►
From YouTube: 3/25/2021 - Senate 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
Good
afternoon,
the
senate
committee
on
natural
resources
will
now
come
to
order
members
and
presenters.
Please
remember
to
mute
your
microphone
when
you
are
not
speaking.
Will
our
secretary
please
proceed
to
call
the
role.
D
A
And
I'm
here
and
let
the
record
reflect
that
we
will
mark
vice
chair
tribal
excuse
for
now.
Thank
you.
I'm.
B
A
Thank
you
welcome
everyone
to
the
senate
committee
on
natural
resources
now
for
anyone
who
has
not
participated
in
these
virtual
legislative
meetings.
Yet
I
will
quickly
explain
how
the
virtual
committee
meetings
are
being
conducted
for
the
2021
legislative
session.
As
you
know,
the
legislative
building
is
currently
closed
to
the
public,
so
all
committee
meetings
will
be
held
virtually
meaning
that
committee
members
staff
and
everyone
else
will
participate
either
through
zoom
video
conference
or
by
telephone.
A
However,
there
are
various
ways
that
members
of
the
public
can
engage
with
us
and
participate
throughout
the
process.
As
in
previous
sessions,
all
committee-related
information
is
available
on
the
nevada
electronic
legislative
information
system
commonly
referred
to
as
nellis,
which
is
accessible
through
the
legislature's
website.
A
There
are
four
main
ways
that
you
can
engage
with
this
committee,
the
first
one
being
registering
to
participate
in
the
committee
meeting
through
the
new
system
on
or
on
list
which
places
you
in
line
to
testify
on
a
bill
or
provide
public
comment
during
the
meeting
you
can
also
submit
written
testimony
to
the
committee's
email
address.
Share
your
opinion,
via
the
legislature's
opinion,
application
on
nellis
and
view
committee
meetings
through
nellis
or
on
the
legislature's
youtube
channel
to
testify
on
a
bill
or
provide
public
comment
during
the
201
legislative
session.
A
Members
of
the
public
must
first
register
for
the
meeting
that
you
would
like
to
participate
in
community
meetings
are
listed
in
several
places
on
nellis
to
register.
Simply
click
click
on
the
participate
button
near
the
meeting
date
and
time
fill
out
the
required
information,
and
you
will
receive
a
confirmation
screen
with
the
details
provided
beyond
then,
just
as
a
note
that,
while
meeting
registration
is
required
to
participate,
it
does
not
guarantee
you
a
spot
to
speak
in
similar
to
previous
sessions.
Testimony
and
public
comment
may
be
limited
due
to
time
constraints.
A
A
Today
we
will
be
hearing
two
bills
senate
bill,
112
and
senate
bill
336.
First,
though,
I
would
like
to
do
a
committee
introduction
of
a
bdr
committee
members.
As
you
know,
pursuant
to
joint
standing
rule
14,
a
majority
of
the
members
of
the
committee
must
vote
to
introduce
legislation
on
behalf
of
the
committee.
As
noted
in
our
committee
rule
six
committee
introductions
may
be
for
accommodation
only
and
is
not
to
be
considered
as
approval
of
a
measure.
A
A
A
I
don't
see
none.
Will
the
committee
secretary
please
proceed
to
follow
the
rule.
F
A
And
I
am
a
yes
motion
carries
so
the
bill
will
now
be
bdr
when
I'll
be
introduced.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
to
the
community
members
all
right.
Let's
go
ahead
and
proceed
to
our
bills,
so
the
first
one
we'll
start
with
is
senate
bill
112..
I
will
go
ahead
and
open
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
112..
This
measure
exempts
certain
products
of
for
the
treatment
of
domestic
animals
from
regulation
or
under
state
law,
while
senator
hansen's
name
is
on
the
bill.
A
I
believe
there
is
a
lineup
of
presenters,
which
would
include
senator
settlemyre
trevor
newhouse,
brett,
kent
and
mike
hillerby.
Let's
go
ahead
and
give
the
floor
to
senator
hansen
to
introduce
us
to
this
bill.
G
Thank
thanks,
checkernadi
yeah,
this
bill.
I
know,
like
I
told
her
before
very
little.
This
was
actually
done
on
behalf
of
senator
settlemeyer
because
he
ran
out
of
bdrs.
I
was
all
for
it
simply
because
it
was
reducing
some
unnecessary
regulations,
but
before
I
get
in
any
deeper
over
my
head,
with
your
permission,
I'd
like
to
turn
it
over
to
senator
settlemeyer.
D
Thank
you
for
that.
Senator
hanson
and
thank
you
chairman,
donate
for
hearing
the
bill
today.
This
issue
actually
interesting
enough
sims
back
from
my
early
teens
when
I
was
walking
around
the
ranch
with
my
dad
and
you
walk
out
in
the
field
and
you
actually
see
little
baby
calves,
fetuses
aborted
dead
in
the
field,
no
hair
on
them
and
as
a
kid
I'm
sitting
here
shaking
my
head
going
dad
what's
what's
going
on.
D
Why
are
these
what's
going
on
with
this
and
my
dad
looked
at
me
and
he
says:
well,
it's
episodic
ovine
abortion
also
known
as
foothill
abortion,
and
it's
like.
Well,
that's
terrible!
You
know,
let's,
let's
vaccinate
them
can't
there's
no
vaccine!
Well
what
causes
it
well,
it's
caused
initially
enough,
because
unr
was
the
premier
entity
university
of
nevada.
You
know
for
those
that
don't
know
that
acronym
sorry,
it's
caused
by
a
deer
kick
so
deers
will
come
down
to
an
area
and
they'll
jump
off
of
the
deer.
D
But
luckily
unr
did
the
research
and
figured
out
that
it
was
the
deer
well
just
recently,
this
last
year
they
finally
found
a
cure,
which
is
great
news
for
those
individuals
that
are
in
those
foothill
areas
that
where
this
is
more
prevalent
now
myself,
I
got
out
of
the
range
lands
in
california,
and
so
I've
not
really
had
that
type
of
loss.
However,
my
vet
contacted
me
and
said
james.
They
finally
came
up
with
a
cure.
Some
40
odd
years
later,
in
conjunction
with
you
know,
university
nevada,
reno
and
davis.
D
However,
the
maker's
not
going
to
sell
it
in
nevada.
Well,
that's
crazy.
Unr
was
the
premier
company.
You
helped
reading
this
about
not
company.
You
know
university
helped
bring
this
about.
Well,
what
can
we
done
and
it
ended
up
being
a
problem
that,
in
the
manufacturer's
opinion
that
they're
governed,
because
they
are
actually
a
virus,
serum
toxin
and
they're
governed
by
the
virus-
serum
toxin
act,
which
states
that
only
the
federal
government
can
regulate
them
and
they're
not
to
be
regulated
by
the
state
in
any
way,
shape
or
form.
D
So
this
particular
substance
is
completely
legally
used
in
nevada,
but
because
they
weren't
licensed
by
the
board
of
pharmacy,
because
in
their
opinion,
they
can't
be
licensed
by
them
due
to
preemption
of
the
federal
level,
they
weren't
getting
a
license
in
nevada.
So
that
meant
interesting
enough.
That
nevada
veterinarians
were
literally
driving
to
other
states
to
get
this
medicine
in
order
to
administer
it,
and
that
just
seems
kind
of
crazy
to
be
basically
having
a
veterinarian
spend
time
on
the
road
to
do
this,
which
obviously
adds
to
the
cost.
D
But
this
is
also
a
substance
that
has
to
be
kept
with
liquid
nitrogen.
