June 23, 2017 Wildlife Heritage Committee Meeting Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners Nevada Department of Wildlife

June 23, 2017 Wildlife Heritage Committee Meeting Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners Nevada Department of Wildlife Meeting Location: Clark County Government Center Commission Chambers 500 S. Grand Central Parkway Las Vegas, NV 89155 1. Call to Order and Roll Call Chairman Wallace The meeting was called to order at 8:00 am. by Chairman Wallace. Commissioner Wallace (Chair), Commissioner Almberg, Commissioner Valentine, CAB Chair Member Glenn Bunch and Member Joe Crim were all in attendance. Commissioner Young was absent. 2. Approval of Minutes The minutes from the June 23, 2016 and May 11 th 2017 Wildlife Heritage Committee meetings need to be approved. Commissioner Valentine had one correction: he believes Commissioner Bliss was not in attendance for the last meeting that was held in June 2016. Public Comment: None Mark Farman (NDOW Wildlife Staff Specialist): Reminds the committee to not forget the other set of minutes. We have two sets that need to be approved. Chairman Wallace: Everyone one clear there was two sets of minutes? Commissioner Almberg did not see the other set of minutes. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to approve the minutes as presented with the striking of Commissioner Bliss off the May 11 th 2017 Wildlife Heritage Committee meeting. The motion was seconded by Member Crim. Motion passed unanimously. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to approve the minutes from June 23 rd 2016 as presented. Second by Member Crim. Motion passed 4-1, Commissioner Almberg abstained from that motion. 3. Member Items No member items. 1

4. Commission Regulation 17-06, 2018 Heritage Tag Regulation Amendment 1 Maureen Hullinger (Management Analyst III) Maureen Hullinger (Management Analyst III): At our May Heritage Committee meeting we were presented with 16 proposals. One of which was late, the California Wild Sheep Foundation. Out of that meeting you gave our department directions to call potential selectees out of those 16 to let them know their final recommendation will happen at this meeting. One of the concerns we received from the selectee s was if it s mandatory attendance. We reassured them that it wasn t and let them know where they were in the process and we invited them to this meeting if they could attend. Public Comment: None Bill DeJuncker President of WHIN: I would just like to thank the Clark County CAB board for recommending us for another Heritage Mule Deer tag. Three years running now we set state records. Over the years I was going to have the exact figures but I did not look it up. I know that WHIN rose over a half a million dollars. So again I thank you for the consideration for when to receive a mule deer tag. Thank you. Back to Committee: Chairman Wallace: We will start with the Wildlife Heritage Mule Deer. At the May Committee meeting we did some preliminary guidance for Mule Deer Foundation and WHIN for one and Nevada Bighorns Unlimited Fallon and Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited for the second. Commissioner Valentine: Shared with the Chairman his considerations that were good for mule deer were the WHIN and the Mule Deer Foundation. Commissioner Almberg: I am in agreement with Paul. It is pretty hard to get away from the history there; they both have done very well in the past. Member Crim: Good choice for the two tags also. Public Comment: - Mule Deer Heritage tags Paul Dixon Clark County CAB: We had a discussion on all the vendor tags for this. One of the things we had discussed is that the Mule Deer Foundations banquets that are held in Salt Lake City versus all the other vendors that are listed here hold the banquets within the state. We believe that wherever the tags exists the people who buy those each year will search that event out and participate in that event; either by phone which I have done most recently, or most cases have been done by phone the last couple of years. We felt that the benefit to the state would not only be the Heritage Program, but there s a benefit to the state of having that tag at a banquet and add excitement, more money and funds into the state by people attending that banquet and gives us a secondary benefit of the banquet. If you gave money to this committee to cover shortages, each of these local banquets do a lot locally with the money and other things versus if we do that with the Mule Deer Foundation, I think that s why Meadow Valley was set up because majority of the money doesn t stay in the state it goes somewhere else. We supported NSU and WHIN for Mule Deer tags. Sean Shea agreed with Paul and thinks that is a great way to look at it and keep the money right here. I definitely believe WHIN, NBU in Fallon and Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited. I figured go to NBU Fallon and see what these guys can do. 2

