►
From YouTube: 2/11/2021 - 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
A
Seeing
that
we've
reached
the
quorum,
we
shall
proceed.
Thank
you
welcome
everyone
to
our
second
meeting
for
the
senate
committee
on
natural
resources.
Before
we
begin,
I
would
like
to
take
a
few
short
moments
again
to
remind
you
on
and
explain
how
our
virtual
committee
meetings
will
work,
since
this
is
a
new
process
for
all
of
us.
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
this
entire
process.
As
in
previous
sessions,
all
committee-related
information
is
available
on
the
nevada,
electronic
legislative
information
system
or
nellis,
which
is
accessible
through
the
legislature's
website.
There
are
four
ways
that
you
can
engage
with
our
committee.
These
include
registering
to
participate
in
a
committee
meeting
through
the
analysis
system,
which
places
you
in
line
to
testify.
A
For
a
bill
or
to
provide
public
comment
during
the
meeting
you
can
either
submit
written
testimony
to
the
committee's
email,
address
or
fax
number
listed
on
the
agenda.
You
can
share
your
opinion
via
the
legislature's
opinion
application
on
nellis
or
last
but
not
least,
you
can
view
committee
meetings
online
through
nellis
or
on
the
legislature's
youtube
channel
to
testify
on
a
bill
or
provide
public
comment
during
the
2021
legislative
session.
A
Members
of
the
public
must
first
register
for
the
meeting
you
would
like
to
participate
in
committee
meetings
are
listed
in
several
places
on
nellis
and
to
register
simply
click
on
the
participate
button
near
the
meeting
date
and
time
then
fill
the
required
information,
such
as
your
name,
the
agenda
item
you're
interested
in
or
your
position
on
the
bill.
Once
your
registration
is
submitted,
you
will
see
a
confirmation
screen
and
you
will
also
be
able
to
receive
an
email
with
the
phone
number
and
meeting
id
to
call
into
that
meeting.
A
A
When
you
are
on
the
phone
line,
please
pay
attention
to
which
bill
is
being
considered
and
when
the
bills
are
listed
on
the
meetings
agenda
and
also
to
be
able
to
follow
the
verbal
prompts
when
provided
by
the
broadcasting
and
production
services,
so
that
you
know
the
keys
to
press
to
raise
your
hand
or
unmute
yourself.
Senate
bills,
33
and
43
are
on
the
agenda
to
be
heard.
Today.
Bps
staff
will
call
on
you
to
speak
by
the
last
three
digits
of
your
phone
number
detail.
A
Instructions
for
participation
in
the
committee
meetings
are
also
available
on
the
help
page,
which
is
listed
at
the
banner
at
the
top
of
every
page
on
nellis
and
if
you
ever
need
any
assistance
with
any
any
of
these
processes
or
if
you
would
like
to
receive
electronic
notification
of
the
committee's
agendas
and
minutes
always
feel
free
to
please
contact
our
committee
manager
at
the
committee
email
listed
on
the
agenda
so
with
that
now
that
we
got
that
out
of
the
way,
let's
go
ahead
and
proceed
with
our
first
bill
hearing.
A
I
will
now
open
the
hearing
on
sp
33,
and
this
measure
revises
certain
provisions
relating
to
natural
resource
and
management.
Well,
the
bill
presenter.
Please
proceed
when
ready
and
I
believe
today
we
have
the
division
of
forestry
and
the
state
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources.
So
whenever
you
are
already.
B
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record
casey
casey
state
forester,
fire
warden
for
the
nevada
division
of
forestry.
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
today
to
provide
testimony
on
senate
bill
33.
B
B
Nbf's
natural
resource
managers
provide
assistance
to
landowners,
regardless
of
vegetation
type,
improving
conditions
in
forests,
rangelands
deserts,
wetlands
and
watersheds
and
other
vegetation
types
has
and
will
continue
to
be.