The
same
way
that
madera
or
pfizer
rather
is
for
cova
19
so
having
to
use
tanks
with
liquid
nitrogen
to
transport.
This
in
discussions
with
the
manufacturer,
as
well
as
the
nevada
pharmacy
board,
through
work
with
mr
hillerby,
which
I'm
pleased
to
be
online
as
well.
We
have
come
up
with
an
amendment
that
I
forwarded
to
you
chairman
and
to
the
rest
of
the
committee.
D
A
A
Thank
you
senator
zettelmeier,
mr
mike
kellerby.
Please
proceed
when
you
are
ready.
H
H
I
want
to
thank
senator
settlemyre
and
hanson
for
reaching
out
when
they
had
the
bill
and
ask
us
if
there
was
a
any
any
issues
or
ways
to
do
that.
The
board
is
officially
neutral
on
legislation.
We
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
weigh
in
and
find
the
best
way
to
craft
that
the
board
had
been
working
with
representatives
of
the
manufacturer
for
some
time,
looking
for
a
way
to
acknowledge
the
federal
law
and
still
be
consistent
with
the
rest
of
nevada
law
and
the
board
of
pharmacy's
duties.
H
So
the
the
amendment
and
now
I'm
delivered
to
section
1.5
on
page
two
explains
the
u.s
veterinary
biologics
establishment
license
process
and
allows
manufacturers
that
have
that
qualification
to
sell
into
the
state
for
use
in
livestock.
Those
virus,
serum
toxins
medications
that
are
covered
by
that.
I
would
just
say
it
might
be
helpful
for
the
committee.
Nevada
has
long
had
a
practice
of
allowing
ranchers
and
dealers
in
livestock
to
be
able
to
get
the
larger
quantities
of
drugs
for
use
on
ranches
with
livestock.
That's
in
nrs
454.301
that
dates
back
to
the
early
1970s.
H
So
it's
long
been
a
practice
that
again,
ranchers
with
large
animal
livestock
have
been
able
to
do
their
own
vaccinations
and
possess
and
administer
those
drugs
on
their
properties,
in
addition
to
the
ranchers
dealers
and
the
livestock
are
able
to
as
well.
So.
Our
attempt
here
was
to
accurately
capture
the
provisions
of
the
federal
law,
provide
an
exemption,
limited
exemption
to
nevada
law
for
those
drugs
and
for
use
in
those
lives
in
livestock.
H
The
specific
references
in
line
14
of
the
amendment
and
that's
in
section
1.5
sub
2b,
are
for
essentially
cows,
sheep,
goats
and
pigs,
and
those
are
the
reference
in
571,
nrs,
571.022,
brett
kant.
The
general
counsel
for
the
board
of
pharmacy
is
also
here
and
available
answer
questions.
If
that
adequately
explains
it
for
the
committee,
I
will
stop
and
we'll
stand
for
any
questions.
A
D
People
are
good
to
presume
with
questions
unless
the
industry
happens
to
be
on
the
line
and
wishes
to
talk
at
this
time.
If
you
would
let
them
that'd
be
good.
The
only
thing
within
the
amendment
as
I'm
looking
at
now,
I
received
it
earlier
today.
I
think
our
intention,
mr
hillary,
under
line
14
and
15,
was
to
go
one
three,
four,
five
and
six.
Unfortunately,
five
was
left
out.
Five
is
dealing
with
ovine
species,
which
is
sheep.
In
that
respect,
I
think
the
desire
was
to
have
them
be
in
the
bill
as
well.
H
A
Thank
you
chair.
Thank
you,
senator
settlemeyer,
mr
mildred.
Okay,
let's
go
ahead
and
proceed
with
any
questions
at
this
time.
Do
any
of
the
community
members
have
any
questions
for
this
bill?
Senator
could.
E
You
thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
to
either
senator
sutter
meyer
or
mr
ellerbe
I
okay.
Now
I
understand
that
you're
going
to
be
able
to
the
company
will
be
able
then
to
bring
the
product
into
nevada.
Will
they
be
able
to
then
distribute
it
with
the.
D
E
Yes,
I
thank
you,
mr
settlemeyer.
I
I
would
just
curious
if
the
board
of
pharmacy
was
going
to
have
any
interaction,
or
would
there
be
any
additional
licensure
required
by
the
state
of
nevada
say
with
a
wholesale
company
or
one
of
these
companies
that
would
in
fact
carry
it.
I
Ready,
thank
you.
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Once
again,
brett
kant,
bratt
kndt
general
counsel,
to
the
state
board
of
pharmacy
and
in
answer
to
the
senator's
question,
the
board
of
pharmacy
does
license
and
regulate
wholesalers
in
our
state.
So
to
the
extent
the
manufacturer
utilizes
a
wholesaler
to
ship
their
product
in
the
state,
it
would
be
customary
and
expected
that
that
wholesaler
would
have
been
licensed
and
regulated
by
the
board.
E
A
follow-up
mr
chair,
then,
then
that
ability
would
be
made
available
to
a
wholesaler
in
the
state.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
they
could
in
fact
reach
out.
J
I
Thank
you
for
the
questions,
everyone
once
again,
brett
kant
in
response.
Yes,
I,
if
I'm
understanding
your
follow
correctly,
a
licensed
wholesaler
in
nevada
could
then
work
with
the
manufacturer
to
distribute
the
product
and
for
sale
in
that.
K
An
amendment
brought
into
the
definition
brought
it
back
to
domestic
animals
as
opposed
to
livestock,
and
I'm
prepared
to
speak
on
why
that's
appropriate
if
the
committee
would
like
me
to.
I
also
have
a
lot
of
background
on
this
bill,
the
purpose,
if,
if
the
committee
wants
it,
I
don't
want
to
waste
time,
but
I
am
here
to
answer
questions
as
an
expert
on
this
bill
and
on
this
on
the
federal
preemption,
if
needed,.
A
K
I
thank
you
very
much,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
all
the
members
of
this
committee,
all
the
senators
that
worked
on
this
bill
and
their
staff,
I'm
not
going
to
retread
ground.
I
had
a
presentation,
but
it
sounds
like
everybody's.
On
the
same
page,
I'm
going
to
jump
right
into
the
idea
that
what
I
don't
I've
got
to
admit,
I'm
not
sure
if
you
guys
are
voting
on
this
now
or
when
it's
going
to
happen.
K
But
the
manufacturer's
position
is
that
the
term
domestic
animals
should
be
instated
into
the
bill
as
opposed
to
livestock,
and
we
want
to
use
the
definition.
That's
in
9
cfr
101.2,
which
is
the
statute
that
defines
all
the
other
material
terms
already
in
the
amendment
already
in
the
bill,
and
it
seems
what
we.
What
with
that
purpose.
The
reason
we
want.
The
reason
why
it's
appropriate
is
because
there's
no
rational
reason
to
limit
categories
of
animals
that
receive
vaccines
that
are
exempted
by
this
bill.
K
All
usda
through
the
virus.
Serum
toxin
act,
specifically
through
aphis,
has
has
authority
over
all
animal
vaccines,
not
just
cattle
or
or
or
pigs
or
anything,
and
to
eliminate
to
line
to
illuminate
certain
categories
of
animals
which
is
what's
being
proposed
here
under
the
nrs
definition
of
livestock
seems
to
seems
like
it
seems
like
it
seems
like.
K
You
know
I'm
happy
to
answer
those
questions
if
anybody
has
them,
but
but
I
am
here
to
put
forth
that
our
position
as
domestic
animals
is
the
appropriate
term
and
not
livestock,
and
we
have
submitted
there
is
a
there
is
a.