Commissioner Almberg: There are some other CABS that would like to see things kept within the state. White Pine CAB had the same philosophy and would like to see things kept in the state. Commissioner Valentine: The only reason why I would look at the Nevada Mule Deer Foundation is that according to their submittal, they have 45,000 people that attend that convention. Historically they have received a grant from us. I don t have a problem with changing Mule Deer Foundation to Nevada Sportsmen s Unlimited. Chairman Wallace: I agree with you as well. We can discuss this further when we come to a motion at the end. We will move to Wildlife Heritage Antelope. We had tentatively thought of Pershing County Chukars Unlimited and Nevada Waterfowl Association. I had received support on Pershing County Chukars and I will read it into the record: Dear Committee Members - Thank you again for your continue consideration of Pershing County Chucker s Unlimited as a vendor for 2018 Antelope Heritage tag. It s truly an honor and privilege to be able to auction this tag and an opportunity not to be taken for granted. Unfortunately we are unable to ask for this tag in person but we trust that this letter can continue education in Nevada s Wildlife and Habitat will allow us again to be awarded the opportunity to put sportsmen and women s money back into the Nevada Wildlife. Again thank you for your past support and look forward to a continued partnership. Dan Hill President Pershing County Chukars Unlimited. Chairman Wallace: I m happy with the names we came up with, Pershing County Chukars Unlimited and the Nevada Waterfowl Association. Commissioner Valentine and Almberg agreed. Public Comment: - Wildlife Heritage Antelope tags Paul Dixon Clark: We supported Pershing County Chukars Unlimited and Nevada Waterfowl Association for antelope tags. Chairman Wallace: We will move to the Wildlife Heritage Rocky Mountain Elk tags, two of them. We had Meadow Valley Wildlife Unlimited, Rocky Mt. Elk Foundation or NBU Reno as potential choices. Commissioner Almberg: Yes the same thought in the elk as we discussed with the deer. Clark County and White Pine both support it. The Meadow Valley Unlimited with the same thought of keeping things in state. I don t have a problem with that at all. Chairman Wallace: So you are thinking NBU Reno we are keeping it in state? Commissioner Almberg: Yes I m thinking NBU Reno and then Meadow Valley Unlimited. Commissioner Valentine: I support that. Commissioner Crim: The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation dinner where is that one at? 3

Commissioner Valentine: The research I did, the actual is at the Rendezvous, I believe in Tucson, Arizona. Commissioner Crim: If it s going to keep money in Nevada I can support it. I don t have a problem with that at all I think it s probably a better idea for the economy concerning our state instead of somebody else s. Member Bunch: I agree I think it a good choice. Chairman Wallace: We will move on to Wildlife Heritage Nelson Bighorn Sheep tag #1 and sheep tag #2. Potential choices are Wild Sheep Foundation and Fraternity of the Desert Bighorn and NBU Reno. I believe that was a partnership. Public Comment: Bighorn Nelson Sheep - None Back to Committee: Commissioner Wallace: We will move on to Wildlife Heritage California Bighorn Sheep. Potential choices of NBU Reno or Elko Bighorns Unlimited. Commissioner Valentine: I feel that after looking at the submittals, Elko Bighorns Unlimited. Commissioner Almberg: I have no problem with that at all. Again that goes back to distributing some of these banquets throughout the state. Public Comment Heritage California Bighorn Sheep Chris Cefalu NBU Reno: I want to thank the Commission for consideration of tags for NBU Reno. We were interested in California Bighorn Sheep. I think we held the record for selling that tag for the state. So we would like consideration for that. That being said we would like to see either Elko Bighorns Unlimited or Fallon have an opportunity for an Elk tag in consideration for NBU Reno. Either way we want to keep it in the state. I like the comments that we hear about keeping these tags here in our state. I thank you for that consideration. Commissioner Almberg: If I understand this right, you re saying that NBU Reno will be willing to give up the potential Elk tag in Reno for the California Bighorn in Reno? Chris Cefalu said that s correct. Commissioner Almberg: I have no problem with that. Chairman Wallace: Move on to the Wildlife Heritage Wild Turkey tags. Potential choices are WHIN, Carson Valley Chukars Club for two, Meadow Valley Wildlife Unlimited and Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited. 4

