle
just
out
of
curiosity
this
summer,
I'm
one
of
what
the
impact
will
be?
I've
I've
just
learned
that
the
road
into
the
ecuadorian
state
park
is
going
to
be
closed
for
quite
a
while.
I
think,
they're
doing
some
construction
road
work
on
that.
Are
you
aware
that,
and
then,
how
does
that
affect
your
being
able
to
keep
that
park
open.
F
Jonathan
brunson
for
the
record,
thank
you
for
the
question
I
am
aware
of
that
park
will
be
closed
in
summer
due
to
the
road
construction
I,
as
anticipated.
I
believe
that
park
will
be
closed
completely
to
the
public
until
about
november.
If
I'm
not
mistaken,.
D
Will
you
be
able
to
take
mate
and
make
sorry,
mr
chair,
if
I
might
follow
up
on
that
question,
will
you
be
able
to
maintain
that
park?
I
have
I
I
was
concerned
when
I
found
out
that
that
road
was
going
to
be
closed,
how
my
my
husband
was
actually
a
ranger
there
at
one
point
as
in
his
youthful
days,
and
I
was
just
curious-
will
that
be
able
to
be
maintained
and
will
be
able
to
be
kept
up?
I
had
some
concerns
about
that.
I
know
that
doesn't
address
this
issue,
but
I'm
concerned.
F
Jonathan
brunges
for
the
record.
Thank
you
for
the
question,
absolutely
so
the
park,
the
staff.
We
have
two
staff
that
live
out
on
site
and
they
will
remain
out
there
and
maintain
that
park
and
make
sure
everything's
good
to
go
out
there.
Okay,.
G
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
My
question
actually
has
to
do
with
it
gets
into
the
weeds
a
little
bit
when,
let's
just
say
this
passes,
will
all
of
the
accounts
be
put
in
right
away
by
region
for
the
parks
or
will
they
continue
to
be
divided
out
and
only
if
one
of
the
smaller
parks
needs
it?
I
just
I
realize
that's
not
necessarily
part
of
this
build,
but
I'm
just
trying
to
figure
out
the
details
of
how
this
would
work.
F
Jonathan
brunges
for
the
record,
thank
you
for
the
question
it
would
upon
approval
would
go
into
essentially
four
accounts,
so
we
have
four
regions
and
be
broken
out
that
way
and
so
again
a
park.
If
they
needed
access
to
those
funds,
they
would
submit
a
request
like
we
currently
do,
and
then
it
would
go
through
the
steps
of
approval
for
them
to
be
able
to
utilize
those
funds.
G
Follow
up
with
me,
mr
chair,
thank
you
so
just
to
make
sure,
then.
So
if
they
would
come
to
you,
then
for
that
approval,
or
would
it
be
the
other
park
ranger
or
the
other
park
managers
who
might
have
been
saving
up
to
do
something
I
mean
is
that
am
I
making
clear
kind
of
what
my
concern
is?
Is
that
maybe
there's
been
one
of
the
parks?
F
Jonathan
bridges
for
the
record,
thank
you
for
the
question,
so
the
the
current
the
procedures
for
that
won't
change.
Currently
a
park
supervisor,
for
example,
would
submit
a
request
for
to
access
those
funds
and
then
goes
to
the
region
manager
and
then
from
there.
It
goes
to
the
deputy
administrator
and
then
to
our
administrator
and
goes
all
the
way
up
to
the
director's
office.
So
there's
quite
a
bit
of
a
check
and
balance
to
utilize
those
funds.
If
that
answers
your
question.
H
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
could
you
tell
me,
does
the
division
have
who
has
a
the
jurisdiction
over
the
area
over
by
the
agriculture
department
in
reno?
All
that
bear
land
is
where
would
that
fall
under?
Would
that
fall
under
the
division
of
parks?
That's
where
the
agriculture
lab
is,
and
all
that
bear
land
that
agriculture
land
out
there,
who
actually
controls
that?
Do
you
know.
A
Okay,
seeing
none
thank
you
very
much,
mr
renders
for
the
presentation
with
that.