The
division's
focus
senate
bill
33
clarifies
that
ndf
is
not
solely
focused
on
forest
management,
but
that
the
division
manages
all
varied
renewable
natural
resources
found
across
nevada.
B
In
addition,
senate
bill
33
expands
the
identified
uses
for
the
division's
nursery
produced
plants
to
include
practices
like
xeriscaping
water
conservation,
providing
wildlife,
habitat
and
sustaining
local
economies.
Ndf
has
a
conservation
plant
materials
program
that
enhances
its
ability
to
provide
conservation,
plant
materials
and
technical
natural
resource
assistance
to
support
nevada
citizens.
B
B
B
A
C
Okay,
thanks
casey,
it's
great
to
see
you
again
welcome
to
another
session,
a
couple
of
questions
when
the
state
fire
marshal
portion
of
the
build
where
they
get
to
have
some
level
of
authority
over
determining
moving
materials.
Is
that
kind
of
a
new
concept
or
does
the
state
fire
marshal
already
have
authority
in
other
sections?
You
know
what
kind
of
roofing
materials.
B
Thank
you
for
the
question
senator
hansen
for
the
record
again,
casey
casey.
That's
why
we
proposed
striking
those
those
came
out
of
our
those
came
out
directly
out
of
our
statutes
in
472..
B
The
state
fire
marshal
is
on
the
line
today.
To
give
you
a
better
understanding
if
need
be,
but
they
do
have
the
state
fire
marshal
and
current
statute
does
have
the
ability
to
adopt
the
wildland
interface
code
for
the
state
of
nevada.
As
I
stated
earlier
in
the
wild
and
urban
interface
code
are
building
compliance,
defensible
space.
B
I
get
requirements
and
and
other
standards
for
fire,
safing
or
adapting
communities.
He
always
has
had
the
ability
to
adopt
that
at
the
state
level,
but
it's
really
enforced
at
the
local
government
level.
They
can
adopt
more
stringent
standards,
but
they
cannot
adopt
less
stringent
standards
than
those
of
the
state.
C
Okay,
so
you're
just
getting
it
out
of
your
section
and
putting
to
where
kind
of
it's
all
I'll
wear.
The
other
thing
I
noticed
you
guys
are
are
making
this
you're
no
longer
required
to
use
indigenous
plants.
Are
you
guys
doing
that,
so
you
can
use?
You
know
like
forged
kosher,
some
more
exciting,
wheatgrass
things
like
that.
B
Thank
you
for
the
question
again:
casey
casey.
No,
I
don't.
We
didn't
make
any
changes
about
it:
the
use
of
indigent
indigenous
or
non-native
or
native
species.
We
have
always
been
able
to
use
non-natives
and
there's
definitely
a
place
in
rehabilitation
and
and
re-vegetation
practices
across
the
state
using
non-native
species
and
growing
them.
In
our
nurseries.
We
have
tried.
We
tried
to
grow
species
that
are
adapted
to
this
area,
but
are
not
necessarily
native.
C
A
Of
course,
thank
you.
Is
there
any
other
questions
from
any
other
committee
members
at
this
time.
D
Mr
chair,
could
we
maybe
is
the
state
fire
marshal
available?
I
am
kind
of
piqued
by
the
fact
that
the
state
foreign
warden
is
is
no
longer
in
charge
of
especially
the
you
know.
Firebag
fuel
reductions
close
to
residents
the
state
fire
marshal
online.
So
we
could,
is
he
gonna?
Have
the
ability
to
enforce
this.
A
Yes,
sir,
I
believe
when
I
open
testimony,
they
will
be
speaking
at
that
time,
so
yeah
any
other
questions
from
any
of
the
other
committee
members.
B
Thank
you
again
for
the
record
casey
casey
senator
gokuchiya.
We
didn't,
we
aren't
taking
that
responsibility
out.
It's
the
enforcement
of
the
of
the
codes
that
we're
taking
out.