I
did
submit
a
proposed
amendment
on
that
topic
and
I
apologize.
I
don't
I'm
a
california
attorney,
so
I'm
doing
my
best,
but
I
am
but
I'm
here
for
that
purpose
and
I'm
here
to
help
eliminate
this
bill.
As
best
as
I
can-
and
I
appreciate
everybody's
time.
D
Ahead
and
send
you
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
The
concept
of
language
for
you
is
after
submitting
the
language
from
the
industry
and
also
the
language
from
the
pharmacy
board,
to
try
to
find
a
place
to
compromise
where
the
pharmacy
board
felt
comfortable
with
the
progression
of
this
bill,
and
that's
what
you
currently
have
in
front
of
you
as
an
amendment.
If
we
wish
the
body
wishes.
Of
course,
it's
more
than
welcome
to
do
what
it
wants.
D
In
relation
to
the
fact
that
some
of
these
smaller
animals
that
are
not
obviously
large
livestock
starts
to
open
up,
potentially
a
slew
of
toxins
that
potentially
the
pharmacy
board
was
not
normal.
I
was
not
necessarily
comfortable
going
to
that
level,
so
that
is
what
is
in
front
of
you
that
type
of
compromise.
But
again,
mr
chairman
you're,
one
woman,
do
whatever
you
want.
A
Thank
you,
senator
settlemyre.
I
have
one
quick
question
that
it
would
be
helpful
to
clarify
before
proceeding
forward.
I
don't
know
if
you
would
be
able
to
answer
this
or
mr
hillaby
do
you
do
we
need
to
explicitly
provide,
and
maybe
mr
cans
as
well
do
we
need
to
explicitly
provide
that
the
board
can
regulate
whole
sellers
for
the
products?
Is
that
something
that
we
should
be
considering
as
part
of
the
amendment.
D
This
is
the
center
of
settlement.
Mr
ken,
of
course,
can
answer
that
veteran
I
can,
but
in
all
reality
I
believe
they
already
do
regulate
the
whole
sailors,
and
I
know
that
the
ones
that
I
deal
with
are
already
licensed
with
the
state
board
of
pharmacy
at
this
time,
but
if
mr
kent
could
elaborate
on
that,
if
I'm
wrong,
I
appreciate
that
too.
I
Thank
you
for
the
question.
Brett
kemp
for
the
record
and
senator
settlemeyer
is
correct
under
current
nevada
law
and
has
been
the
long-standing
practice
pursuant
to
that
law.
Wholesalers
are
licensed
and
regulated
by
the
state
board
of
pharmacy.
The
specific
statutory
citation
for
that
is
nrs
639.233.
A
Thank
you,
mr
kant.
Senator
hanson
did
you
have
any
questions
that
you'd
like
to
mention
before
we
proceeded
to
testimony?
No,
it
was.
K
D
I
was
keeping
everyone
in
the
committee
informed
of
the
amendments
as
they
came
up
and
then
again,
I
sat
down
working
with
the
pharmacy
board
on
amendment
3142,
which
I
I
feel
is
the
best
course
currently
in
front
of
this
committee.
However,
it
is,
as
we
all
know,
legislation
once
you
turn
it
over.
It
becomes
a
work
product
of
the
committee,
and
so
it's
up
to
you
guys.
I
I
feel
myself.
D
The
3142
is
the
most
logical
way
to
proceed
forward
because
it
solves
the
problem
which
again
the
issue
in
front
of
me
at
least,
was
the
concept
of
allowing
the
episodic
bovine
abortion
drug
developed
in
combination
with
unr
and
davis.
An
idea
lab
is
allowed
to
be
sold
in
the
state
of
nevada,
rather
than
having
our
veterinarians
having
to
travel
out
of
state
to
acquire
it,
and
this
amendment
accomplishes
just
that
and
does
open
it
up
a
little
bit
more,
but
hopefully
not
so
much
that
it
causes
any
detrimental
problems
in
the
state
of
nevada.
A
Thank
you
senator
settlement
senator
brooks.
Did
you
want
to
ask
any
clarification
journey
yeah.
D
This
is
senator
settler
through
you,
mr
chairman
of
senator,
brooks
yes,
I
feel
that
3142
is
the
best
acknowledgement
and
is
what
I
feel
combines
the
desired
effect.
Maybe
it
doesn't
go
as
far
as
the
industry,
or
rather
the
company
may
wish
to
go
and
in
some
respects
I
think
it
actually
goes
a
little
further
than
probably
at
times
the
pharmacy
board
wishes
to
go.
But
in
that
respect
I
think
we're
in
a
good
place
and
being
a
natural
resource.
I
guess
you
call
that
dog
law
right
where
not
everybody's
a
hundred
percent
happy.
A
Thank
you,
senator
brooks
and
senator
cinema,
any
other
last-minute
questions
before
we
proceed
to
testimony.
Okay,
I
think
we
are
good
to
go.
Let's
go
ahead
and
proceed
with
the
testimony.
As
a
reminder,
we
will
be
limiting
all
testifiers
to
two
minutes.
Each
testifiers
are
encouraged
to
summarize
their
positions
and
submit
more
comprehensive
testimony
in
writing.
Eps
is
there
anyone
on
the
line
wishing
to
provide
support
testimony
for
sb112
at
this
time.
L
L
J
A
Thank
you,
bps.
Is
there
anyone
on
the
line
wishing
to
provide
opposition
testimony.
L
Thank
you
chair.
Actually,
as
I
just
as
I
said,
that
there
is
an
additional
caller
that
would
like
to
add
to
support
testimony.
Would
you
like
to
hear
that
now.
L
B
Hello
good
afternoon
and
thank
you,
I
was
actually
on
hold
for
the
next
bill,
but
this
bill
came
up
and
I
do
have
an
interest
in
it.
I
would
be
totally
in
support
of
this
bill.
We
do
raise
cattle
and
have
been
affected
by
this
kick
disease.
B
Last
year
we
had,
I
believe
we
lost
four
calves.
We
have
a
small
operation,
but
I
we
lost
four
cabs
last
year
to
this
tick
disease
and
that's
a
huge
hit.
Even
for
somebody
like
myself-
and
I
forgot
I'm
sorry-
my
name
is
janae
j
e
n
n
e
rhodes,
r-h-o-d-e-s
and
I
live
in
reno
nevada
and
I
am
in
support
of
passing
this
bill.
Thank
you
for
your.
L
Time
again
to
testify
in
support
on
senate
bill
112,
please
press
star
9
now
to
take
your
place
in
the
queue
if
you've
recently
joined
the.
L
A
L
L
A
Thank
you
bps
and
last
but
not
least,
is
there
anyone
on
the
line
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
neutral
on
sb112.
L
A
Thank
you,
vps
all
right.
Do
I
have
any
last-minute
comments
from
either
senator
hansen
or
senator
settlemyer
at
this
time,
senator
settlemyre.
Do
you
want
to
go
ahead
and
proceed.
D
Thank
you
chairman.
I
greatly
appreciate
the
opportunity,
the
cattlemen's
association
ser,
nina
laxalt
texted
me
and
they're
in
another
committee.
They
wanted
to
lodge
their
support
for
it.
In
that
respect,
and
I
worked
with
my
veterinarian
randy
wallstrom
on
it.
I
even
worked
with
a
veterinarian
out
of
eureka
by
the
name
of
jj,
funny
name
gokuchiya,
with
the
bill
too.
So
if
it's
terribly
messed
up,
we
can
always
just
blame
them.
