MINUTES OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES Sixty-eighth Session February 1, 1995 The Senate Committee on Natural Resources was called to order by Vice Chairman Lawrence E. Jacobsen, at 1:40 p.m., on Wednesday, February 1, 1995, in Room 224 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Vice Chairman Senator Mark A. James Senator Mike McGinness Senator Ernest E. Adler Senator John B. (Jack) Regan Senator O. C. Lee COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Senator Dean A. Rhoads, Chairman (Excused) STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: Fred Welden, Chief Deputy Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau Dana Bennett, Senior Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau Billie Brinkman, Committee Secretary OTHERS PRESENT: Joe Johnson, Toiyabe Chapter, Sierra Club Elsie Dupree, Representative, Nevada Wildlife Federation Larry Hawke, Government Relations Counsel, Nevada Mining Association Bill Upton, Chairman, Environmental Committee, Nevada Mining Association Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation Michael McGriff, Representative, American Pistol and Rifle Association Gaylyn Spriggs, Lobbyist, Rayrock Mines Joe Guild, Lobbyist, Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corporation Stephanie D. Licht, Secretary/Treasurer, Nevada Wool Growers Association Janet Rogers, Chairman, Colorado River Commission Amy Halley, Representative, Barrick Gold Strike Mine Vice Chairman Jacobsen opened the hearing on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.R.) 9. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 9: Expresses support of Nevada Legislature for exchanges of land involving Bureau of Land Management and Colorado River Commission which would result in additional land for Laughlin. Dana Bennett, Senior Research Analyst, Legislative Counsel Bureau, who also serves as staff to the Legislative Committee on Public Lands, came forward to provide the initial background of S.J.R. 9 in the absence of Senator Rhoads, Chairman, Public Lands Committee. Ms. Bennett indicated this resolution was unanimously approved by the Public Lands Committee at its meeting in December, 1994. She said additional details on this action and all actions taken by the Public Lands Committee during the last 18 months can be found in its report which is Legislative Counsel Bureau (LCB) Bulletin No. 95-11. Taken from that report, Ms. Bennett read a brief explanation of S.J.R. 9: Nevada's Legislative Committee on Public Lands has maintained a continuing interest in the growth of Laughlin, one of the state's newer communities, whose development has been constrained by the vast amounts of public land surrounding it. During their meeting in Laughlin, the members were informed that the town board was working with BLM [Bureau of Land Management] and the Colorado River Commission to acquire, through the land exchange process, 640 acres. This land would be an important addition to the area available for residential development and, as such, contribute to the local tax base. Therefore, the Public Lands Committee recommends that the 1995 Session of the Nevada Legislature: Express support for future land exchanges involving the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Colorado River Commission that will result in more land for Laughlin. Janet Rogers, Chairman, Colorado River Commission, came forward to testify on behalf of S.J.R. 9. She stated that on November 8, 1994, the Clark County Board of County Commissioners requested that the Colorado River Commission and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) initiate a process to exchange certain state lands administered by the commission in the Fort Mojave Valley for 640 acres of federal land. The county adopted its Laughlin Land Use Guide in which the county encouraged the exchange because of current infrastructure and developmental pressure. Ms. Rogers continued outlining the procedures necessary to initiate and accomplish the exchange. Ms. Rogers said adoption of S.J.R. 9 would give a welcome signal to the BLM that the Legislature gives this land exchange priority and wishes the BLM to do the same. Ms. Rogers presented two amendments to the resolution (Exhibit C). Senator Regan queried if, in the land swap, there is a need for development of affordable housing within the new area. Ms. Rogers said the development of affordable lodging and infrastructure is a part of the very purpose behind the land exchange. The land for the desert tortoise preserve would be better used by the BLM and this land would be used to proceed with development the way Laughlin had envisioned it. Vice Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on S.J.R. 9. ***** Vice Chairman Jacobsen opened the hearing on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.R.) 8: SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 8: Urges Congress of United States to amend Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide for consideration of economic impact of Act. Vice Chairman Jacobsen called on Ms. Bennett to give an overview of S.J.R. 8. Ms. Bennett said this resolution, dealing with the Endangered Species Act, came from the Public Lands Committee and was approved unanimously at its meeting in December, 1994. She read a brief explanation of the measure from the committee's