We
still
have
the
responsibility
for
fuel
breaks
in
the
state
and
we
still
have
responsibility
to
protect
the
nevada's
natural
landscapes.
B
The
state
fire
marshal
has
the
adoption
of
the
code.
The
enforcement
of
things
like
defensible
space
and
the
built
environment
lies
at
a
different
level.
So
it's
it's
not
that
we
won't
continue
to
do
those
practices.
We
just
don't
have
enforcement
responsibility
for
those
which
we
did
have
when
we
were
all
risk
under
473.
D
B
Thank
you
and
and
again
for
the
record
casey
casey.
We
are
proposing
striking
those
additions
to
the
state
fire
marshal's
statutes
in
477
other
than
a
mirroring
statute,
change
that
allows
the
state
fire
marshal
and
the
division
of
forestry
to
continue
to
work
together
on
some
of
these
issues.
B
But
those
would
be
stricken
out
of
there
as
they
really
are.
The
local
government's
jurisdictional
responsibility.
A
Being
none
thank
you.
So
at
this
time
we
will
hear
testimony
in
support
of
sb33.
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
on
the
line
right
now
that
would
like
to
provide
support
for
the
testimony.
E
E
E
F
Hello,
my
name
is
jaina
moan
j-a-I-n-a-m-o-a-n
and
I
am
the
external
affairs
director
for
the
nature
conservancy
in
nevada.
Thank
you
for
hearing
my
comment.
Today.
We
are
a
global
organization
conducting
science-based
on-the-ground
conservation
work
to
support
our
mission
of
conserving
the
lands
and
waters
on
which
all
life
depends.
The
nature
conservancy
supports
ab33.
F
We
appreciate
the
replacement
of
the
term
reforestation
with
revegetation
and
the
inclusion
of
rangelands
in
sections
10-14.
We
think
this
is
a
forward-thinking
change
that
can
help
expand
application
of
natural
climate
solutions
for
enhancing
carbon
sequestration
on
lands
across
the
state.
Regarding
sections,
three
five
and
seven
expanding
the
role
of
the
state
and
assisting
in
re-vegetation
efforts
across
ecosystems
and
jurisdictions
is
a
positive
step
forward
in
the
state's
fight
against
the
immediate
threat
of
wildfire
and
the
ongoing
and
related
threat
of
climate
change.
F
In
partnership
with
federal
agencies
which
have
a
critical
role
to
play
in
revegetation
efforts,
we
ask
that
the
state
commit
to
seeking
the
use
of
native
plant
materials
wherever
possible
in
alignment
with
the
nevada
native
seed
strategy,
which
has
recently
been
adopted
as
a
key
pillar
of
the
shared
stewardship
agreement.
Homegrown
nevada
native
plants
provide
enhanced
ecosystem
services
and
benefit
agricultural
communities,
a
win-win
for
nature
and
people.
F
Section
11
of
the
bill
particularly
resonates
with
the
restoration
work,
the
nature
conservancy
is
doing,
and
the
headwater
forests
of
the
truckee
river.
We
have
conducted
studies
and
surveys
of
vegetative
cover
in
the
truckee
river
watershed
and
on
some
range
lands
in
the
state.
We
would
be
happy
to
provide
the
results
from
that
research.
We
also
recently
entered
into
an
agreement
with
and
are
working
with,
the
united
states
forest
service
to
implement
projects
on
forest
service
lands
to
reduce
wildfire
risks
and
protect
watersheds.
F
A
Thank
you
for
your
comment.
Bps,
really
quick.
I
believe
we
have
the
state
fire
marshal
on.
So,
if
you
can,
if
you
can
come.
E
D
G
All
right,
thank
you,
mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
for
the
record.
My
name
is
mike
diesek.
I
am
your
state
fire
marshal.
I
am
testifying
in
support
of
sb
33
with
the
as
amended
the
state
forester,
and
I
having
conversations
felt
like
there
was
a
lot
that's
already
in
477.