We
will
open
testimony
on
senate
bill
53.,
we'll
start
with
anyone
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
support
first
in
the
room,
seeing
none
bps.
Do
we
have
anybody
on
the
phone
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
support
of
sb53.
A
A
A
A
All
right,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
presentation
with
that.
We
will
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
53
and
we'll
move
on
to
the
last
bill
on
our
agenda
today,
which
is
senate
bill
65,
which
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
state
department
of
agriculture
and
I'll
open
the
hearing
on
sb65.
I
see
we
have
director
op
with
us
director.
Whenever
you
are
ready,
you
may
proceed.
I
Thank
you
very
much
sherman
and
members
of
the
committee.
My
name
is
jennifer
ott,
director
of
the
department
of
agriculture.
Thank
you
for
allowing
me
to
present
to
you
senate
bill
65,
which
is
a
cleanup
bill,
updating
provisions
relating
to
the
department
of
agriculture
to
provide
a
little
background.
After
the
2019
legislative
session,
the
department
of
agriculture
developed
a
five-year
strategic
plan
to
establish
clear
goals
for
the
department's
future
goal
number.
One
of
that
plan
is
to
modernize
our
statutory
and
regulatory
framework
senate
bill.
I
I
The
bill
does
not
create
any
positions
new
to
the
department
or
require
any
additional
funding.
It
simply
formalizes
existing
positions
as
part
of
the
makeup
of
the
department
I
have
in
the
past,
received
some
questions
regarding
the
deletion
of
language.
This
bill
does
not
remove
authority
or
ad
authority.
It
just
changes
the
language
to
reference
nrs,
rather
than
trying
to
capture
all
nrs
by
specific
wording.
This
will
help
the
department
comply
with
future
nrs
changes
made
by
the
legislature.
I
And
two
thank
you
sections
one
and
two
names:
the
division
of
administrative
services
and
lists
the
five
divisions
as
existing
in
the
department
inclusive
of
the
name
changes
though
the
administration
division
has
existed
in
the
department
for
some
time
and
performance,
vital
functions
such
as
fiscal
administration
and
I.t.
It
was
not
previously
recognized
in
statute,
section
3,
5,
12
and
13
changes,
the
name
of
the
division
of
consumer
equitability
to
the
division
of
measurement
standards,
thusly
the
state
sealer
of
consumer
equitability
to
the
state
sealer
of
measurement
standards.
I
I
A
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
a
couple
questions
if
I
might
on
the
bill
itself-
and
I
have
a
copy
of
the
actual
fashion
bill
here
so
under
section
six
number
two,
it
states
the
step
state
veterinarian
must
and
then
it
says,
have
to
be
a
graduate.
Do
they
have
to
have
a
nevada
license?
Do
they
have
to
be
a
licensed
veterinarian
in
the
state
of
nevada.
I
Jennifer
ought
for
the
record:
no,
they
do
well,
they
have
to.
They
will
have
a
license
in
order
to
be
a
state
veterinarian,
but
not
for
the
recruitment
requirements.
We
did
not
want
to
put
that
in
statute
because
we
wanted
to
have
the
ability
to
recruit,
licensed
veterinarians
from
other
states
or
other
countries
potentially,
so
we
wanted
to
keep
that
recruitment,
but
we
would
require
it
as
a
job
in
an
unclassified
position
for
them
to
have
a
nevada
license.
D
D
I
mean
we
hire
physicians
from
out
of
the
state
all
the
time,
but
they
have
to
be
able
to
get
a
license,
be
licensed
in
the
state
of
addis.
Are
you
going
to
mandate
somewhere
that
the
state
veterinarian
has
or
is
qualified
and
must
have
when
we
ask
our
attorney
general
to
hire
licensed
nevada
attorneys?
I'm
just
curious
about
that.
I
Jennifer
opt
for
the
record.
Yes,
thank
you
for
your
question.
I
I
understand
your
concern.
Like
I
said
you
know,
we
just
don't
have
it
in
statute.
It's
part
of
hiring
requirements.
D
D
That
will
be
a
requirement
that
they
must
be
licensed
in
the
state
of
nevada.