report: The Endangered Species Act of 1973 was scheduled to be re- authorized by the U.S. Congress in 1994; however, no action was taken. It is expected to be considered in 1995. As written, the Act does not require, at the time a species is being studied as an addition to the threatened or endangered lists, any consideration of the economic impacts upon an area should the species be listed. The situations involving the spotted owl in the Pacific Northwest and the desert tortoise in southern Nevada are clear indications that such a consideration is necessary and important. Therefore, the Public Lands Committee recommends that the 1995 Session of the Nevada Legislature: Express support for the inclusion of economic considerations in the re- authorization of the federal Endangered Species Act. Ms. Bennett read a letter directed to Senator Rhoads (Exhibit D) from Russ Fields, Administrator, Nevada Division of Minerals, in support of S.J.R. 8. Senator James referred to a resolution introduced in 1993 on this subject. He asked Ms. Bennett what the action was on the previous measure. Ms. Bennett said the resolution referred to by Senator James was Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.R.) 15 of the Sixty-seventh Session. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 15 OF THE 67TH SESSION: Urges Congress to require that the determination of a species as being threatened or endangered be made in a timely manner. Ms. Bennett gave an explanation of S.J.R. 15 of the 67th Session. She said it asked that economic considerations be taken into account when the recovery plans are being developed and recovery plans are typically developed after the species has been listed. S.J.R. 8 would ask that the act be amended to require the consideration of economic impact at the time the listing is being considered. Discussion continued concerning S.J.R. 15 of the 67th Session versus S.J.R. 8. Ms. Bennett explained the resolution being proposed this session starts at an earlier point than the resolution that was passed last session, that S.J.R. 8 is asking for an amendment of the Endangered Species Act. The resolution as passed last session, just addressed economic impacts during recovery plans, and recovery plans kick in after the species has been listed. Senator James said he feels the language in S.J.R. 8 could be more specific. Vice Chairman Jacobsen said he feels that resolutions "never seem to get any- place." Which, he said, points out a fact that the language must be more direct and not only spell out concerns, but also suggest some solutions. Ms. Bennett said she would be happy to work with the committee to develop wording for an amendment which would be more specific. Senator Regan suggested that on page 2, line 11, S.J.R. 8, the words "may have" be deleted and the word "has" be added. Vice Chairman Jacobsen said he thinks such an amendment is a good idea. Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, read a prepared statement (Exhibit E) in support of S.J.R. 8. Senator James indicated he agrees with the statement made by Mr. Busselman that the committee should also offer to Congress some method that would instill additional accountability for the federal agencies that are involved in the listing. He said he would support amending S.J.R. 8 to address that subject. Gaylyn Spriggs, Representative, Rayrock Mines, came forward in support of S.J.R. 8. She said she is in favor of amending the resolution to include accountability. She suggested that when a species is listed, the economic impacts are considered, and that it is important to include the word "considered." Larry Hawke, Government Relations Counsel, Nevada Mining Association, said the mining association supports S.J.R. 8, then he deferred to Bill Upton, Chairman, Environmental Committee, Nevada Mining Association. Mr. Upton said the environmental committee supports S.J.R. 8. However, he pointed out the Endangered Species Act had caused a considerable amount of expense to the mining industry in terms of meeting the provisions and requirements of that act. He expressed it had been most noticeable in the exploration activities, particularly in the northern part of the state and the higher elevations. Mr. Upton suggested the term "protected species", line 12, page 2, of S.J.R. 8, be changed to "threatened and endangered species" as a point of clarification. Mr. Upton added there are a number of species that are protected by other federal and state laws in addition to those protected by the Endangered Species Act. Elsie Dupree, Representative, Nevada Wildlife Federation, read a prepared statement (Exhibit F) in opposition to S.J.R. 8. Joe Johnson, Representative, Toiyabe Chapter, Sierra Club, went on record in opposition to S.J.R. 8 without comment. Senator James asked Mr. Johnson what his thoughts were on an amendment to the Endangered Species Act which would indicate that economic factors would not be considered when the species is listed, but just whether the numbers had dropped enough so that a species had to be listed. But then, Senator James continued, modify the effects of that listing. He said he understands the act which says, as soon as a listing is made it becomes a thing that cannot be touched, and that just the listing had a "draconian" effect, with no planning, no consideration of anything. Senator James pointed out