So
that's
also
the
good
news.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman
and
committee
for
your
time
today.
A
Thank
you,
senator
settlemyre,
all
right.
I
think
we
are
good
to
go
so
I
will
now
go
ahead
and
close
the
hearing
on
sb112.
A
Just
as
a
reminder,
the
committee
will
not
be
taking
any
action
on
this
build
today,
but
it
may
bring
it
back
for
a
future
work
session.
Great
all
right.
Let's
go
ahead
and
move
to
our
next
bill
senate
bill
336.
I
will
go
ahead
and
open
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
336.
This
measure
revises
provisions
governing
veterinary
medicine.
I
believe
we
have
three
presenters
for
sb
336.
A
I
don't
see
one
presenter
bps:
can
we
go
for
on
a
two
minute
recess
really.
A
A
That's
so
I
just
gotta
note
that
senator
key
character
will
be
on
soon,
so
let's
just
go
ahead
and
wait
for
him.
So
that
way
there
you
go
perfect.
A
Senator
keith
senator
key
clipper
we're
on
recess
right
now.
So
as
long
as
you're
good,
we
can
come
back
good
to
go
whenever
you're
ready.
For
me,
mr
trump.
Thank
you
all
right,
bps,
we're
ready
when
you
are.
A
Thank
you
all.
Let's
go
ahead
and
proceed
with
senate
bill
336.
As
I
was
mentioning,
I
will
open
the
hearing
on
senate
bill
336.
This
measure
revises
provision
governor
governing
veterinary
medicine.
We
have
three
presenters
for
this
bill.
We
have
senator
keith,
keffer
ina
laxalt,
representing
the
nevada
state
board
of
veteran
medical
examiners
and
jennifer
pettigo
executive
director
of
the
nevada
state
board
of
veterinary
medical
examiners.
Senator
keith
keffer.
Please
proceed.
O
Thank
you
very
much,
mr
chairman,
members
of
the
committee.
For
the
record.
My
name
is
ben
kikefor.
I
represent
senate
district
16,
which
is
south
washoe
county
and
all
of
carson
city,
a
pleasure
to
be
here
today
before
you
present
senate
bill
336,
which
is
a
bill
that
was
brought
to
me
by
the
board
of
veterinary
medical
examiners,
to
update
their
statutes
and
hopefully
make
things
a
little
bit
cleaner
and
easier
for
them
in
their
authority
as
regulatory
board
over
veterinary
medical
exam
or
the
veterinary
profession.
O
So
I'm
going
to
turn
it
over
to
the
to
the
professionals
to
present
the
bill
and
its
contents.
I
will
say,
however,
that
during
comment
you
may
hear
testimony
from
alyssa
dave
worth
who
represents
the
veterinary
medical
association.
O
We
have
been
talking
with
her
about
a
proposed
amendment
that
is,
I
would
deem
friendly
if
it's
brought
up
but
she's
the
only
person
who
I've
spoken
to
about
potential
changes
to
this
bill.
So
that's
that's
where
we're
at
with
friendly
amendments.
M
as
written,
and
I'm
going
to
qualify
that
later
on
when
I'm
done
going
through
the
11
changes
that
we're
requesting
here
there
are
11
changes,
as
I
just
said,
one
ensures
that
specialists
that
work
in
nevada
are
licensed
in
the
state
and
are
subject
to
rules
and
regulations.
M
Two
removes
the
overly
burdensome
and
outdated
provision
requiring
service
of
an
administrative
complaint,
be
posted
in
the
newspaper
when
correspondence
to
a
license
cannot
be
delivered
by
certified
mail
or
through
a
process.
Server
three
allows
the
board
the
latitude
to
review
and,
if
satisf,
satisfied
with
the
methods
of
the
organization
approve
an
organization
to
evaluate
graduates
of
foreign
veterinary
programs
that
were
not
accredited
by
the
american
veterinary
medical
association.
M
M
M
M
Secondly,
I
think
you're
going
to
hear
a
lot
of
opposition
to
the
bill,
and-
and
I
want
to
clarify
some
things-
that
I've
read
on
twitter
about
opposition
to
this
bill.
There
are
no
changes
to
any
scope
of
practice
in
this
bill
whatsoever,
and
I
think
there
may
be
concerns
that
might
be
misread
that
in
sections
two
and
three,
where
there's
definitions,
I've
got
to
look
at
it
really
quickly.
M
M
M
I'm
a
little
concerned
that
those
might
be
the
opposition
that
they're
misreading
that
and
maybe
misrepresenting
that
the
changes
that
are
presented
in
the
bill
to
describe
those
two
professions
or
practices
may
be
changing
those
practices
but
in
fact,
they're
not
they're,
just
bringing
into
alignment
those
definitions
that
have
been
in
nac
for
many
many
years
and
again,
this
this
bill
does
not
make
any
changes
whatsoever
to
any
scope
of
practice,
and
with
that
I
will
turn
it
over
to
jennifer
pedego
and
will
be
available
for
questions
following
testimony.
N
You
thank
you
to
the
chair
in
the
committee
as
well
as
senator
settlemeyer.
I'm
sorry
senator
keith
effort.
It's
been
a
long
session
already,
so
I
just
wanted
to
go
through
section
by
section
to
give
a
little
bit
of
clarification
on
the
sections.
N
We
are
trying
to
streamline
the
definition
and
clarify
for
licensees
and
applica
or
registrants,
which
include
and
is
defined
later
in
the
the
bill
just
to
make
conforming
changes
so
that
it's
clear
that
registrants
and
licensees
are
all
under
the
same
requirements
and
subject
to
the
same
treatment.
N
So
sections
four
and
five
both
add
the
update,
the
registration
and
I'm
sorry
they
define
registered
and
registrant,
which
is
again
that
was
added
by
lcb
for
clarification.
Later
in
the
chapter
we
do
in
section,
6
have
a
list
of
applicants
that
are
not
included
in
this,
which
include
facility
registrations,
veterinarians
registered
the
da
and
board
of
pharmacy
for
controlled
substances,
euthanasia,
technicians
who
also
handle
controlled
substances
and
agencies
that
employ
euthanasia,
technicians.
N
N
Section
8
explains
the
ability
for
the
board
to
refuse
the
issuance
of
a
registration
for
acts
that
would
constitute
disciplinary
action,
which
is
again
a
conforming
change
to
updating
that
language
as
well
as
section
9.
N
now
section
10
is
a
section
which
nina
mentioned.
Ms
lackfelt
mentioned
that
we
are
working
with
the
nvma
to
suss
out
how
we
can
reach
an
agreement
on
how
this
would
best
be
applicable.
N
As
currently
written,
it
eliminates
an
exemption
for
diplomates,
which
are
specialists
to
work
for
30
days
or
fewer,
without
a
license
in
nevada
and
that's
within
a
12-month
period,
so
we're
working
on
them
to
make
sure
we
don't
restrict
the
number
of
registered
specialists
that
may
come
into
the
state
and
provide
vital
work.
So
we
are
working
with
them
on
that
and
that's
in
paragraph
two
paragraph
one
allows
veterinary
technicians
licensed
veterinary
technicians
to
administer
vaccines
for
zoonotic
diseases
under
active
veterinary
supervision.
N
Direct
supervision,
section
11,
removes
a
requirement
regarding
the
posting
of
notice
of
a
hearing
or
action
item
in
a
newspaper
for
four
consecutive
weeks.
If
an
individual
is
not
able
to
be
reached
by
either
a
process
server
or
certified
mail
section
12
is
also
a
conforming
change
to
the
registration
language.