That
allows
me
to
take
up
a
lot
of
those
things
that
that
this
bill
gets
out
of
forestry's
wheelhouse.
G
We
had
some
initial
concerns.
Talking
to
my
deputy
attorney
general
regarding
responsibilities,
authorities,
expertise
and
what
it
comes
down
to
is.
I've
already
adopted
the
2018
international
wildland
urban
interface
code
that
becomes
base
code
for
the
state
local
entities
can
adopt
more
stringent
regulations
as
they
see
fit.
G
During
the
last
code
adoption
we
did
have
some
some
fire
chiefs
had
some
concerns,
so
we
didn't
adopt
it
and
it's
entirely
in
in
its
entirety.
However,
we
did
adopt
the
vast
majority
of
it.
We
have
limited
enforcement,
especially
nevada,
vervain
statute.
477,
naturally
emits
things
like
the
residential
code
or
dealing
with
private
residents,
and
that's
why
I
think
we
feel
that
the
best
place
for
that
is
in
each
local
entity.
G
The
wildland
high
hazard
fuels
are
different
from
county
to
county
and
there's
really
no
one-size-fits-all,
and
we
we've
already.
We
work
with
our
rural
partners
and
handle
whatever
they
they
need
us,
that's
within
our
statutory
authority.
A
C
Sorry
chair,
I
didn't
see
that
you
wanted
me
to
do
it
a
different
way
than
just
wave
my
hands
I'll
work
on
that
mike.
How
are
you
today
good
to
see
you
a
quick
question
from
your
testimony?
Are
you
guys
in
favor
of
this
477
part
of
the
bill?
I
mean
almost
sounded
like
you.
Don't
really
want
the
responsibilities
that
the
law
is
kind
of
throwing
away.
G
All
right
for
the
record,
mike
diezak
state
fire
marshal.
No,
I
I'm
in
support
of
it
as
amended
some
of
the
concerns
when
it
gets
convoluted.
We
have
in
nrs
477,
where
my
authorities
are,
we.
We
have
population
caps
within
washoe
and
clark
and
carson
city
and
with
with
the
addition
to
those
right
where
they
were,
we
could
run
into
potentially
issues
where
my
authorities
were
going
where
the
the
statutes
have
have
taken
them
away.
I
have
no
concerns
with
the
removal
of
those.
G
In
fact,
you
know
when
you
broke
most
of
it
down.
We
already
did
a
lot
of
that.
I
don't
have
the
expertise
as
in
that
bill
to
say:
hey,
I'm
gonna
go
across
the
state
of
nevada
and
I'm
gonna
determine
everybody's
wildland
urban
interface.
G
I
I'd
like
those
resources,
the
expertise
within
my
staff
and
and
and
again
it's,
I
think,
a
very
local
issue.
The
different
types
of
fuels
vary
from
from
county
to
county
from
region
to
region,
and
we
cover
that
and
give
them
the
ability
to
do
that
with
the
adoption
of
the
wildland
urban
interface.
C
A
D
Yes,
mr
chair,
senator
gregory,
if
I
could
go
for
it
yeah.
Thank
you
yeah
mike.
I
I
guess
I'm
just
a
little
bit
apprehensive
about.
I
know
you
got
handed
this
at
whether
you've
got
the
resources
and
and
ultimately
you
you're,
going
to
end
up
in
some
rural
jurisdictions
that
really
don't
have
a
ton
of
codes
adopted.
D
Are
you
going
to
have
the
ability
to
enforce
you
know
the
fact
that
yeah
they're
they're,
not
enforcing
you,
know,
defensible
space,
and
maybe
some
of
their
some
of
the
buildings
in
place
are
in
fact
don't
meet.
G
G
Yes
again
for
the
record,
mike
diezak
state
fire
marshal,
our
our
authority
within
the
wildland,
especially
on
the
on
on
private
residents,
is,
is
truly
restricted.