Ultimately,
and
then
my
remember
follow
another
question,
mr
chip,
so
on
section
9,
all
the
language
that
you're
deleting
part
of
that
has
some
important
functions
and
part
of
that
is
to
participate
in
land
use
relating
to
the
competition
for
food
and
water
between
livestock
and
wildlife,
to
ensure
the
maintenance
of
the
habitat
for
livestock
and
wildlife.
D
So
are
they're,
not
you're
not
going
to
have
those
duties
anymore,
that
the
administrator
will
not
have
that
duty
and
who,
if
not
the
administrator,
who
will
be
doing
that.
I
Jennifer
ought
for
the
record,
like
I
said,
the
the
language
there
is
captured
under
other
nrs,
the
we.
The
reason
why
we
have
it
deleted
under
this
one
is
because
that
is
actually
most
recently
in
the
department
covered
under
the
administrator
for
plant
industries
and
not
animal
industries.
I
D
All
right,
thank
you.
I
guess
I'm
just
concerned
about
our
feral
horses
and
some
of
those
issues,
the
feral
livestock
that's
out
there
under
b.
So
where
can
you
refer
me
to
so
I
could
find
who
who
will
be
responsible
for
that?
Is
there
a
nr
somewhere,
it's
been
a
huge
problem.
We
need.
Somebody
needs
to
be
responsible
for
monitoring
that
I
would
assume
it's
in
your
department,
as
you
said,
and
I'm
just
looking
forward
to.
Where
is
that
and
what
statute
will
that
now
be
in
or
is
it
already
in.
I
Jennifer
up
for
the
record,
yes,
I
apologize
that
specific
section
part
b
is
still
under
animal
industries.
The
the
feral
livestock
is
still
under
animal
industries
and
it
is
covered
under
nrs
569
and
I'm
happy
to
provide
you
in
the
committee
an
exact
listing
of
where
those
are
great.
D
G
Thank
you
sharon.
Thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
I'm
sorry.
If
I
missed
this,
I
don't
think
I
did
the
the
reduction
from
five
years
to
three
years.
Can
you
please
discuss
that
and
what
the
basis
is
for
that.
I
Sure
jennifer
offered
the
record
under
section
six.
Is
the
state
veterinarian
reduction
of
regulatory
experience
from
five
years
to
three
years
over
the
past
few
years,
and
and
I
wanna
just
clarify
regulatory
experience-
is
not
veterinary
experience,
it's
specific
to
regulations,
and
so
we
were
finding
just
a
recruitment
to
be
difficult,
for
we
found
many
veterinarians,
but
very
few.
A
H
Thank
you,
chair
and
members
of
the
committee.
It
is
great
to
be
here
in
person
with
you
and
see
all
of
you
for
the
record.
My
name
is
elliot
mallon
representing
the
nevada,
petroleum
marketers
and
convenience
store
association.
We
just
want
to
be
on
the
record
supporting
this
legislation,
and
I
appreciate
the
department
of
agriculture
and
director
ott
for
bringing
this
bill
forward.
H
A
A
A
I
No
thank
you
chairman.
I
appreciate
you
considering
this
bill.
A
Thank
you
very
much
with
that.
I
will
close
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
65.
and
members
that
now
takes
us
to
the
last
item
on
our
agenda
for
today,
which
is
public
comment
as
a
reminder.
In
order
to
provide
public
comment,
you
must
register
either
to
join
us
here
in
the
legislative
building
or
provide
comment
by
phone.
We
ask
that
you
limit
your
remarks
to
two
minutes
and
clearly
state
and
spell
your
name
before
beginning
with
that,
seeing
none
in
person
broadcast.
A
Minutes
yeah,
it's
amazing.
What
being
in
person
can
do,
I
think
for
for
expediting
things.
Thank
you
again
to
all
of
the
sponsors
and
presenters
of
the
bills.
Thank
you,
members
for
your
time
and
attention
and
for
those
who
did
join
us
to
provide
your
your
testimony
and
thoughts
with
that.
Our
next
meeting
will
be
on
monday,
the
26th
of
april
at
4pm
and
without
this
meeting
is.