N
Section
13,
I'm
sorry
section,
14,
15
and
16
also
makes
that
licensee
registering
conforming
change.
Section
17
adds
registrants
to
those
who
have
who
may
have
a
complaint
filed
against
them.
N
Just
like
any
licensee
section
18
clarifies
that
the
practice
of
registrations,
just
like
the
practice
of
licensees
so
in
veterinary
field
under
the
board,
without
any
of
the
registrations,
is
considered
unlawful,
section
19
allows
the
board
to
review
any
agency
that
evaluates
it's
a
kind
of
a
clearing
house
for
veterinarians
that
apply
to
work
in
nevada,
but
have
not
graduated
from
an
avma
accredited
college.
That
is
also
a
section
we're
working
on
the
nvma,
with
in
section
20
again
we're
updating
the
application
requirements
to
clarify
that
it
includes
registrants
and
licensees.
N
Section
21
requires
euthanasia
technicians
that
surrender
their
license
to
also
notify
the
board
of
pharmacy,
as
well
as
the
board
within
15
days,
and
the
reason
for
that
is
euthanasia.
Technicians
have
the
ability
they
have
a
controlled
substance,
registration
with
the
board
of
pharmacy,
but
that
is
contingent
on
them
working
in
an
agency
which
is
defined
as
a
humane
society,
regional,
animal
services,
county
animal
control,
those
types
of
agencies,
so
we
thought
it
was
important
to
update
that
they
report
within
a
specified
time
frame.
N
Section
22
changes,
as
ms
laxalt
explained,
the
deadline
for
renewal
from
december
31st
of
every
year
to
june
30th
of
every
other
year.
That's
an
administrative
change
to
help
with
efficiency
and
also
to
help
our
licensees,
who
are
very
busy
during
christmas,
as
are
most
of
us,
and
I
think
they'll
be
really
happy
with
that.
N
We
changed
that
to
ensure
that
it
was
a
finding
of
malpractice
and
not
just
an
allegation
so
that
we
can,
if
needed,
act
or
reach
out
to
any
complainants
that
might
be
involved.
N
Section
25
makes
a
similar
changes
previously
mentioned
to
allow
licensed
veterinary
technicians
to
administer
zoonotic
vaccines.
26
and
27
are
also
similar.
Registered
licensee
updates.
N
Section
28
requires
the
referring
veterinarian
to
disclose
any
fiduciary
interest
in
a
facility
to
which
they
may
refer
a
client
and
that
they
make
notice
that
their
treatment,
the
referring
veterinarian's
treatment,
is
not
contingent
on
that
owner.
Utilizing
that
service
sections
29
through
33
make
registrant
and
licensee
distinctions
to
update
that
language.
N
Section
34
adds
the
ability
for
the
board
to
consider
complaints
within
a
committee
and
the
impetus
behind
that
was
a
due
process
issue.
We
wanted
to
make
sure
that
if
a
registrant
or
a
licensee
was
the
subject
of
a
complaint
and
was
found
to
have
disciplinary
action
before
a
committee,
they
could
then
appeal
to
the
remainder
of
the
board
if
they
felt
that
they
would
like
a
hearing
and
so
that
a
full
hearing.
A
Thank
you
so
much
to
all
the
presenters,
including
miss
jennifer,
pedego,
senator
keith,
keffer
and
me
miss
nina
laxalt.
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
content
that
we
just
went
over
right
now.
So
I'll
give
a
few
a
few
seconds
just
to
let
the
senators
digest,
but
I
know
a
few
of
them
already
have
some
questions
looks
like
senator
hansen's
already
unmuted
so
go
for
it.
G
G
If
you
do
me
a
favor
and
check
that
opinion
poll
thing,
I
want
to
find
out
what's
going
on
here,
the
the
concerns
everybody
seem
to
have
is
apparently
what
lcb
put
back
in
the
bill,
we're
going
to
start
licensing
people,
apparently
they
already
are
licensed
under
nac,
but
normally
nac
has
to
be
based
on
nrs.
G
So
the
idea
that
we're
going
to
start
having
the
don't
ask
me
how
you
do
that,
but
who
do
chiropractic
work
on
horses
are
gonna
have
to
be
licensed.
Now,
that's
a
that's,
apparently,
a
huge
red
flag
and
the
penalties,
the
penalties
are
gonna,
put
people
in
jail
for
popping
horses
back
or
whatever.
That's
just
crazy
to
me.
So
I
don't
know
where,
where
that,
apparently,
that
was
lcb
also,
I
guess
the
biggest
question.
What
what
problem
are
we
trying
to
solve
with
the
the
horse,
chiropractic
people
and
and
the
what's?
O
I'll
start
really
quickly
appreciate
it
senator
hansen.
This
is
senator
keith
keffer
for
the
record.
So
I
look.
I
I
understand
that
it's
you
know
the
concern
that
people
have
about
potentially
seeing
themselves
have
to
be
registered
and
new,
but
I
think
that
if
you
look
at
what
is
currently
in
nac,
the
definitions
for
animal
chiropractic
and
animal
physical
therapy
are
already
instead
are
already
in
the
administrative
code,
as
is
the
requirement
that,
if
you
practice
in
those
one
of
those
two
areas
that
you
register
with
with
the
board.
O
So
if,
if
there's
some,
I'm
assertion
that
people
this
is
going
to
require
people
to
register
now,
that's
just
not
the
case,
so
I
I
think
that
perhaps
mrs
pettigo
could
speak
more
specifically
to
to
to
why
these
these
practices
are
required
to
register
and
if
there
are
any
specific
issues,
we're
fixing.
But
this
doesn't
change
the
requirement
for
registration.
G
I
I
got
that
senator
keeger.
The
question,
though,
is
normally
having
served
on
the
legislative
commission.
You
have
to
have
an
nrs
before
you
have
an
nac
and
if
the
nrs
currently
does
not
require
that
kind
of
licensing,
I'm
kind
of
wondering
and
look,
I
think,
we're
looking
at
it
backwards.
Frankly,
I'd
rather
see
us
go
back
to
nac
and
take
those
people
out
unless
somebody
can
show
a
specific
cause
that
these
people
are
are
harming
animals.
O
Yeah
you
and
I
are
on
the
same
page
on
that
one,
I'm
sorry
ben
keegan
for
the
record.
Look,
I
agree
with
you,
I'm
looking
for
ways
to
get
less
regulation
in
industry,
so
the
I
think
the
board
can
speak
to
that.
Specifically,
I
will
say
that
oftentimes
we
empower
regulatory
boards
to
promulgate
regulations
that
oversee
the
that
are
that
are
pretty
broad
to
oversee
the
industries
that
they
have
regulatory
authority
over.
A
That's
pedego,
I
I
didn't
mean
to
interrupt
you
and
I
know
senator
gokuji
has
a
question.
It
looks
like
we
might
have
to
take
a
quick.
I
don't
want
to
use
the
word
quick
because
it
might
be
a
while
we're
going
to
take
a
recess.
A
Between
now
and
around
we'll
probably
come
back
at
6
pm
so
to
any
senators
that
have
questions,
we
will
resume
this
hearing
and
come
back
after
we
return
from
the
floor
and
then
at
that
point
in
time
we
will
go
ahead
and
take
testimony
from
any
of
the
callers
that
are
looking
to
testify
on
sb336.
A
Thank
you
bps,
and
thank
you
all
to
you
for
all
of
you
joining
the
senate
committee
on
natural
resources.
