MINUTES OF THE
SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES
Sixty-seventh Session
April 2, 1993
The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Chairman R. Hal Smith, at 8:43 a.m., on Friday, April 2, 1993, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:
Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman
Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Vice Chairman
Senator Ernest E. Adler
Senator Thomas J. Hickey
Senator Mark A. James
Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.
Senator Dina Titus
STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst
Rayanne Francis, Senate Committee Secretary
OTHERS PRESENT:
Colonel William J. Yukish, Chief, Nevada Highway Patrol
Division, Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety
Michael C. Branch, Trooper, Nevada Highway Patrol, Department of
Motor Vehicles and Public Safety
Terry Crawforth, Deputy Director, Nevada Department of Wildlife
Fred E. Wright, Lobbyist, Coalition for Nevada's Wildlife
Fred M. Messmann, Boating Law Administrator, Nevada Department
of Wildlife
* * * * *
Chairman Smith opened the work session and declared the Senate Committee on Natural Resources would be considering action on several bills (Exhibit C). He invited Senator Neal to make a brief presentation on Senate Bill (S.B.) 108.
SENATE BILL 108: Prohibits use of radar gun in manner which may expose natural person to nonionizing radiation.
Senator Neal asked Colonel William J. Yukish, Chief, Highway Patrol Division, Nevada Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, to present the proposed amendments to S.B. 108.
Colonel Yukish introduced himself, as well as Michael C. Branch, Trooper, Nevada Highway Patrol (NHP), Department of Motor Vehicles and Public Safety, to members of the committee. Colonel Yukish emphasized Trooper Branch was also a certified radar instructor in the State of Nevada.
Colonel Yukish drew attention to the proposed amendments to S.B. 108, which were drafted in response to Senator Neal's concerns at the March 19, 1993 hearing (Exhibit D). He also called attention to the most recent National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) bulletin dealing with health concerns associated with the use of police radar units (Exhibit E). Colonel Yukish also provided an additional source of information on the subject from the Department of Health & Human Services (Exhibit F).
Colonel Yukish summarized the aforementioned handouts by insisting there was no conclusive evidence that traffic radar devices present a serious health hazard to the operators. He continued by stressing further studies will be done to ensure the accuracy of these results.
Colonel Yukish stated the proposed amendments to S.B. 108 had been developed by the Carson City Sheriff's Department and the NHP. He continued by pointing out the amendments took into consideration the recommendations made by NHTSA, as well as the Department of Health & Human Services.
As he reviewed the amendments with members of the committee, Colonel Yukish said five laboratories in the country conduct power level and emission checks on radar devices. He continued by saying the average cost of this checkup was in the area of $100 per unit. Senator Neal asked if the NHP submitted their radar units to this type of inspection process. Colonel Yukish assured members of the committee that the NHP sent its radar units (on a rotation basis) to a laboratory for recertification.
Upon completion of reviewing the proposed amendments, Colonel Yukish voiced his confidence that all of the concerns expressed by Senator Neal had been addressed. He remarked the proposed amendments would also give law enforcement agencies enough latitude to develop their own policies and procedures relative to the purchase and operation of radar units.
Chairman Smith called for action on S.B. 108.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 108 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR TITUS WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 92: Revises provisions governing issuance of certain game tags for resale by owners of land as compensation for damage caused by wildlife.
Chairman Smith drew attention to the fact this was a work session, but assured members of the committee that testimony would be allowed if the need arose. He invited Senator Rhoads to summarize the Subcommittee on Wildlife's recommendations to the full committee concerning S.B. 92.
Senator Rhoads reviewed a handout provided to members of the committee detailing the subcommittee's recommended amendments to S.B. 92 (Exhibit G). He pointed out the major change to S.B. 92 dealt with allowing the compensation hunting tag to be used anywhere within the unit where the private land was located. Previously, Senator Rhoads said the hunter was restricted to only hunting in the area where the damage incurred.
