►
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
B
Present
the
first
bill
on
our
agenda
is
house
bill,
43,
trophy
game,
big
game
and
wild
bison
lice
file
bison
license
allocation
committee
members.
You
should
be
familiar
with
this
bill.
It
is
a
bill
sponsored
by
the
trw
committee,
so
I
don't
think
we
need
to
walk
through
it.
I
think
we're
all
familiar
with
what
it
does.
B
Let's
just
jump
in
with
some
public
testimony
recall
that
we
last
year
there
was
an
effort
by
our
game
and
fish
department
to
lead
a
task
force,
and
one
of
the
issues
that
they
brought
to
us
was
this
bill.
So
with
that
I'd
defer
to
director
nezvik
from
game
and
fish
explain
to
us
where
we
are
and
what
what
we
need
to
be
knowing
with
with
this
bill.
C
C
This
is
something
that
this
committee
seen
before
it
moved
through
the
house,
and
it
was
amended
in
a
couple
ways
on
the
on
the
house
floor,
but
just
as
a
quick
reminder,
the
two
primary
objectives
that
the
task
force
sought
to
achieve
with
this
bill
was,
first
of
all,
to
to
change
the
allocation
of
resident
non-resident
licenses
for
what
is
now
termed
the
big
five
species
the
hardest
to
draw
species
in
the
state,
from
an
allocation
that
that's
varied
right
now
to
an
allocation
of
90
non-res.
I'm
sorry
90
resident
10
percent
non-resident.
C
The
the
task
force
approved
this
recommendation
unanimously.
I'm
joined
today
by
several
task
force.
Members
chairman
flittner,
is
here
she
serves
on
that
task
force.
Commissioner
lee
livingston
is
here.
I
believe
that
we
also
have
online
potentially
one
of
our
co-chairman.
I
think
that
commissioner
rusty
bell
may
be
online
and
then
we've
also
got
joe
schaefer
here:
who's
a
sportsman
and
familiar
to
most
of
the
folks
on
this
committee,
as
well
from
laramie
county
community
college.
C
The
there
were
some
amendments
on
on
the
house
side,
and
then
I
have
had
the
staff
pass
around
a
couple
of
additional
amendments
that
I
can
walk
through
whenever
you're
ready.
Madam
chair,
for
today,
mainly
to
we,
we
caught
one
slight
error
that
was
contradictory
to
what
the
task
force
had
recommended.
It's
kind
of
a
subtle
change,
but
I
can
talk
through
that
and
then
also
some
conforming
language
that
that
we
believe
needs
to
be
changed
based
on
amendments
that
were
made
on
the
house
floor.
B
I've
tracked
them
through
and
I
think
they
are
pretty
technical,
so
I've
given
lso
of
some
copies
excuse
me
our
session
staff.
So
if
you'd
like
to
look
at
those-
but
I
did
circulate
that
based
on
what
lso
caught.
So
that
would
be
what
you
see
as
a
formal
amendment
and
then
I'm
guessing.
This
is
what
you're
alluding
to.
D
D
C
Start
this
morning
directly,
madam
chair,
senator
landon,
so
first
of
all,
this
bill
does
not
address
the
issue
of
preference
points,
so
anybody
that
has
performance
points
now
would
keep
those
the
way
that
it
would
affect
those
hunters
that
have
a
lot
of
preference
points
if
they're
non-residents
is
that
their
chances
of
drawing
after
this
bill
was
in
effect,
would
decrease
right
now.
As
an
example,
bighorn
sheep
is
an
allocation
of
75
percent
resident
25
non-resident.
C
If
this
bill
were
to
pass,
that
number
would
change
from
25
percent
to
10
percent
for
the
non-resident
so
it'd
be
it
would
affect
non-resident
hunters
now
on
the
flip
side.
Resident
hunters
would
have
a
slight
increase
in
their
chances
to
draw
one
of
these
licenses,
and-
and
I
I
don't
think
I
mentioned
I'm
sure-
just
for
the
record-
it's
it's
bighorn
sheep,
mountain
goat,
grizzly
bear
bison
and
moose.
C
Absolutely
thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
this
first
amendment
above
the
solid,
solid
line
there
there's
a
little
bit
of
a
an
explanation
there,
but
essentially
the
task
force
intent
was
not
to
make
this
retroactive
for
anyone
other
than
those
folks
that
are
currently
in
a
five-year
waiting
period.