A
We
left
off
before
recess
talking
about
senate
bill
336
and
we
had
heard
from
the
presenters,
and
we
are
now
back
resuming
to
the
question
and
answer
period
before
we
left
senator
hanson
had
a
question
that
he
had
some
addressed.
A
We
have
our
legal
counsel
alan.
Would
you
like
to
address
anything
before
we
proceed
with
any
further
questions.
P
Thank
you,
chair,
donate
alan
amburn
for
the
record,
so
senator
hansen
was
talking
about
senate
bill
336,
specifically
where
the
regulatory
authority
was
for
establishing
these
specific
types
of
entities.
I
believe
his
specific
point
was
animal
chiropractic,
the
practice
of
animal
chiropractic,
the
practice
of
animal
physical
therapy,
so
nrs638.070
subsection
2
authorizes
the
board
to
adopt
a
variety
of
regulations.
P
Specifically,
it
authorizes
the
board
to
adopt
regulations
concerning
alternate
veterinary
medicine,
which
includes
acupuncture,
chiropractic
procedure,
dentistry
cosmetic
surgery
and
other
types
of
practices,
and
so
it
was
that
type
of
authority
regulatory
authority
that
the
board
used
to
establish
a
governance
of
these
types
of
areas
of
practice
in
regulation.
A
Thank
you,
mr
amburn.
Do
we
have
any
questions
for
the
committee
members
for
any
of
the
bill
presenters?
I
need,
I
think,
senator
good.
You
had
a
few
questions
so,
whenever
you're
ready,
sir.
E
O
Bed,
this
is
senator
key
cover
for
the
record.
I
don't
believe
so,
but
I
would
defer
to
ms
pedego
to
answer
the
info.
N
Thank
you.
Those
specific
registrants
are
not
required
to
work
under
a
veterinarian,
but
in
sorry
I
think
I
I'm
computer
issue
they're
not
required
to
work
under
a
veterinarian,
but
in
collaboration
with
a
veterinarian
or
referral
situation.
If
you
will,
they
are
required
to
share
medical
records
with
the
referring
veterinarian.
So
it
is
a
collaborative
practice.
It's
not
a
an
oversight.
E
All
right
and
thank
you,
ma'am
and,
and
then
I
just
want
to
you,
know,
make
sure
and
restate
because
there
there
has
been
a
flurry
of
you
know,
activity
on
under
section,
10,
there's
nothing
and
again.
I
think
it's
very
clear
that
you
know
you've
got
two
of
this
work.
E
Can
you
can
help
your
your
neighbors,
your
friends
whatever,
as
long
as
you
don't
charge,
that
can
can
in
fact
happen
and
then
also,
if
you
are
the
owner
or
you
work
for
the
owner
of
an
animal
again,
none
of
these
none
of
these
activities
would
be.
In
fact
I
mean
these.
These
are
the
owners
and
or
an
employee
can
do
any
of
this
work
and
again
like
say
it's
it's
out
there,
it's
something
we
customarily
done,
but
there's
been
kind
of
a
flurry.
E
A
lot
of
people
thought
that
this
bill
was
going
to
ban
you
from
either
doing
your
own
work
or
helping.
Someone
else
do
the
work,
and
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
got
that
on
the
record.
There's
nothing
in
the
bill
that
does
that
and
nothing
in
the
bill
that
requires
a
chiropractor
or
a
physical
therapist
to
work
under
a
vet
work
with
I.
I
would
hope
they
would,
but
that's
just
good
medicine.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
so
much
senator
gokula
for
that
question.
Do
we
have
any
other
questions
from
any
other
committee
members
before
we
proceed
with
testimony.
A
Well
before
we
proceed,
I
just
want
to.
I
have
a
quick,
quick
clarification
to
senator
kate
keffer
and
to
miss
pedego.
Just
to
clarify
you
will
be
addressing
the
concerns
that
have
been
brought
forward
between
section
10
and
section.
19.
is
that
that
is
something
that
you
you'll
be
working
to
adjust,
correct
and
section
10.
I'm
referring
to,
I
believe,
that's
on
that's
the
removal
of
the
diplomat
license
and
then
section
19,
I
believe
refers
to.
A
O
Is
thank
you
governor
for
the
record,
mr
chairman.
Thank
you.
We've
had
discussions
with
miss
nate
worth
who
represents
the
veterinary
medical
association,
and
you
know
certainly
the
proposals
that
she's
bringing
forward
are
friendly
to
me
and
then
I
know
that
ms
pedego
is
going
to
get
the
opinion
of
the
board
before
she
can
take
a
formal
position
on
them,
because
the
board
wouldn't
have
voted
on
them
yet
either
way.
Frankly,
because
the
board
hasn't
authorized
it
yet,
but
from
the
sponsor's
perspective,.
N
A
Great
thank
you
and
for
the
record
that
was
miss
jennifer,
better
go
for
the
secretary
taking
the
notes.
Okay,
thank
you
for
addressing
that
question.
I
think
we're
ready
to
go
ahead
and
continue
on
bps.
Oh
as
a
reminder,
we
will
be
limiting
all
testifiers
to
two
minutes.
Each
testifiers
are
encouraged
to
summarize
their
positions
and
submit
more
comprehensive
testimony
in
writing.
Bps
is
there
anyone
online
wishing
to
provide
support
testimony
at
this
time
for
sb
336.
L
A
Let's
give
it
a
few
more
seconds,
I
know
that
we
started
a
little
bit
earlier
than
what
we
mentioned.
The
recess
time
would
commence
back,
so
if
we
can
just
give
it
like
30
seconds
before
we
move
on.
L
Certainly
chair,
thank
you.
We
are
currently
on
support
testimony
on
senate
bill
336.
If
you
have
recently
joined
the
call
and
would
like
to
testify
in
support,
please
press
star
9
now
to
take
your
place
in
the.
L
L
Chair
there
are
no
callers
in
support
at
this
time.
However,
just
as
a
heads
up,
we
are
the
the
callers
are
coming
back
in,
as
I
speak,
I
can
re
say
the
announcement
again
if
you
would
like.
L
L
A
Thank
you
vps
next.
Is
there
anyone
on
the
line
wishing
to
provide
testimony
in
opposition
to
sb
336.
L
L
F
Hi,
mr
chair
and
members
of
the
committee,
thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
speak
today.
My
name
is
zach
rhodes.
For
the
record,
it's
spelled
z-a-c-h.
F
E
r-h-o-e-e-s
and
I'm
calling
as
a
nevada
horse
owner
and
a
certified
equine
dentist
in
opposition
of
senate
bill
336.
I
was
born
and
raised
in
nevada.
F
I've
been
around
horses
all
my
life
and
I've
been
in
the
horse
healthcare
industry
for
about
17
years
now,
I'd
like
to
clarify
some
things
that
the
vet
board
is
claiming
is
untrue,
which
is
that
this
is
somehow
not
changing
the
vet
practice
act
when
literally
in
their
exhibit.
It
says
that
it
ensures
that
specialists
that
work
in
nevada
are
licensed
in
the
state
and
are
subject
to
the
rules
and
regulations.
F
F
I
did
send
you
guys
some
stuff
that
obviously
couldn't
be
put
as
exhibits,
but
massage
therapists
already
won
lawsuits
in
arizona
and
tennessee
over
veterinary
boards
that
tried
to
outlaw
their
practice
and
while
we're
on
it,
I
find
it
funny
that
the
vet
board-
you
know
they're,
always
talking
about
upping
the
quality
of
care,
protecting
horse
owners
from
other
bad
people
when
in
their
own
statutes,
they
don't
even
require
their
own
licensed
veterinarians
to
know
anything
about
massage
therapy.