Commissioner Valentine: I have the following organizations for the Turkey tags. My selections are Meadow Valley, Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited, Carson Valley Chukar Club, WHIN and Las Vegas Woods and Water. Chairman Wallace: That would leave Carson Valley Chukar Club one and then transfer the other to Las Vegas Woods and Water. Public Comment: Wildlife Heritage Turkey tags Paul Dixon Clark County: On break, Commissioner Valentine and I had discussions about Las Vegas Woods and Waters. Their banquets are getting up to five hundred now. We have Carson Valley Chukar Club, Meadow Valley, Wildlife Unlimited, NSU and SCI. SCI is something we haven t mentioned and they have a pretty good size banquet up in Reno. This is the first time in a long time since they had applied for tags. Again trying to spread the wealth and trying to keep from double stacking unless something like NBU Reno. I did mention earlier we talked about the Desert Bighorn we thought we had the discussion on whether giving them a Bighorn, Desert and California Bighorn. For NBU it would be better change it to an elk tag. Sean Shea: Your last meeting I checked on every body they were the WHIN - 2, the Chukar Club 2, Meadow Valley Unlimited and Nevada Sportsman Unlimited. When I left I thought everybody was comfortable with that. I think the Chukar Valley Club should get 2. Look at the money those guys put towards upland game, it blows all of these guys out of the water. This is the first year they want to do it and sometimes you see those two tags with bidders and they start bidding back and forth. And all of a sudden they get up there and then another tag does just as well as the first. Especially if you have some big money guys starting to come and participate in the Turkey tags. Chairman Wallace: I do not have an issue with the suggestion of NBU Reno for the California Bighorn Sheep tag and giving the elk tag to Elko Bighorn Unlimited. I feel pretty good about that myself actually. Commissioner Valentine: I support that considerably. I know that Elko Bighorn Unlimited requested the California Bighorn, but we will work with that. Member Crim and Member Bunch are both good with that. Chairman Wallace: We are ready for a motion. Maureen Hullinger (Management Analyst III): - Can we do each species as a separate motion just for clarity since we will be stepping into the Commission Meeting later on this morning? Chairman Wallace: Yes we can do that. Motion: Chairman Wallace moved to award the Wildlife Heritage Mule Deer tags to WHIN and Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited. Second by Commissioner Valentine. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to award the Wildlife Heritage Antelope tag to Pershing County Chukars Club Unlimited and Nevada Waterfowl Association. Second by Member Crim. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. 5

Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to award the Wildlife Heritage Rocky Mountain Elk tags, one to Elko Bighorns Unlimited and one to Meadow Valley Wildlife Unlimited. Second by Commissioner Almberg. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to award the Wildlife Heritage Nelson Bighorn Sheep tag number 1 to the Wildlife Sheep Foundation/Fraternity of the Desert Bighorn and Heritage Nelson Bighorn Sheep number 2 to NBU Reno. Second by Member Crim. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to award Wildlife Heritage California Bighorn sheep tag to NBU Reno. Second by Commissioner Almberg. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to award the five Wildlife Heritage Turkey tags: 2 to Carson Valley Chukar Club, 1 to WHIN, 1 to Meadow Valley Wildlife Unlimited, and the final one to Nevada Sportsmen Unlimited. Second by Member Crim. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. 5. Extensions of Heritage Projects Approved for Prior State Fiscal Years Habitat Staff Specialist Mark Farman For Possible Mark Farman: Hopefully you all have the summary table related to this agenda item, which was provided to you earlier. This table will be used for the next two agenda items 5 and 6. The first topic is the requests for extension. What that basically means is we have a total of eight projects from Fiscal Year 13 through Fiscal Year 17. Their project managers requested extensions, which simply allows them to carry over any unused funds into Fiscal Year 18. The way to read this table is if you want to figure out which projects are requesting an extension, just look at the far right column. If you see the words extension request, that is one of those eight projects. If you see a dollar amount in that column that s a project that has been completed and has unused funds that can be reallocated to others projects as we will be discussing under the next agenda item. Getting back to extension requests, this table tells you the amount of money that s been awarded to each of those 8 projects and what their current unspent balances are. That is going to be carried over to Fiscal Year 18 if the Committee approves the request. We also included the reason for the extension request. In a nut shell, I have summarized what was sent to me via email by each project manager. We have one project each from Fiscal Year 13 and 15. We had two from Fiscal Year 16. If you look at page 2 of the table, we had 4 for Fiscal Year 17. Are there any questions regarding the specifics on the extension requests? There were no questions. Public comment: - None Back to Committee: Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to grant the extension of the Heritage Projects as requested: Project 13-08 Duck Creek Valley Sage Grouse Habitat Improvement Project, Project 15-02 Respiratory Pathogens in Mountain Goats Assessing the Effects of Recruitment and Transmission Risks to Simpatric Bighorn Sheep, Project 16-03 Sierra Front Winter Mule Deer Habitat Improvement Project, Project 16-06 Mule Deer Corridor and Survival Analysis, Project 17-02 Fiscal Year 17 Big Game Capture, Monitoring and Disease Surveillance Program, Project 17-03 Spruce Mountain Restoration Project, Project 17-05 Delineation of Desert Bighorn Lambing Habitat and Ram Dispersal Patterns, and Project 17-06 Sheep Flat Habitat Enhancement. Second by Commissioner Almberg. Motion passed unanimously 5.0. 6

6. Heritage Funding Reallocations from Projects Approved for Prior State Fiscal Years Chairman Wallace For Possible Action Mark Farman: If we look at the same table that we just covered on the previous agenda item, this table is also support material for agenda item 6 regarding the possible reallocation of any unused funds to other projects. Please note that such reallocations can only occur to other projects that are active and from the same fiscal year. This year we have probably a record low amount of dollars that need to be reallocated. We have a grand total of $175.75. Our project managers did an outstanding job in spending their award amounts. So we have a pretty easy task today because the dollar amounts are so low. The first project that has an unspent balance is Fiscal Year 14 Project 14-04. The bad news is there are no other projects from that fiscal year to allocate funds to. The good news is that it is a very small amount of $41.33. Therefore the unspent balance simply stays in the account so it is not wasted and can still be used for future projects. If you go to the second page, we have two projects from Fiscal Year 16. The first is 16-04 Atlanta Road Sage Grouse Habitat Improvement. There is $70.42 of unspent funds that can be reallocated to active projects from that year. Likewise, Project 16-09 - The North Schell Pinyon-Juniper Removal Project has a remaining balance of $64. Like the previous project that I just mentioned, that unspent balance can be reallocated to either 16-03 or 16-06. Chairman Wallace asked if there is a preference by the Department whether the reallocation goes to Project 16-03 or 16-06. Mark Farman stated there is no preference. Commissioner Almberg: Shared that one of the only CABs that commented on this topic was Washoe County, and they would like it to go to Project 16-03 Sierra Front Winter Mule Deer Habitat Improvement Project. Public Comment: - None Motion: Commissioner Almberg moved to reallocate the funds from Project 16-04 and 16-09 with a total of a $134.42 to be reallocated to Project 16-03. Second by Commissioner Valentine. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. 7. State Fiscal Year 2018 Heritage Project Proposals Chairman Wallace For Possible Action Mark Farman: There are no changes to the proposed FY18 projects; we can just pick up where we left off at the last meeting. I have a few extra copies of the latest summary table if anybody needs it. Commissioner Wallace: I want to take this time to again thank NBU for their generous donation that allows us to fully fund all the projects this year. Public Comment: Sean Shea: A question was brought up at our CAB meeting: why on project 18-08 are there no trout stamp or duck stamp moneys being spent towards that, and that it is all coming out of Heritage. This is for ducks and the fisheries. Mark Farman: The use of trout stamp funds is limited to hatchery related facility improvements and repairs. Alan Jenne: It s being utilized for the hatchery. 7