And
let
me
explain
that
so
currently,
if
you
draw
a
bighorn
sheep
license
after
the
the
date
that
you've
drawn
that
you're
not
allowed
to
apply
again
for
five
years,
so
what
this
amendment
would
do,
would
it
would?
C
It
would
honor
the
intentions
of
the
task
force,
which
was
to
include
the
once
in
a
lifetime
provision
for
those
folks
that
are
currently
in
that
waiting
period
now
for
a
sportsman
who
drew
eight
years
ago
and
is
no
longer
in
that
waiting
period
and
has
potentially
bought
additional
or
or
earned
additional
preference
points,
this
amendment
would
not
apply
to
them.
It
would
strictly
apply
to
those
folks
who
had
received
a
license
within
five
years
of
whatever
the
effective
date
of
this
bill
is.
B
C
Certainly
man,
I'm
sure,
so.
The
second
amendment
is
based
on
language
that
was
previously
struck
and
then,
with
the
one
of
the
amendments
that
was
made
in
the
house,
we
believe
these,
those
specific,
the
specific
terminology
there
that
describes
the
gender
or
the
type
of
license
for
bighorn,
sheep,
bison
and
moose
needs
to
be
struck,
because
this
would
apply
this
particular
provision.
That's
that's
contemplated
in
this
page
page
6
line
21
deals
with
all
of
the
all
of
the
licenses
that
would
be
issued,
not
just
those
for
for
bulls
or
ram
sheep.
B
C
And
then
the
last
one
is
actually,
I
don't
know
exactly
how
to
handle
this
manager.
We
we
offered
this
in-house
committee.
It
was
and
it
passed,
but
we
never
saw
it
show
up
in
the
engrossed
bill,
and
so
we
offer
it
here
again
today,
just
to
make
sure
that
language
gets
in.
We
believe
that's
important
language
and-
and
it
follows
the
same
logic
as
what
I
just
described
in
the
last
amendment.
F
That
is
senator
schuler.
Thank
you,
madam
chair
yeah.
Yeah.
I
appreciate
all
that
you
guys
have
done.
I
just
was
asked
gonna
ask
a
quick
question
about
the
the
task
force
and
how
that
went.
If
everybody
was
in,
I
guess
agreement
with
with
most
of
the
changes
that
were
made
and
and
just
what
was
your
take
on,
that
I
guess
yeah
director.
C
Ma'am
sure
senator
schuler
yeah,
so
as
far
as
the
task
force
members
there
was,
you
know,
I'm
going
to
say,
I'm
going
to
estimate
it
2.5
to
maybe
three
days
worth
of
discussion.
Just
on
on
these
issues
alone
that
you
see
here
before
you
today,
it
was
very
robust
discussion
with
a
lot
of
different
perspectives.
C
There
was
a
significant
public
outreach
component
to
this
effort
as
well
so
task
force
members
conducted
town
hall
meetings
around
the
state
at
several
different
locations
and
all
of
the
task
force
meetings
were
conducted
in
public
so
and
at
all
those
meetings.
We
had
a
lot
of
public
testimony
as
well,
and
then
there
was
a
written
comment
opportunity
for
the
public
as
well
that
occurred
between
each
task
force
meeting
where
the
public
could
submit
written
comments.
C
B
B
Thank
you
and
my
apologies.
I
know
representative
flittner
is
here.
Madam
cochair,
would
you
like
to
address
this
group?
I
probably
should
have
led
off
with
you.
I
apologize
for
that
alrighty
and
I
see
representative
newsome.
Also.
Would
you
like
to
address
okay,
thank
you
for
being
here
just
so.
I
get
a
sense
of
who'd
like
to
testify
pl.
Can
I
get
a
show
of
hands
from
people
in
the
audience
who
would
like
to
speak
and
then
I'm
curious
to
know
how
many
people
have
signed
up
online.
B
B
G
Good
morning,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
for
the
record,
joe
schaefer,
I'm
a
member
of
the
wyoming
wildlife
task
force
in
my
day,
job
I
get
to
work
with
community
colleges
and
do
some
pretty
cool
work
here
in
laramie
county.
So
thanks
for
giving
me
just
a
few
minutes
to
comment
on
behalf
of
the
the
task
force,
the
one
of
the
biggest
challenges
I
think
we've
faced
is
really
understanding
and
trying
to
grapple
with
two
dynamics,
specifically
with
the
these
big
five
species.