So
how
is
that
protecting
the
public?
L
Q
Hi
good
evening
this
is
anita
kendall.
My
last
name
is
c-h-a-n-g
b-I-g-o,
I'm
the
owner
of
zen
equine
body,
work
based
in
las
vegas
nevada,
and
I'm
calling
to
oppose
the
changes
in
particular
because
of
the
section
three
which
is
based.
Animal
physical
therapy
means
rehabilitation
of
injuries,
and
then
it
talks
about
the
uses
of
following
techniques.
Should
I
be
gunner
should
now
be
dumber
under
the
regulation
requiring
a
service
provider
to
be
registered
in
order
to
buy
services,
and
I
just
want.
Q
I
have
gone
through
certification
courses,
that's
outside
of
that
school
and
providing
services
that
are
not
invasive,
and
why
I
understand
one
of
the
senators
had
mentioned
earlier
on
recall
that
this
does
not
require
or
does
not
have
any
impact
to
any
of
us
providing
physical
therapy
massage
services.
However,
because
the
amendment
to
this
bill
does
specifically
mention
animal
physical
therapy,
I
want
to
make
sure
that
this
is
not
going
forward
as
it
is.
If
it
is
going
forward.
L
J
Hi
everyone,
my
name
for
the
record.
My
name
is
alyssa
navors,
I'm
here
today
on
behalf
of
the
mvma
in
its
current
form,
the
nbma
is
opposed
to
the
legislation
before
I
outline
why
I
want
to
the
committee
to
know
that
we
are
actively
engaged
with
the
veterinary
board
and
senator
kikefer.
All
of
them
was
very
gracious
and
open
to
our
concerns,
which
we
are
very
grateful.
J
Our
first
concern
is
the
section
10
of
the
legislation
veterinary
specialists
to
achieve
diplomat
studies
have
undergone
rigorous
training
and
examinations
by
the
various
national
specialty
organizations
that
govern
the
profession.
These
examinations
are
far
more
rigorous
than
the
examination
for
general
veterinary
licensure
in
nevada,
with
the
diplomat
license.
Veterinarians
that
are
operating
under
license
can
only
perform
what
they're
specially
allowed.
The
reason
current
law
was
put
into
place
was
to
increase
access
for
nevada
consumers
to
nationally
certified
specialists,
as
there
is
a
drought
of
the
specialist
nationally
and
here
in
nevada.
J
We
believe,
as
currently
drafted
section
10
will
have
the
unintended
consequence
of
decreasing
access
to
specially
veterinary
care
in
nevada.
We
respectfully
request
that
section,
10
of
the
legislation
be
removed.
Our
second
concern
is
with
section
19
of
the
legislation:
veterinarians
are
trained
all
over
the
world.
Some
foreign
veterinary
schools
are
accredited
by
the
avma
and
some
are
not
not.
J
L
B
Hello
and
good
evening,
I
want
to
thank
everybody
for
your
time
and
for
hearing
the
opposition
on
this
bill.
My
name
is
janae
rhodes,
it
is
spelled
j
e,
n,
n
e
e
r,
h,
o
d
e
s.
First
of
all,
this
is
all
the
smoke
and
mirrors
here.
It's
nothing
more
than
a
group
of
professionals
trying
to
establish,
establish
a
monopoly
against
well-trained
individuals
who
truly
care
about
the
horse's
well-being
and
and
providing
care
for
them
and
honing
in
their
skills
and
doing
an
excellent
job.
B
I
for
one
I
want
to
say
I
don't
appreciate
miss
locke's
statement
in
the
opening
earlier
that
she
said
there
are
so
many
opponents,
because
we
don't
understand
the
bill
completely,
and
I
want
to
say
that
couldn't
be
further
from
the
truth,
I
for
one
as
a
horse
owner
and
a
horse
trainer
who
would
be
adversely
affected
by
this
bill.
I
understand
exactly
what's
going
on
here
and
I
have
to
believe
that
all
of
you
will
as
well
and
that
you
will
both
know
on
sb
336.
L
L
L
Q
F-A-I-T-H-J-O-H-N-S-O-N
I'd
like
to
start
off
thanking
everyone,
a
lot
who
are
allowing
me
to
speak
today,
I'm
15
years
old
and
I'm
a
native
nevadan.
I
have
lived
here
my
entire
life,
I'm
sure,
just
like
everyone
here,
I
have
nothing
but
the
best
intentions
on
behalf
of
our
nevada
animals,
especially
our
horses.
I
myself
am
a
horse
owner.
Therefore,
I
understand
and
recognize
how
important
equine
therapy
and
rehabilitation
treatments
are
to
our
horses
and
their
well-being
and
physical
health.
Q
The
equestrian
community
in
nevada
relies
a
great
deal
on
our
trained,
massage
therapist
to
ensure
our
horse's
performance
and
health.
These
massage
therapists
cannot
go
out
and
treat
any
and
everyone
without
certification.
They
are
skilled
professionals
who
have
been
through
intensive
schooling
in
order
to
gain
this
role
in
our
community,
which,
I
might
add,
is
a
very
big
one.
If
this
bill
were
passed,
it
would
cause
many
of
these
trained
professionals
to
lose
their
job
and
source
of
income.
I
am
deeply
concerned
with
what
would
happen
if
this
bill
were
to
be
passed.
Q
Q
L
L
B
Professionals
certified
gone
enduring
courses,
unlike
the
veterinarians,
who
may
be
trained
in
something
else,
although
there's
a
benefit
that
veterinarians
veterinarians
are
also
stretched
very
thin.
You
have
to
book
an
appointment
two
weeks
in
advance
for
a
lameness
issue,
and
it's
seen
here
that,
if
they're
as
this
is
added
to
them,
they
might
be
stretched
more
thin.
So
it
doesn't
benefit
vets
as
well,
and
the
only
I
don't
even
know
who
benefits
at
the
consumer.
B
On
the
consumer
side,
prices
are
going
to
go
way
up,
we're
going
to
have
to
book
a
broad
call
for
them
to
come
out
a
hundred
dollars
for
the
barn
call.
I
work
two
part-time
jobs
to
afford
horseback
riding
and
even
then
I'm
stretched
thin
as
well.
This
is
going
to
be
super
expensive
on
my
end,
and
it
also
affects
the
people
who
have
been
trained
professionally
doing
this
for
15
or
so
years.
This
is
going
to
affect
them
drastically
and
it's
going
to
totally
ruin
their
jobs
here
in
nevada.
B
L
B
My
name
is
abigail
field,
a
b
I
g
a
I
l
f,
I
e
l
d.
I
am
a
horse
owner
and
an
equine
massage
therapist
in
the
state
of
nevada.
I
have
owned
and
cared
for
horses.
My
whole
life.
I
have
been
in
the
massage
trade
for
the
last
year
by
passing,
sc
336.
You
are
taking
an
owner's
right
to
choose
who
provides
care
for
their
horses.
Many
horse
owners
are
in
rural
areas
and
their
access
to
good
care
is
already
slim
by
passing
bsb
336.
B
It
will
only
continue
to
limit
the
availability
of
care
to
owners.
Lowering
the
care
will
lead
to
lowering
the
quality
of
care.
Not
only
will
passing
sb
336
affect
the
horses
in
nevada,
but
also
every
certified
equine
massage
therapist.
Many
nevadans,
including
myself,
have
put
lots
of
training
and
time
into
becoming
a
skilled,
massage
therapist.