We
deal
more
with
commercial
facilities,
that's
not
to
say
that
we
don't
do
things
that
aren't
specifically
in
our
statute
for
an
example.
G
If
a
rural
county
with
no
real
building
officials
such
as
esmeralda,
came
to
us
and
they
were
going
to
build
a
dollar
general
store,
477-030
doesn't
put
dollar
general
stores
in
my
authority,
but
because
there's
no
one
there
to
do
it,
we
just
do
it
for
them.
We
act
as
as
their
official,
but
for
us
to
think
I
mean
I
have.
I
have
limited
resources
to
go
and
start
unless
it
were
in
a
commercial.
G
If
I
guess,
if
it
were
in
a
commercial
facility,
it
would
be
a
lot
easier
for
me
to
to
assert
some
authority
in
their
area,
but
with
private
residences
and
the
defensible
space,
and
I
mean
the
the
the
magnitude
of
the
of
the
calls
for
you
know.
Tumbleweeds
building
up,
and
that
is
always
always
rested
with
the
local
jurisdictions.
D
Just
follow
up,
if
I
may,
mr
chair
and
again
mike,
I
guess
what
concerns
me
then
all
right,
our
ranch
residents
armsteads,
are
they
considered
commercial
or
residential.
D
Again,
ranch
properties,
homesteads,
you
know
ranch
headquarters.
Are
they
typically?
Are
they
commercial
or
are
they
deemed
residential?
You
know
if
it's,
I
can
just
see
you
wandering
out
through
elko
county
here
telling.
G
Those
would
be
residences,
those
would
be
considered
residences
and
again,
the
the
the
if
you,
if
you
look
into
477
477
other
than
code
adoption,
my
codes
apply
throughout
the
state,
yet
my
ability
to
enforce
them
has
population
caps
in
certain
areas.
They
always
have
the
base
code.
So
if
there's
no
one
there
in
the
in
a
rural
county
or
city
isn't
adopting
codes,
my
codes
still
apply
at
the
base.
The
only
time
they
can
do
things
when
they're,
when
they're
they're
more
stringent
they
can,
they
can
add
things
to
them.
G
They
can
adopt
parts
that
weren't
adopted.
They
can
adopt
residential
fire
sprinklers,
but
we
as
a
as
a
an
agency.
Don't
don't
do
that
and
we're
not
in
the
business
of
getting
into
ranches
and
homesteads
and
again
that
that's
why
I
think
the
locals,
if,
if
a
local
government
came
to
us
and
in
a
formal
letter
and
and
asked
us
to
intercede
and
our
and
our
on
our
dag,
says
hey,
you
know
this
is
this
is
something
you
can
do.
G
I
mean
we,
we
can
try
it
on
a
on
a
case-by-case
basis,
but
there
are
not
many
sworn
officers
out
there
in
the
state
and
we
we
were
forced
to
close
the
elko
office.
So
we
have
right
now,
I'm
gonna,
say
two
officers,
a
sergeant
and
a
lieutenant
position
in
carson
and
two
officers
in
vegas,
and
that's
it
one
inspector
in
carson,
one
inspector
in
vegas
full-time
we've
been
handling
things
through
contracts.
G
We
have
one
plans
examiner
so
and
and
again
the
expertise
of
some
of
those
requirements
that
were
stricken
such
as
as
determining
going
into
elko,
county
and
saying
okay.
Well,
this
is
this,
is
this:
is
the
wildland
for
you
guys
or
going
into
douglas
county?
My
gosh,
you
know
and
saying
this
is
what
it
is.
That's
that's
a
job
for
for
local
government
to
determine
what
they
consider
that
that
high
fuel
high
hazard,
in
accordance
with
the
adopted
code.
A
You
any
other
committee
members
with
any
other
questions.
I
think
we're
ready
to
proceed
bps
is
there
anyone
else
on
the
line
that
would
like
to
testify
in
support
of
customs
that
will
provide
support
testimony.