G
Unfortunately,
what
we've
seen
is
a
significant
increase
in
the
demand
and
the
supply
of
many
of
these
animals
decreasing
and
as
a
result
of
that,
the
idea
that
we
could
eventually
give
every
single
person
who
wanted
to
hunt
one
of
these,
these
wonderful
animals,
the
opportunity
to
do
so
is
just
not
the
reality
of
today.
There
is
just
not
a
system
or
a
way
in
which
we
can
do
that,
and
so
we
we've
shifted
in
many
ways
from
having
to
to
separate
the
the
biological
aspect
of
the
supply,
which
is
still
important
and
you'll.
G
See
that
you
know,
one
of
the
other
recommendations
of
the
wildlife
task
force
was
to
fully
fund
the
wildlife
trust
fund
to
help
us
with
habitat
things
that
could
you
know,
attempt
to
see
these
numbers
increase.
That's
very
important.
We
think
that
that's
probably
one
of
the
most
important
things
we
can
do
is
because
if
we
can
actually
get
a
healthier
herd,
more
animals
we're
going
to
have
a
better
opportunity
for
for
people
to
actually
pursue
one
of
these
big
game
species.
G
So
so
that
aside,
the
other
piece
we're
dealing
with
right
now
is
just
equity.
So
how
do
we
create
equity
and
opportunity?
Knowing
that
that
we
probably
can't
guarantee
everybody
can
get
a
shot
to
do
that
and
so
much
of
the
work
and
the
conversation
leading
up
to
this
was
really
trying
to
figure
out
what's
the
most
equitable
approach,
hence
the
the
response
with
a
once
in
a
lifetime
opportunity.
G
G
For
for
these
types
of
permits
between
residents
and
non-residents,
I
know
you
had
late
nights
and
probably
early
mornings.
I
did
send
you
an
email
this
morning
with
a
handout
that
was
developed
and
shared
with
the
task
force.
That
shows
you
state
by
state
analysis
and
you'll,
see
that
the
general
norm
is
90
to
residents
and
and
10
percent
to
non-residents.
G
D
Thank
you,
madam
chairman.
Mr
president,
thanks
for
your
enthusiasm,
your
efforts
your
time
last
year,
I
really
wasn't
ready
to
just
what
I
I
felt
kind
of
like,
maybe
that
we
might
have
been
knee-jerking
a
little
bit
and
wanted
to
allow
the
task
force
to
do
its
work,
and
so
I
really
do
appreciate
everybody
who
served
on
that,
and
my
question
to
you
this
morning
is
what
I
hope
we're
not
raising
expectation
too
high
here.
I
I
think
it
certainly
improves
our
chances
as
residents.
G
You,
madam
chair,
senator
landon
thanks
for
those
comments.
Actually
one
of
the
benefits
of
having
such
a
wonderful
community
college
system
systems,
we
were
able
to
tap
into
some
of
our
faculty
to
do
some
statistical
modeling
for
the
the
task
force.
I
don't
know
the
percentages
off
the
top
of
my
head.
I
can
tell
them
to
you,
but
what
I
will
tell
you
is
they
go
from
really
really
bad
to
just
really
bad
and
that's
the
reality.
There
is
no
system
that
gives
great
odds.
H
G
Mr
schaefer,
thank
you,
madam
chair
senator
salazar
good
morning,
good
to
see
you
thank
you
for
that,
so
so
I'll
shift
and
speak
just
from
a
resident
hunter
perspective,
because
the
task
force
did
not
take
up
the
issue
of
a
delayed
implementation
of
the
9010.
I
think
it
was
the
intent
of
the
recommendation
that
it
would
be
in
one
one
shot,
and
so
I
believe
our
good
friends
with
game
and
fish
have
some
of
the
the
actual
numbers
of
how
that
would
work
and
and
the
implementation
over.
G
I
think
what
is
five
years
with
that
my
take
on
it
is.
Is
I
don't
know
that
it
makes
sense?
I
don't
know
that
I
would
personally
support
it
and
and
for
for
the
single
reason
that
the
numbers
that
actually
shift
are
so
inconsequential
that
to
actually
add
the
administrative
burden
to
work
through
that
for
the
actual
impact
to
to
what
I
think,
the
the
interest
of
representative
summers
was
some
individuals
in
his
district
from
the
outfitting
industry.