Unlike
a
vet,
our
whole
schooling
is
based
around
massage
therapy
and
how
it
can
improve
the
way
horse,
moves
and
works.
We
have
put
in
many
hours
learning
to
perform
and
perform
a
safe
and
beneficial
massage.
B
We
strive
to
give
each
client
the
best
care
to
each
and
every
client.
Many
equine
trainers
also
rely
on
the
availability
to
rehab
and
perform
therapeutic
modalities
to
help
improve
a
horse's
body
and
mind.
Many
owners
do
not
have
the
time
or
knowledge
to
perform
these
modalities
on
their
own.
Therefore,
it
is
limiting
the
amount
of
options
a
horse
owner
has
to
help
their
horse.
Overall,
I
oppose
sb
336.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
L
L
A
Thank
you
vps
and
last
but
not
least,
is
there
anyone
wishing
to
testify
in
neutral
on
sb
36
336?
Thank
you
just
because
we
started
a
little
bit
earlier.
I
just
I
might
entert
depending
on
how
this
goes.
I
might
entertain
anyone
else
that
didn't
get
the
chance
to
speak.
If
bps,
we
can
check
that
if
anyone
joined
late
while
we're
doing
this.
L
C
C
You
know
I've
been
a
nevada
resident
for
close
to
20
years
and
our
family.
We
do
competitions
with
rodeo
and
our
horses
are
equine
athletes,
and
we,
you
know,
use
these
other
modalities
of
massage
therapy
and
chiropractic
and
pm,
pemf
and
and
things
alike,
to
keep
our
athletes
in
top
physical
condition.
C
Our
veterinarians
are
spread
so
thin
in
our
area.
I
have
to
keep
an
open
relationship
with
three
local
vets
just
to
try
to
get
an
appointment
in
a
reasonable
amount
of
time.
You
know
having
these
types
of
modalities
only
being
performed
by
veterinarians
is
going
to
spread
them
so
much
more
thin.
Being
able
to
get
an
appointment
to
have
work
done
on
a
horse
is
going
to
be
next
to
impossible.
C
C
Our
our
training
that
goes
involved
in
these
athletes
is
tremendous,
and
it
is
very
costly.
You
know,
having
these
modalities,
only
being
being
able
to
be
administered
by
a
veterinarian
is
is
going
to
be
counterproductive
to
the
welfare
of
animals.
You
know
this
type
of
modalities
are
not
in
lieu
of
proper
veterinary
care.
I
am
in
constant
contact
with
my
primary
vet
regarding
lameness
issues
and
such,
and
even
they
recommend
doing
some
of
these
modalities
in
between
visits
to
ensure
that
the
athletes
are
are,
you
know,
being
well
cared
for.
C
I
appreciate
you
taking
my
statement
today
again,
I
oppose
336
and
I
feel
that
it
is
a
backwards
thinking
type
of
bill,
that's
being
pushed
through
the
legislature.
Thank
you.
A
L
A
Thank
you
bts
and
if
anyone
watches
this
recording
and
you
weren't
able
to
join
us
later
at
6pm
but
were
earlier,
always
feel
free
to
send
your
testimony
to
us,
and
we
can
share
that
with
the
committee
members.
Okay,
senator
keith
keffer.
Do
you
have
any
last
minute
remarks
before
we
close
this
hearing.
O
Aid,
mr
thank
you
very
much,
mr
chairman.
I
appreciate
it.
I
think
senator
click
chief
might
have
something
that
he
wanted
to
something,
but.
E
I
would
I
really
wanted
to
ask
in
his
closing
comments
so
senator
I
seem
to
be
missing
something
here:
we've
already
established
on
the
record
that
it
doesn't
require
a
supervising
vet,
and
so
I'm
losing
something
here
in
in
what
the
impact
is
to
these
two
professions:
the
choir
chiropractor
and
the
animal
therapist
other
than
is
it
just
the
registration
process,
and
we
haven't
really
touched
on
that.
I
don't
know:
are
those
fees
going
to
be
that
exorbitant
or
I'm
just
missing
something
here.
O
Yeah,
thank
you
senator
gregory
chief
senator
ben
kevin
for
the
record,
and
I
think
I
am
too
so.
O
I'm
I'm
looking
at
the
nevada
administrative
code
638.780
as
it
currently
exists,
and
it
says
that
a
physical
therapist
who
has
been
issued
a
certificate
of
registration
pursuant
to
this
code
may
practice
animal
physical
therapy
only
under
the
direction
of
a
veterinarian
licensed
in
the
state
who
has
established
a
valid
veterinarian,
client,
patient
relationship
concerning
the
animal
receiving
the
animal
physical
therapy
before
it's
performed,
and
if
the
physical
therapy
assumes
individual
liability,
the
quality
of
the
animal
physical
therapy
performs.
O
So
if
the
insinuation
is
that
now
physical
therapists
are
going
to
have
to
work
on
work
in
consultation
with
a
vet,
they
already
do
according
to
existing
nac.
And
if
people
are
not
practicing
that
way,
then
they
should
check
out
nevada
administrative
code
638.780.
O
The
same
is
true
for
chiropractic
definitions
and
scopes
of
practice
that
are
in
nac
63638.
So
I
must
be
missing
exactly
what
they're,
referring
to
there
wasn't
a
direct
point
to
which
provision
of
this
bill
is
changing,
that
nothing
that
I
have
read
in
this
bill
changes.
The
current
the
current
relationship
between
these
professions
and
their
their
clients
and
their
patient
animals
and
the
need
to
work
in
consultation
with
with
a
vet,
because
that's
currently
how
it's
how
it's
supposed
to
be
done
under
nac.
O
If
that's
not
how
it's
being
done,
then
I
cannot
speak
to
that,
but
if,
if
someone
could
point
specifically
to
how
it
makes
those
changes
via
via
email,
I'd
love
to
I'd
love
to
read
it
because
I
haven't
seen
the
specific
change,
that's
getting
everyone
concerned.
So
I'm
sorry!
I
can't
answer
your
question
more
specifically,.
O
Yeah,
I
thank
you
ben
for
the
record
it
I
don't.
I
I
think,
there's
a
difference
between
a
supervising
veterinarian,
right
or
under
the
direction
and
what
is
currently
in
nac,
which
says
says
only
under
the
under
the
direction
of
a
veterinarian
license
in
the
state.
So
that's
that's
what
that's
current
standard,
so
it
doesn't
change
current
standard
based
on
what
is
already
in
the
nac.
A
O
No,
I'm
thinking,
mr
chairman,
I
appreciate
the
time
and
if
there
are
specific
suggestions
from
those
who
have
expressed
their
concern,
that
this
bill
is
going
to
affect
them
in
an
unintended
manner.
It'd
be
all
ears
to
hear
their
suggested
changes
to
address
that.
Otherwise
I
thank
you
for
your
time.
A
A
The
committee
will
not
be
taking
any
action
on
sb336
today,
but
it
may
bring
it
back
for
a
future
work
session.
Let's
go
ahead
and
go
to
public
comment.
Please
remember
to
limit
your
comments
to
two
minutes.
Bpstaff
is
there
anyone
wishing
to
provide
public
comment
at
this
time.
L
L
A
Thank
you,
bps
members,
any
last
minute
comments
or
questions.
Before
we
end,
I
don't
see
none
all
right.
Our
next
meeting
is
on
tuesday
march
30th
at
4pm.
Please
note
the
time
change
it's
going
to
start
at
4pm.
We
are
starting
30
minutes
later
next
tuesday.
Only
with
that
meeting
is
adjourned.
Thank
you
have
a
good
night.