Senator Hickey asked if the purpose of providing a compensation tag was to limit the wildlife population in the area where the damage incurred. Senator Rhoads replied the intent of issuing a compensation tag was to reimburse the private landowner for the damage incurred to crops and property. He continued by saying the rancher/farmer actually sustained certain species of wildlife by providing winter forage.
Senator Hickey correlated the increase in the wildlife population and the cultivation of certain crops. Senator Rhoads commented that some landowners do not object to the presence of wildlife if the compensation was adequate. Senator Hickey cautioned fellow members of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources that this was the very problem they should avoid creating. He continued by saying he interpreted the policy S.B. 92 was adopting to be one of encouraging landowners to grow certain crops in order to attract certain species of wildlife. Senator Rhoads did not object to this observation, but stressed this bill created a win-win situation for wildlife and landowners.
Senator Hickey asserted S.B. 92 encouraged the development of a "feed lot" mentality. Senator Rhoads encouraged Terry Crawforth, Deputy Director, Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW), to describe some of the finer points of the bill.
Mr. Crawforth introduced himself to members of the committee. In response to Senator Hickey's questions, pointed out the NDOW can arrange special degradation hunts to deal with increased wildlife populations. Senator Hickey interrupted Mr. Crawforth by insisting that S.B. 92 actually created a "feed lot" atmosphere. Senator Rhoads admitted he had never heard this issue verbalized in that manner, but recognized there was some truth to Senator Hickey's observation.
Considerable discussion ensued on the merits of S.B. 92. Senator Hickey expressed his concern about the fact that there was no ceiling on the amount landowners could charge for compensation hunting tags.
Senator Rhoads invited Fred E. Wright, Lobbyist, Coalition for Nevada's Wildlife, to provide testimony to members of the committee. Mr. Wright introduced himself to members of the committee and provided a brief background history of S.B. 92. He explained the intent of amending the bill was to broaden the use of a compensation hunting tag and increase its value to the private landowner. Mr. Wright admitted he did not share Senator Hickey's viewpoint that the bill would encourage a "feed lot" atmosphere, because the crops which attract the wildlife are planted in established fields.
Senator Hickey explained this legislation originated as a result of crop damage incurred by wildlife. He continued by saying the state became involved in this issue because of its inherent interest in the state's wildlife. He stated his premise that these compensation tags could actually be abused by private landowners who consciously elect to grow specific crops in order to attract wildlife. Mr. Wright remarked the differing viewpoints of S.B. 92 were merely a matter of semantics.
Senator Hickey stressed a limit on the compensation tags should be set. Senator Rhoads and Mr. Wright stated a limit already exists. Mr. Wright continued by saying only 200 compensation tags can be issued each year. Senator Hickey insisted that he was referring to a limit on the amount a private landowner can charge for a compensation hunting tag. Senator Rhoads wondered why the NDOW would ever want to set such a limit. Senator Hickey replied the real question was "what was the value of the damaged crop?"
Mr. Wright said the Wildlife Board of Commissioners has established a fee of $50 (plus administrative costs) for each compensation tag issued to a private landowner. He said the landowner has the right to resell this hunting tag at whatever amount he/she determines to be compensatory for the damage incurred by the wildlife.
Mr. Wright explained the purpose of increasing the size of the area in which the hunt may take place was due to the fact the wildlife may no longer be grazing on the private land during the specified hunting period. Senator Neal asked if the term "unit" should be defined within S.B. 92. Senator Rhoads and Mr. Wright replied this term was already defined within statute.
After Senator Rhoads completed his review of Exhibit G, Chairman Smith admitted that he shared many of the same concerns as Senator Hickey. Chairman Smith said he did not favor S.B. 92, but would support its passage due to the fact the most recent amendment reinstated the bill's sunset date.
Senator Hickey said he hoped the legislature would examine this issue in further detail. He emphasized he was not opposed to feed lots, but objected to what S.B. 92 may cost the state in the issuance of damage compensation tags. He said this legislation had been drafted in response to compensation for damage caused by wildlife. However, the legislation now more closely resembles some kind of reward for feeding animals. Senator Hickey concluded his remarks by recommending that a full report (listing the effects of S.B. 92) should be submitted to the 1995 legislature.