G
H
G
Madam
chair
senator
salazar.
Yes,
as
the
good
director
said,
this
was
a
unanimous
vote
coming
out
of
the
task
force
that
task
force
as
wide
distribution,
a
representation
of
folks
from
individual
sports
men
and
women
too,
to
outfitters
on
that
and
similar
to
our
comments.
I
think
on
other
amendments
that
aren't
just
clerical
or
clarifying
amendments.
You
know
what
we
said
is
that
that's
not
what
the
the
task
force
advanced
and
so
what
I
would
tell
you
is.
G
B
I
Good
morning,
madam
chairwoman,
members
of
the
committee,
my
name,
is
bill.
Novotny,
I
am
head
of
government
affairs
for
the
wyoming
outfitters
and
guys
association.
You'll
recall
that
we've
had
this
discussion
about
9010
over
the
years
before
this
committee
and
the
outfitters
and
guides
association
has
typically
been
opposed
to
moving
any
9010
bill
forward.
What
I
can
say
today
for
you,
as
our
association,
which
is
the
trade
association
of
outfitters
and
guidances
in
the
state,
is
that
we've
taken
a
neutral
position
on
this
bill.
I
If
you
look
at
the
very
positive
good
that
preference
points
and
the
money
that's
generated
does
for
conservation,
those
folks
have
contributed
greatly
to
our
wildlife
assets.
So
you
know
there
is
a
member
of
several
members
that
may
work
as
outfitters
that
serve
on
the
task
force,
but
I
do
want
to
be
clear.
Wyoming
out.
First
guides
association
does
not
have
a
seat
specific
on
that
task
force,
so
I
speak
as
the
association
and
there
are
outfitters
that
serve
on
that.
Just
to
make
that
very,
very
clear.
B
J
J
It's
something
that
that
is
is
going
to
be
decided
in
the
legislature,
the
dr
alkanelope
or
our
regulation,
and
so
looking
at
at
the
bill
as
it
was
written,
we
felt
that
it
was.
It
was
not
exactly
what
a
lot
of
outfitters
wanted.
It
was
what
quite
a
few
resident
hunters
wanted.
So
there
was
a
good
balance
and
we
felt
is
the
right
thing
to
bring
forward.
H
K
K
J
Madam
chair
senator
grew
as
a
task
force.
We
did
anecdotally
discuss
the
the
waiting
period.
We
did
not
act
upon
it.
The
bill
that
without
representative
summer's
amendment
is
what
we
voted
on
unanimously,
I'm
back
and
forth.
On
my
thoughts
about
the
amendment,
I
don't
see
much
to
dr
schaefer's.
You
know
to
his
comments.
I
don't
see
how
it
would.
B
B
L
But
you
know
we
can
miss
one,
but
what
we've
seen
and
what
we've
been
really
happy
to
see
is
this
group
of
18
people
that
have
very
different
opinions
are
representing
different
factions
of
the
hunting
and
sporting
community
and
they're
all
coming
together
and
they're
they're,
finding
the
compromise
and
whether
we're
you
know
get
everything
out
of
it
that
we
want.
What
I
am
confident
in
is
that
this
task
force
is
taking
on
an
extraordinarily
complicated
subject
and
they're
doing
it
do
justice.
They
have
done
a
ton
of
public
output.
L
They
are
always
open
to
listening
to
things
that
other
groups
myself.
I
know
wyoming
wild
sheep
foundation
attends
a
lot
of
those
bow
hunters
of
wyoming
attends
a
lot
of
those
and
they're
always
open
to
listening
to
us
and
to
hearing
what
we
have
to
say.
So
I
feel,
at
least
from
the
sporting
ngo
side
of
things,
we're
feeling
very
hurt
and
very
included
into
this
conversation.
L
I
know
in
history
we
have
had
concerns
with
some
of
the
9010
allocation
more
on
the
funding
side
of
wyoming
game
and
fish
department,
but
we
feel
that
the
recommendation
that
the
task
force
are
putting
forward
is
a
good
way
forward
and
a
good
compromise
amongst
everything.
So
we
are
really
here
to
support
the
work
that
they
are
doing
and
I
can
stand
for
any
questions.
B
M
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
committee
rusty
bell,
a
campbell
county
commissioner,
I'm
actually
the
co-chair
of
the
wyoming
wildlife
task
force
and
one
of
my
day
jobs
is
also
a
taxidermy,
and
so
thank
you
for
taking
taking
time
to
listen
to
me,
the
the
my
fellow
task
force.