that when everything stops just because a species is listed is the main objection of this committee. He continued, saying he would not want to bring in economic effects at the listing stage if the consequences were softened, and if there was a certain amount of time to study a temporary plan before the listing goes into effect. Senator James asked Mr. Johnson if his organization which supports the Endangered Species Act, had given any thought to his suggested ideas. Mr. Johnson said it is the position of the Toiyabe Chapter not to support economic considerations. He said generally there is a broad awareness that the present law and its regulations has impacted the development community and has some unnecessary or unanticipated problems. He said putting the impact at some delayed time would be an area to investigate. Joe Guild, Lobbyist, Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corporation, came forward in support of S.J.R. 8. Amy Halley, Representative, Barrick Gold Strike Mine, testified in support of S.J.R. 8. Mike McGriff, Representative, American Pistol and Rifle Association, came forward and remarked that his association is "in support of the spirit behind all three resolutions [the current agenda], but opposed to addressing the issues in this manner." Mr. McGriff went on to read a prepared statement which basically did not refer to S.J.R. 8. Vice Chairman Jacobsen reminded Mr. McGriff of the resolution at hand, and Mr. McGriff remarked, "The Endangered Species Act is unconstitutional and should never have been imposed on the people of Nevada." Stephanie D. Licht, Secretary/Treasurer, Nevada Wool Growers Association, came forward in support of S.J.R. 8. Vice Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on S.J.R. 8. **** Vice Chairman Jacobsen opened the hearing on Senate Joint Resolution (S.J.R.) 6. SENATE JOINT RESOLUTION 6: Expresses support of Nevada Legislature for activities and operations of all mining industries in Nevada and expresses its opposition to any extensive and unreasonable reform of existing federal laws governing mining. Dana Bennett said S.J.R. 6 was unanimously approved by the Public Lands Committee at its meeting in Las Vegas in December, 1994. And she read a brief explanation for that action: For several sessions, the United States Congress has entertained proposals to change the Mining Law of 1872. This past Congress, however, came closest to radically altering many of the procedures governing hard-rock mining on public lands. Although no amendments to existing laws were ultimately passed, the threat of such action has resulted in a chilling effect on minerals exploration in Nevada. Because mining has been important to this state, historically and currently, the Public Lands Committee was aggressive in its support of the industry and its opposition to radical reforms during this interim period. All indications are that Congress will return to this issue when it convenes in 1995. The Public Lands Committee will continue to be diligent in its monitoring of any proposed actions and encourages its legislative colleagues to reiterate their support for this valuable part of Nevada's economy. Therefore, the Public Lands Committee recommends that the 1995 Session of the Nevada Legislature: Express support for the mining industry in this state and opposition to extensive and unreasonable reform of existing mining laws. Ms. Bennett read into the record, a letter (Exhibit G) written to Senator Rhoads from Russ Fields, Administrator, Division of Minerals, in support of S.J.R. 6. Joe Johnson, Representative, Toiyabe Chapter, Sierra Club, expressed support of S.J.R. 6 and informed the committee that the Sierra Club supports mining. He presented suggested amendments (Exhibit H) to S.J.R. 6. He said the suggested amendments would change the character of the resolution from supporting things not liked, to expressing support of reasonable reform of existing federal laws governing mining. Senator James asked for examples of a reasonable reform of the 1872 mining law. Mr. Johnson said one of the most contentious areas is royalties. He suggested royalties are accepted and justified, however, the argument is what level is reasonable and what should that level be based upon, gross or net. Further discussion by Senator James and Mr. Johnson regarding royalties and the proprieties of the same. Mr. Johnson said patenting is a principle concern to the Sierra Club. And he suggested there are abuses primarily in the areas where service rights have high economic value. He said the surety of title of mineral rights is supported by the Sierra Club. He declared the official position of the Sierra Club is opposition to patenting. Mr. Johnson said a third area proposed by the Sierra Club has to do with the determination of whether the land is suitable for mining or recreational uses, which is a contentious point. Mr. Johnson continued explaining the suggested amendments in Exhibit H. Elsie Dupree, Representative, Nevada Wildlife Federation, Inc., read a prepared statement (Exhibit I) in support of S.J.R. 6. Larry Hawke, Government Relations Counsel, Nevada Mining Association, came forward in support of S.J.R. 6. Mr. Hawke announced he had distributed to the committee members, a Briefing Book on the General Mining Law prepared and published by the Nevada Mining Association (Exhibit