E
E
A
E
A
Great,
thank
you
so
much
bps.
Thank
you
to
the
presenters
on
this
bill
at
this
time.
Seeing
that
there
are
no
other
comments,
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
sb32.
A
So
at
this
moment
we
will
now
proceed
to
senate
bill
43.
I
will
now
open
the
hearing
on
sb43.
This
manager
revises
provisions
relating
to
the
advisory
board
on
outdoor
recreation,
while
the
presenter,
mr
colin
robertson,
administrator
of
the
division
of
outdoor
recreation,
state
department
of
conservation
and
natural
resources,
please
proceed
when
ready.
H
H
Each
of
these
proposed
members
represents
an
important
perspective
regarding
outdoor
recreation
in
nevada.
The
nevada
association
of
counties
represents
nevada's
counties
and
rural
communities,
which
are
gateways
to
some
of
nevada's,
most
beloved
outdoor
recreation
experiences
together.
The
us
department
of
the
interior
and
the
u.s
department
of
agriculture
manage
the
majority
of
public
land
in
nevada.
H
A
D
A
D
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
colin
robertson,
administrator
of
the
nevada
division
of
outdoor
recreation
for
the
record.
Thank
you
senator
for
the
question.
Yes,
the
it
was
partly
tied
to
the
review
of
state
statutes
regarding
the
limitation
on
the
number
of
boards
or
committees
that
an
individual
person
is
eligible
to
participate
on
and
yeah.
That's
the
primary.
A
I
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you,
mr
robertson,
for
your
presentation.
I
have
a
couple
of
questions.
The
the
first
one
is
about
the
current
makeup
of
the
board.
Could
you
give
us
a
little
bit
of
perspective
on
of
how
many
men
and
women
serve
on
the
board,
whether
we
have
any
representatives
from
indigenous
communities
or
tribes
in
nevada,
on
the
board
and
whether
there
are
people
with
disabilities
or
members
of
the
lgbtq
community
on
the
board.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
vice
chair,
schaible,
colin
robertson,
division
of
outdoor
recreation
for
the
record.
Yes,
the
advisory
board
on
outdoor
recreation
as
it
was
created
in
the
2019
session,
included
an
11
member
advisory
board
when
the
legislation,
the
finished
legislation
passed.
H
The
indian
commission
nevada
in
the
chairperson
of
the
nevada,
indian
commission,
thank
you.
Senator
the
gender
makeup
of
the
board
is
about
equally
split.
The
four
appointed
seats
from
the
governor's
office
are
seats
that
represent
our
members
that
represent
professional
knowledge.
Basically,
one
area
is
conservation
interests.
The
second
area
is
public
health.
The
third
area
is
education
and
workforce
training,
workforce
development
and
the
fourth
is
economic.
H
The
outdoor
industry,
there
is
one
member,
the
member
of
the
the
chairperson
of
the
nevada
indian
commission,
is
named
by
statute
as
an
indigenous
member
of
the
advisory
board.
There
are
at
this
time
that
I
am
aware
of
no
one
on
the
advisory
board
with
a
document
of
disability.
Does
that
answer
your
question.
I
H
I'll
come
back
to
it.
If
I
can,
if
I
might.
I
Okay,
the
other
question
that
I
have
is,
I
mean
I
think
it's
pretty
clear.
What
I'm
getting
at
is
that
we
need
to
make
sure
that
the
boards
are
sufficiently
diverse,
but
I
have
a
question
unrelated
to
that
related
to
the
federal
government
representatives
serving
on
the
board
as
non-voting
members,
and
I'm
wondering
why,
for
the
department
of
the
interior,
the
bill
includes
the
blm
park
service
or
fish
and
wildlife,
rather
than
just
specifying
like
the
park
service.
Perhaps.
H
Thank
you
for
the
question
colin
robertson,
division
of
outdoor
recreation.
For
the
record.