Members
did
a
great
job,
so
I
won't
won't.
Keep
you
very
long.
I
will
tell
you
that
we
don't
have
a
a
lot
of
easy
tasks
that
we
were
given
in
this
task
force.
M
I
guess
that's
why
it
was
created,
and
we
appreciate
that
like
like
with
dr
schaefer
said
earlier,
or
director
nesbik,
it
wasn't.
It
was
18
to
zero
on
this
and
we
did
spend,
I
would
say
hundreds
of
hours,
cumulatively
on
this
and
took
a
lot
of
comment,
and
so
I
I
don't
anticipate
with
the
things
that
we've
been
talking
about
in
our
task
force
lately
that
we
may
ever
see
another
unanimous
vote
on
that.
I
would
like
to
address
really
quick,
the
the
summers
amendment
we
didn't.
M
We
didn't
talk
about
that.
That
was
something
that
I
think
during
testimony
on
the
on
the
house
side.
We
did
hear
from
from,
certainly
mr
pollard
and
we've
heard
from
him
before
and
and
some
of
those
other
outfitters
that
that
deal
with
the
moose
and
moose
outfitters,
more
so
in
in
representative
summers,
district
and
and
so
as
far
as
as
far
as
that
goes,
all
we
can
do
is
tell
you
and
to
testify
to
you
what
what
the
task
force
did.
M
Certainly,
representative
summers:
we
respect
his
decisions
and
and
really
love
having
him
on
the
task
force,
and
he
has
to
do
and,
as
all
legislators
do
they
have
to
do
what
they
what
they
need
to
do
for
their
constituents,
and
you
know
I.
I
don't
think
that
that
that
amendment
actually
changes
the
the
the
what
the
bill's
intent
was.
It
just
stretches
out
the
implementation
date,
and
so
maybe
I'm
not
a
big
fan
of
it.
D
B
With
that
committee,
public
comment
is
closed.
Committing
what's
your
pleasure.
What's
your,
I
am
tired.
The
bill
has
been
moved
and
seconded
discussion.
I
I
want
to
ask
a
question,
though,
of
mr
nesvik,
so
I'm
I'm
trying
to
just
make
sure
I'm
catching
this,
and
now
I'm
waking
up
the
first
amendment
that
you
offered
to
us
makes
sense
about
not
making
this
retroactive,
but
then
you
said
on
page
six
line:
21
that
there
is
there
was
a
standing
committee
that
was
adopted,
but
this
engrossed
version
doesn't
capture.
That
is
that
correct.
B
B
D
Yeah
good
point
so,
madam
chairman,
I
I
guess
I
went
ahead
and
tracked
in
what
the
game
and
fish
has
asked
us
to
consider
and
including
that
third
piece
of
the
amendment,
and
I
I
guess
I
would
say
that
maybe
just
to
call
it
safe.
Maybe
our
committee
might
want
to
track
that
in
and
just
have
it
part
of
the
amendment.
B
I
think
that's
fair.
You
know,
mr
my,
my
good
colleague
here
who's
been
a
chairman
for
a
lot
longer
than
I
have.
I
think
you
know
out
of
prudence
will
adopt
that,
and
I
would
hope
that
there's
no
objection
among
committee
members,
but
I
think
maybe
we
should
visit
with
lso
a
little
bit
to
see
if
they
advise
issuing
a
revising
gross
copy.
K
I
I
agree
totally,
and
I
know
that
we
all
are
aware
of
the
deadlines
that
we're
under
and
under
normal
circumstances.
It
would
be
easy
to
say,
let's
lay
this
back
and
for
a
day
or
two
and
get
that
get
that
straightened
out.
But
we
all
know
if
we
do
that,
then
we
effectively
kill
this
bill,
and
I
know
none
of
us
want
to
do
that.
B
C
C
Since
we're
still
on
the
before
we
go
to
those,
I
do
understand
some.
There
was
a
mistake
on
that
first
amendment.
I
understand
why
you
might
have
been
struggling
to
figure
that
out
the
I
think,
if
you
on
the
first
amendment
on
line
five,
if
you
make
where
it
says
sheep
or
if
you
make
the
ore
blue,
like
an
addition,
I
think
that
straightens
it
up.
Okay,.