Senator Rhoads admitted that he had drafted the original legislation, but emphasized it was never his intent to create a "feed lot" atmosphere. Chairman Rhoads emphasized the Senate Committee on Natural Resources had firmly established in the record that this issue should be reviewed on a continual basis. He expressed his appreciation to Senator Rhoads, as well as the other members of the Subcommittee on Wildlife Issues, for their efforts in developing a fine piece of legislation.
Chairman Smith called for action on S.B. 92.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 92 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 118: Makes various changes to provisions governing revocation or suspension of licenses and permits issued for hunting, fishing or trapping wildlife.
Senator Rhoads advised members of the committee that S.B. 118 had been amended by deleting the words "and permits" and "or permit(s)" from the entire bill. At the request of the mining industry, he explained the Subcommittee on Wildlife Issues had agreed to present these amendments to the entire committee.
Chairman Smith called for action on S.B. 118.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 118 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 119: Allows board of wildlife commissioners to revoke licenses and permits upon single violation of statutes or regulations.
Senator Rhoads explained the proposed amendments to S.B. 119 were similar to those of S.B. 118. He continued by pointing out the bill had been amended by deleting the words "and permits" from the entire bill. He stressed this amendment had been prepared in response to objections voiced by the mining industry.
Chairman Smith called for action on S.B. 119.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.B. 119 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 130: Revises restriction on terms of sale or lease of state land or interest therein.
Senator Hickey admitted he had originally requested that this bill be held, but asserted all of his questions had been answered.
Chairman Smith called for action on S.B. 130.
SENATOR HICKEY MOVED TO DO PASS S.B. 130.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 229: Requires person to file report of accident involving vessel with department of wildlife before receiving payment of insurance claim.
Chairman Smith invited Fred M. Messmann, Boating Law Adminis-trator, Nevada Department of Wildlife, to provide testimony on S.B. 229.
Mr. Messmann explained he had worked diligently on this legis-lation. During a recent conversation with James L. Wadhams, Lobbyist, American Insurance Association, Mr. Messmann was informed that if Mr. Wadhams was not in attendance at the work session with an amendment, Mr. Wadhams would agree to support S.B. 229 as written.
Chairman Smith read a brief note he had received from Mr. Wadhams (Exhibit H).
Senator Adler objected to passage of S.B. 229 in its present form due to fact he was still concerned that insurance companies could refuse to process the claim of an individual who, due to a boating accident, was lying unconscious in a hospital bed. He explained amended language contained in section 1, subsection 3 of the bill would allow an insurer to withhold insurance payments until the operator of the boat filed a NDOW boating accident report. Senator Adler stated this type of permissive language could lead to situations where individuals may file claims of bad faith against insurance companies which refuse to process claims until a NDOW report was filed.
Senator James shared Senator Adler's concerns and stated S.B. 229 placed both the injured person and the insurance company in a quandary. He voiced his doubts about whether an insurance contract could actually be altered by a change in statute. He thought the bill was going to be amended and refused to support the bill in its current form.
Chairman Smith closed the work session on S.B. 229 and assigned it to a subcommittee comprised of Senators James and Adler.
Chairman Smith expressed his desire to take action on S.J.R. 7.
SENATE JOINT
RESOLUTION (S.J.R.) 7: Directs Legislative Commission to continue committee to review Tahoe Regional Planning Compact.
Considerable discussion ensued on possible amendments to the bill and Senator Adler proposed language reducing the committee's membership from seven to three members.
SENATOR ADLER MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS S.J.R. 7 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR HICKEY SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 295: Requires sign that advertises price of gasoline to include price of all grades of gasoline sold on premises on same sign.
Senator Hickey stated this bill was still in subcommittee, thus Chairman Smith held the bill for consideration at a future work session.
SENATE BILL 303: Makes various changes relating to regulation of pesticides.