The
reason
is
that
there
are
terms
specified
for
the
seats
on
the
advisory
board
on
outdoor
recreation
and
the
department
of
the
interior,
with
those
three
agencies
manages
primarily
through
the
bureau
of
land
management.
The
very
large
portion
of
nevada,
the
u.s
department
of
agriculture
through
the
u.s
forest
service,
also
manages
a
very
large
proportion
of
nevada's
public
lands.
H
But
the
idea
was
to
leave
those
seats
tied
to
the
overarching
department
so
that,
if
an
appropriate
candidate
from
usda
rural
development,
for
example,
as
compared
to
the
us
forest
service
becomes
be,
is
nominated
for
participation
that
the
interests
of
usda
through
either
rural
development
or
forest
service
could
be
represented
by
that
seat
and,
by
the
same
token,
that
the
department
of
interior
could
be
represented
by
a
voice
of
someone
on
either
the
bureau
of
land
management,
the
fish
and
wildlife
service
or
the
park
service.
H
J
Thank
you,
chair,
donate,
and,
and
thank
you,
mr
robertson.
My
question
is
why
why
are
you
doing
this?
H
H
I
can
say
that
in
the
principle,
principal
reasons
are
tied
to
what
I
testified
to
earlier,
which
is
that
nevada's,
rural
places,
counties
and
communities
both
are
gateways
to
some
of
the
most
important
recreational
assets
in
the
state
and
the
perspective
of
someone
from
those
rural
gateway
communities
is
something
that's
missing
from
the
advisory
board
as
it
was
designated
in
the
2019
passage
of
the
legislation
and
principally
that
the
be
aligned
with
the
goals
of
the
shared
stewardship
agreement
that
it
is
important
from
an
outdoor
recreation
standpoint
as
much
as
from
a
conservation
standpoint
to
understand
what
the
situations
are
for
the
forest
service
and
the
blm
as
the
principal
land
managers
in
the
state
of
nevada
for
public
lands.
J
Well,
I'd
say
I
mean
that's
a
good
goal,
but
I
can
just
see
this
thing
coming
back
and
us
having
conversations
about
why
you
can't
build
these
seats
or
ever
get
a
quorum
or
this
is
a
crazy,
complicated,
looking
board
and-
and
I
just
it's
just
it's
and
it's
big,
so
yeah,
okay,
that's
a!
I
appreciate
your
contacts
that
you
know
the
voices
that
you
want
on
here
and
it
makes
sense
just
good
luck.
A
Thank
you
senator
brooks.
Do
we
have
any
other
last
minute.
A
Questions
being
none,
thank
you
so
bp.
As
a
reminder.
Next,
we
will
go
ahead
and
hear
testimony
in
support
of
sb43.
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
on
the
line
right
now
who
would
like
to
wish
who
would
like
to
provide
support
testimony.
E
F
D-A-G-N-Y-S-T-A-P-L-E-T-O-N
good
afternoon,
chair,
donate
and
senators.
We
are
testifying
in
support
of
the
bill
today
in
favor
of
the
bill
with
the
proposed
amendment,
and
we
want
to
thank
dcnr
and
administrator
robertson
for
asking
for
input
on
this.
We
understand
the
vision
of
creating
the
advisory
board
on
outdoor
recreation,
to
support
outdoor
recreation
in
the
recreation
economy
in
nevada,
and
we
recognize
as
well
that
a
significant
amount
of
outdoor
recreation
happens
in
rural
communities.
F
Our
members
agree
that,
having
a
representative
from
rural
nevada,
whose
local
economies
and
livelihoods
interface
with
outdoor
recreation
is
important
because
nato's
board
is
made
up
of
a
representative
from
each
county
commission,
including,
of
course,
our
15
rural
counties.
We
agree
that
nato
is
the
appropriate
body
to
nominate
an
appointee
for
this
board
if
the
legislature
still
wishes.
We
think
that
this
also
creates
an
opportunity
for
the
board
to
coordinate
with
nevada's
counties.