J is on file in the Research Library.). And Mr. Hawke mentioned he had provided the committee secretary with a copy of a presentation and testimony (Exhibit K) delivered in Washington, D.C., to the House Committee on Resources, Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources on the general issue of mining reform. The testimony was provided by John L. Dobra, Ph.D., Economist, at the University of Nevada, Reno, and director of the Natural Resource Industry Institute. He said the testimony would be informative together with the briefing book. Bill Upton, Chairman, Environmental Committee, Nevada Mining Association, joined Mr. Hawke and said the association does view some of the provisions seen in mining law proposals for reform in the environmental areas, as being highly duplicative of existing laws and regulations, particularly in Nevada. He endorsed the testimony by Elsie Dupree (Exhibit I) regarding the regulations in the state as they apply, not only to the mining industry, but to other industries as well. He said they are comprehensive and effective and the track record they have had over the last several years speaks for itself. Mr. Upton said, "We do view the environmental provisions in the mining law reform debate as being duplicative and we will be extremely honest to our industry in light of the regulations we already have in place." Senator Adler inquired what the mining industry's current position is on mining reform. Mr. Hawke gave an overview of the current status of the mining reform action in Congress: Representative Geo. Miller of California who is the chairman of the Natural Resources Committee in the House when the Democrats controlled, has or will introduce legislation on mining law reform that should mirror the HR322 legislation of last session that included the substitute provided by the Congressman from California who is no longer a member of that body. The mining industry, nationally, is currently working with members of Congress to develop reform of the general mining law that is consistent with many of the goals and objects which are articulated in S.J.R. 6. That is about as specific as I can get right now. In reply to a further question by Senator Adler, Mr. Hawke said it basically is the goal of the mining industries to get reforms passed during this Congressional Session in order to get the issue settled at the national level. He said the Nevada Mining Association is not directly involved in those activities. Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation, urged the committee to support S.J.R. 6 and read a prepared statement (Exhibit L) to that effect. Gaylyn Spriggs, Lobbyist, Rayrock Mines, spoke in favor of S.J.R. 6. However, she said, for the record, she is opposed to the amendments as outlined in Exhibit G. Joe Guild, Lobbyist, Santa Fe Pacific Gold Corporation, came forward in support of S.J.R. 6, and he too, opposed the changes in Exhibit G. He asked that the resolution be passed as written. Stephanie D. Light, Secretary/Treasurer, Nevada Wool Growers Association, commented the Wool Growers Association appreciates all of the support for the industries in Nevada which are in the rural areas. She went on record in support of S.J.R. 6. Vice Chairman Jacobsen closed the hearing on S.J.R. 6. ***** Vice Chairman Jacobsen announced the next meeting of the Senate Committee on Natural Resources would be Monday, February 20, 1995. Vice Chairman Jacobsen announced there were seven bill draft requests (BDRs) to be presented for committee introduction. He asked Mr. Welden to read all the summaries and then asked for action on all seven BDRs. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 43-559: Increases fee for issuance of certificates of ownership and number for transfer of ownership of certain motorboats. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 40-583: Revises provisions governing evidence of compliance with emission control programs. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 40-584: Provides statutory authority for department of motor vehicles and public safety to deny, suspend or revoke license of fleet station. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 43-557: Requires certain children to wear personal flotation devices while on board certain vessels. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 45-862: Revises provisions governing certain unlawful activities related to hunting, trapping, possession, sale or training of birds of prey. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 50-880: Revises provisions governing inspection of sheep and issuance of sheep permits. BILL DRAFT REQUEST 50-885: Revises remedies available to state board of sheep commissioners with regard to delinquent taxes. SENATOR REGAN MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 43- 559, BDR 40-583, BDR 40-584, BDR 43-557, BDR 45-862, BDR 50-880, and BDR 50-885. SENATOR JAMES SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED. (SENATOR RHOADS WAS ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.) ***** There being no further business, Vice Chairman Jacobsen adjourned the meeting at 2:55 p.m. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: Billie Brinkman, Committee Secretary APPROVED BY: Senator Lawrence E. Jacobsen, Vice Chairman DATE: Senate Committee on Natural Resources February 1, 1995 Page