Mark Farman: The intent of the funds that are in that account is they are needed for hatchery repairs and improvements. That s why it was deemed Heritage was more appropriate. Jack Robb: We do have some big projects going into hatcheries that are getting old in age. We have some major well projects trying to get proper water to combat disease at some of those facilities. We are using our money out of the trout stamp to keep those facilities up. Paul Dixon: The Clark CAB said that on Project 18-02 they feel that there should be a monitoring component to 18-02 to track and verify success. A lot of the times we go out and do stuff, seedings, etc. and there have been projects that we spent millions of dollars and we have nothing to show for it because germination rate is 2 or 3%. It would be nice to know with a monitoring program how successful we were and what we are applying since we have a large amount of money. The other thing was Project 18-05 which is the fuel thinning project. Fuel thinning does little or nothing for wildlife. If we going to do things, its looks good aesthetically, to look at a mountainside versus chaining. If we are doing Heritage Projects, are we doing them for aesthetics or doing them for wildlife? Our feeling is that if you are going to do something for wildlife, you should just chain the PJ away and go from there, but if you are going to be doing thinning it doesn t seem to be a wildlife related project to us. That was our concern. We did not have anybody from NDOW that could answer the question at our meeting. Alan Jenne, Habitat Division Administrator: He appreciates Paul s questions and apologized that no one was there to answer that question at their CAB meeting. As far as 18-02 and Wildfire Restoration, a big component of what we do through the Nevada Partners for Conservation and Development Program is a monitoring program. We hire vegetation crews annually that we send out to monitor our success and often times, you may see 5 years pass before seeding actually takes. We will continue to send out crews and monitor but we do make sure that we track projects and see what our success rates are. If there is an opportunity, we can bring Lee Turner who oversees that program to come in and talk about those successes. There are times when that fails, but that does not mean that we walk away from it. Neither the Department nor BLM will give up on some of these. We do not feel it is wasted money. If we don t put the money forward we know what we will get. As far as the fuel thinning and the Overland Pass Project, much of that project is old chainings. What we are looking at is multiple techniques being applied where the thinning occurred. It is in those old chainings and it is chaining maintenance. It is going back into projects that were conducted in the 70 s and we are going back in and maintaining those to try and get the uplift to those migrating mule deer that travel down that Ruby Area 10 corridor. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to approve the Wildlife Heritage Proposals as submitted for Fiscal Year 18. Second by Commissioner Almberg. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. Alan Jenne: One thing you might do to just make the record clear is to acknowledge where we are going to put the donation from NBU. If I remember correctly, they were thinking about putting that towards project 18-02 but maybe Chris can confirm that. Mark Farman: If I may elaborate, that way we will formally not exceed the funds that are available. So if you approve the projects as proposed, we will exceed the amount available. If my math is 8

correct, a donation of $33,686.08 would allow the total requested to match the total available. NBU Reno graciously offered to cover that short fall. We are under the impression that we can take the donation from NBU and donate it to Project 18-02. That would simply reduce the amount being requested by that project. It would be $100,000 minus $33,686.08 and that would allow us to not exceed the funds available. Chris Cefalu NBU Reno: That is correct. We picked 18-02 just to make it easy to write one check. Since that project is a large amount it would help make up the shortfall so all projects could be approved. Mark Farman: I have the calculated amount if you need it Mr. Chairman. Applying the donations to Project 18-02 would reduce the requested award amount for that project down to $66,313.92. Motion: Commissioner Valentine moved to approve the Wildlife Heritage Proposals for Fiscal Year 18 as presented with the exception of 18-02 being funded from Heritage for $66,313.92 with the balance of that to be made whole by Nevada Bighorns Unlimited Reno s donation. Second by Commissioner Almberg. Motion passed unanimously 5-0. 8. Future Committee Meeting - Chairman Wallace For Possible Action Chairman Wallace: At this point we do not have a specific need for a near term meeting so we will meet next May. Public Comment: None 9. Public Comment Period None 10. Adjourn The meeting was adjourned at approximately 10:03 a.m. 9