F
F
E
K
Good
afternoon,
mr
chairman
members
of
the
committee,
my
name
is
tom
clark,
that's
t-o-m-c-l-a-r-k.
I
come
before
you
today
on
behalf
of
the
nevada
outdoor
business
coalition.
We
were
the
one
of
the
lead
lobbyists
in
the
creation
of
the
new
division
and
the
advisory
board.
That's
on
the
agenda.
For
today
it's
included
in
this
particular
piece
of
legislation.
K
K
We
very
much
support
the
bill.
That's
before
you
and
the
amendment
to
include
a
member
of
the
rural
communities,
those
communities
with
less
than
100
000
folks,
and
with
the
limited
time
I
could
go
into
the
history
of
how
we
came
up
with
the
advisory
board
originally.
But
I
will
tell
you
that
in
the
creation
of
the
division
in
working
with
ms
carlton
and
the
other
stakeholders
on
ab46,
when
it
was
crafted
and
passed,
we
modeled
the
advisory
board.
H
J
K
Said
I
very
much
support
the
legislation
and
I
would
encourage
you-
and
I
believe
it
goes
to
senator
brooks's
comments-
that
this
amendment
not
become
a
christmas
tree
for
others
that
want
to
join
the
advisory
board.
The
intent
behind
the
advisory
board
was
simply
to
make
it
so
that
there
was
a
forum
for
not
just
the
members
of
the
advisory
board,
but
other
stakeholder
groups
to
participate
in
the
conversation
ways
that
we
can
bolster
and
promote
the
outdoor
recreation
industry
in
our
state.
E
A
Great
thank
you.
Next,
we
will
go
ahead
and
move
in
to
hear
testimony
in
opposition.
A
Thank
you
bps.
Thank
you
to
mr
robertson
for
presenting
today
seeing
that
there
are
no
other
testimonies
or
wait
people
wishing
to
testify.
I
will
now
close
the
hearing
on
sb43
up
and
just
for
a
reminder
for
everyone's
sake.
Both
of
these
bills
will
be
held
for
a
future
work
session
and
so
we'll
be
hearing
back
from
them.
So
at
this
time.
H
Thank
you,
chair,
colin
robertson,
for
the
record.
I
just
wanted
to
revisit
vice
chair
scheible's
question
about
the
makeup
of
the
advisory
board
on
outdoor
recreation.
If
I
could
and
senator
scheible
the
answer
is
that
there
are
of
the
11
members.
Seven
are
seven,
are
men,
four
are
women
but
of
the
seven
men
all,
but
one
of
them
are
in
positions
that
are
named
by
statute.
A
Thank
you,
mr
robertson.
Seeing
no
other
comments
again.
I
will
not
close
the
hearing
on
fp43.
We
will
now
move
on
to
public
comment,
so
I
will
not
call
for
public
comment.
Please
remember
to
limit
your
comments
to
two
minutes.
Bps
stuff.
Is
there
any
public.
E
C
Earl
and
the
first
build
the
nature
conservancy
testimony
the
lady
testified.
She
mentioned
that
they've
done
some
studies
on.
I
think
she
said
the
truckee
river
watershed
and
she'd
be
happy
to
share
those
with
us.
Can
you
make
a
request?
I
would
like
to
see
those
so
if
she's
still
listening,
but
I'd
like
to
get
a
copy
of
the
watershed
reports
or
studies
or
whatever
it
is,
she
was
talking
about
out
there
still.
Can
you
help
them?
Get
that
to
me.
Please.
A
A
So
seeing
no
other
comments
just
as
a
reminder
for
everyone.
Our
next
meeting
is
tuesday
february
16th
at
3,
30
p.m,
and
we
will
be
hearing
two
bills:
those
are
senate
bills,
23
and
52.
So
thank
you
all
for
joining
us
today
and
this
meeting
is
now
officially
adjourned.