B
B
B
K
B
D
Chairman
just
real
quickly,
I
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
track
them
in
it.
I
certainly
have
it
tracked
into
my
my
bill
and
we
we
could
track
those
or
we
could
just
simply
pass
this
amendment,
knowing
that
our
legal
staff
can
track
it
in
for
us,
whatever
you're
comfortable
with
madam
chairman,
senator.
B
B
K
Madam
chair
would
like
to
make
one
last
amendment
on
page
6
line
19,
starting
with
the
word
beginning,
strike
the
balance
of
that
line
in
lines,
20
21,
22,
23
and
on
page
7
line
1
through
july,
1st
2027
comma.
So
it
would
be
that
sentence
would
earth
on
that
line
when
the
sentence
would
begin
with.
Commission.
B
It's
been
moved
and
been
moved.
Is
there
a
second?
Second,
it's
been
moved
and
seconded
just
for
our
clarification.
The
game
and
fish
gave
us
some
language
or
director.
Nezvik
gave
us
some
language
about
adjusting
the
word
of
the
use
ram
bull
bull
on
page
six
line.
Twenty
one.
Getting
rid
of
this
would
make
that
part
of
the
amendment
unnecessary.
Just
for
clarification,
senator
gru
did
you
have
any
comments.
K
But
after
that
and
I
watched
some
of
the
meetings
and
I
and
followed
it
quite
closely
and
after
watching
the
invoke
of
all
the
participants
in
the
testimony
here
today,
I'm
prepared
to
go
with
their
findings
and
I'm
not
going
to
turn
that.
I
know
that
some
of
my
outfetter
friends
are
still
a
little.
K
D
C
What
I
heard
you
say
is
is
that
if
this
amendment
were
to
pass,
then
the
other
amendment
we
offered
with
clarifying
gender
would
not
be
necessary
and,
and
that
I
don't
think,
that's
correct
and
I'll
I'll
commit
to
double
verifying
that
after
this.
But
I
don't
think
we
would
need
to
do
that,
because
that
language
was
as
a
consequence
of
another
summer's
amendment
that
was
earlier.
I
think
it
was
on
first
reading
that
struck
some
of
the
language
that
came
out
of
the
joint
committee.
The
interim
committee.
B
Okay,
well,
we
have
this
adopted.
I
think
if
we
strike
this
delayed
implementation,
all
of
this
will
get
sorted
out
by
lso.
I
think
is
how
that
might
shake
out,
but
I
mean
we
need
them
to
take
a
closer
look.
I
am
troubled
that
we
missed
incorporating
standing
committee
amendments
that
were
adopted
on
the
house
side.
I
really
want
to
get
a
corrected
copy
out
and
then
clean
amendments.
B
Get
this
cleaned
up,
but
just
for
the
committee's
awareness
there
might
be
parts
of
this
what
we
adopted,
if
we
adopt
senator
gru's
amendment
right
now
that
are
unnecessary
but
we'll
sort
through
sort
through
all
of
that,
so
all
right
any
discussion
on
the
amendment
to
pull
out
the
delayed,
effective
date
saying
none
all
those
in
favor
say:
aye
aye,
all
those
opposed
say
no,
the
amendment's
passed
committee
members.
Do
you
have
any
other
amendments
you'd
like
to
offer
to
this
bill
at
this
time,
senator
or
landon.
D
Director,
I
meant
to
ask
you
this
earlier
and
I
apologize
I
do.
Are
we
okay?
Financially,
as
we
do
this?
What
sort
of
impact
are
we
going
to
have
on
revenue
to
the
state?
Have
we
figured
that
out
yet
have
have
can,
because
we
may
be
asked
that
madam
chairman
and
I
I
just
want
to
be
able
to
defend
the
bill
and
here's
what
we're
looking
at
and
here's.
So
thank
you
director.
Any
thoughts
director.
C
Nezvik
madam
sheriff
center
landed.
Thank
you
for
for
your
thoughts
there
and
and
being
concerned
about
game
of
fish
revenue.
We,
the
the
there's
so
few
licenses
that
the
impact
is,
is
negligible.
It's
about
200
000
is
our
our
estimate,
and
so
you
know
we're
comfortable
with
the
with
this
change,
based
on
all
the
work
that
went
into
it.
It's
a
public
policy
decision
and
that's
a
consequence
of
it,
but
but
I'm
comfortable
with
that.
Thank
you
for
that
appreciate
any.