Senator Rhoads requested that Chairman Smith hold this bill. There was no objection to Senator Rhoads' request from any member of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources.
ASSEMBLY BILL (A.B.) 126: Directs state fire marshal to develop reference guide for use by personnel responding to emergencies involving hazardous materials.
Chairman Smith explained A.B. 126 had been amended in response to concerns voiced by members of the committee at an earlier hearing on March 31, 1993. He asked Caren Jenkins, Senior Research Analyst, to summarize the proposed amendments to A.B. 126.
Ms. Jenkins explained Senator Smith's concerns regarding the liability posed by language contained in section 1, subsection 2. She clarified by saying a problem could arise if a responder, who had not been supplied with a reference guide, was injured at a hazardous materials accident. At Chairman Smith's request, Ms. Jenkins recommended that section 1, subsection 2 be deleted from A.B. 126.
Ms. Jenkins explained concerns had also been voiced regarding the distribution of the reference guide. She recommended that the first sentence of section 1, subsection 3 be modified to read:
3. The state fire marshal shall make available the reference guide to local governments, state and local personnel...
Chairman Smith explained these proposed amendments had been discussed with concerned parties and, subsequently, approved.
SENATOR RHOADS MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS A.B. 126 AS AMENDED.
SENATOR TITUS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE JOINT
RESOLUTION (S.J.R.) 15:Urges Congress to take certain actions to allow for consideration of certain economic factors in determining whether to list species of wildlife as being endangered or threatened and in developing recovery plans for endangered or threatened species of wildlife.
Chairman Smith stated that, at the Wednesday, March 17, 1993, hearing, S.J.R. 15 been passed out of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources. Shortly after the hearing, several concerns had been raised about the total effectiveness of existing language contained in the resolution. At that time, Senator James had volunteered to prepare an amendment clarifying several areas within the resolution.
Chairman Smith invited Senator James to review his proposed amendment to S.J.R. 15. Senator James explained existing language specified that the Secretary of the Interior would determine whether to list a species of wildlife as endangered or threatened by balancing the available scientific data with commercial and economic impact information. Senator James asserted that he did not feel this was appropriate, so he recommended proposed language which would require that a determination be made in a timely manner in an effort to mitigate the economic impacts.
Chairman Smith explained S.J.R. 15 had originally been passed out the Senate Committee on Natural Resources without any kind of amendment. Senator Rhoads asked if the members of the committee should take another motion on the bill. Chairman Smith clarified the amendment would be handled by Senator James, thus no further action would be taken by the committee on S.J.R. 15.
Chairman Smith said the next order of business before the committee was consideration of two bill draft requests (BDRs).
BDR 51-905:Makes changes concerning collection of petroleum cleanup discharge fee.
Chairman Smith called for action on BDR 51-905.
SENATOR NEAL MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 51-905.
SENATOR RHOADS SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
BDR 48-833:Changes manner in which projects are approved for acquisition, construction and operation.
Chairman Smith called for action on BDR 48-833.
SENATOR ADLER MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 48-833.
SENATOR NEAL SECONDED THE MOTION.
THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
* * * * *
SENATE BILL 125: Revises Carson Water Subconservancy District to include Storey County and exclude Douglas County.
Senator Adler mentioned he and several other members of the legislature (Assembly Speaker Joseph E. Dini, Jr., Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, etc.) had recently met with members of the Carson Water Subconservancy District. He explained this district had been formed by the legislature in 1987 and had developed some very good studies. However, Senator Adler said it was time for the district to begin using their authority to perform duties set forth in statute.
Senator Adler requested that S.B. 125 be held for consideration at a future work session. There was no objection to Senator Adler's request from any member of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources.
* * * * *
There being no further business before the Senate Committee on Natural Resources, Chairman Smith adjourned the hearing at 9:24 a.m.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:
Rayanne J. Francis,
Committee Secretary
APPROVED BY:
Senator R. Hal Smith, Chairman
DATE:
??
Senate Committee on Natural Resources
April 2, 1993
Page 1