Anybody did without looking at well she she's if she is in there she's meant to be in there because she'd want to be in there as well.

Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, that's what I when we kind of called out.

She knows that this is here, so yes, we go.

All right, perfect.

It's rock and roll.

So this is the Carson City Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife Meeting Wednesday, March 11, 2026.

We are in the bonanza room.

It is 534, Zach.

Can we get a call to order?

Or roll call?

Chair Fleming.

Here.

Vice Chair Beamer.

Here.

Member Dennett.

Member Stewart.

Here.

Member Thompson's present.

We have four.

All right, perfect.

Member Thompson, since you made it back, you want to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the fly of the United States of America.

And to the Republic for which it says one nation undergoing indivisible with liberty and just for all.

Thank you, sir.

All right, let's move on to item number four, public comment.

We'll have public comment before and after.

Okay, I think we're good.

We can get gone again.

All right.

So are we good to move on to item number five?

Yes.

Okay, perfect.

For possible action approval minutes.

I know we missed the September 22nd, 2025 minutes due to people in attendance not being there.

So I do have something on that.

Even if you weren't at the meeting, right?

Uh you can still look at the minutes and still vote on them.

You don't have to abstain from that.

Okay.

And hope got clarification from our our DA, uh deputy DA that's assigned to us.

Um it says here you are correct.

Board members do not need to abstain from voting on the approval of minutes if they were not at a meeting.

Uh they can review the minutes, watch the video, or take any other preparatory actions they deem necessary, and then vote on the minutes.

Uh board members can abstain at their option, and many do.

Um that's it.

I just wanted to make sure everybody knows that.

So you know I I told them that I would relay that to everybody, and uh just so kind of as a reminder, but you know, you have the option to say that's it is what it is, right?

Like if you don't feel comfortable voting on it, don't vote on it.

You know what I mean?

Uh so and that's what I my rebuttal back to him was you know that's all I appreciate the reminder, but you know, both of them made that we explained that, and both of them made that choice, so it is what it is, right?

Yeah.

Um that's good to know in the future though.

Yeah.

Okay.

Do we were you three there for the September meeting?

I don't think Danny was, were you?

I haven't been to a meeting since September.

Okay.

Oh, so you were at September.

I was not, I have not been here since September.

I mean, I missed it.

I missed all meetings since uh September and beyond.

Okay, so yeah, but you and I were so.

But I reviewed them.

Yeah.

So as long as you guys are willing to vote on it, let's go.

Oh, yeah, absolutely.

All right.

Yeah, let's go ahead and those look good for you.

Your attendants are there.

Yeah, then I'll just jump on it and we can move this one out so we're not holding anything up.

I think that's the biggest thing is if we have you know multiple meeting minutes there.

Uh the pro the problem is is that open meeting law or or I should say NRS 241 specific that meeting minutes have to be approved at the next meeting, next possible public meeting that you have that a body has.

Okay.

So you do run into the potential of having a 241 violation if we you know can continually do that.

And then they also look at the fact that hey, how many you know if you guys are missing a bunch of meetings, then maybe you're not suitable.

So you're not suitable to be able to serve on the board, right?

We don't we just don't want to get to a place like that, right?

Yep.

Perfect.

I'm gonna punch 5A and 5B together on a vote, then I'll look for possible action to approve the meetings of the September 22nd, 2025 meeting and the January 22nd, 2026 meeting.

So move a stated.

I'll second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

Passes 4-0.

Perfect.

All right, moving on to item number six for discussion only.

Update from attendees of the January 23rd and 24th, 2026, Nevada Board of Robby Commissioners meeting.

Rob, is that you?

Wasn't uh actually uh Doris went to it.

Um so I didn't I didn't attend.

I was out I was at a conference, so I couldn't couldn't tune in either.

Um so we got we don't really have anything we can go past that.

All right.

Perfect.

We'll move on discussion only.

Update and activity report on the Parts of the City Urban Wildlife Committee.

Yeah, so if I can, Mr.

Chair, um so we received uh this, and I'll hand them to each board member.

Um and then here is uh here's one for you, two Zach, or anybody that comes in.

I just printed a bunch of them.

So this is the 2025 uh urban wildlife report.

In the spirit of full disclosure here, apparently calls were not logged appropriately and they had to go back and kind of I want to say I don't want to say guess because the majority of the calls they knew if they were urban wildlife calls or not.

But there was there was a D a deviation of you know potential whether it was or wasn't and so they included them regardless.

Um I think the biggest thing that this points out, right, is you could see the difference in totals for Carson City.

You know, obviously the education and stuff that we have done I think has I mean I think we'd be a miss to say that it hasn't played an effective role, right?

Um because we still have albeit mule beer populations in some areas have decreased, I I we still have it, right?

It's still it's the populations are here.

And so um, and the same thing goes for like the top the top items there, coyotes and black bears.

Um would have been my third guess.

Yeah.

So I think that uh, you know, I mean then our number going down in Carson City, I think is reflect could be reflective of the fact that you know, where you are getting out and and providing a lot more education.

I think it's also reflected in the fact that citizens are getting a lot more used to having urban wildlife, knowing that it's not going to go away.

We have to learn how to cohabitate, and there's uh just a ton of outreach that's been going out the last I want to say ten years on this, right?

I mean, we have played a vital part of that.

And so this was this was very encouraging to me.

I don't know about you guys, but um I think it's you know, it's never gonna go away, right?

Like we're still gonna have it, but uh the gal they have in that position right now.

I'm really hoping and praying that we can we can keep her in that position because it is uh she's pretty pretty awesome.

Uh her name is true, and um and so I am sending this along with a PowerPoint presentation to Mayor Bagwell and to the other and to the rest of the board of supervisors for review, and I talked to Lori about it and uh just said, hey, you know, I mean you you had us present uh our annual report at the at a board of examiners, I mean a board of gosh boards of examiners.

Uh I can tell you where my head's at, right?

Um you had us report uh or present it to the board of supervisors at a public meeting.

If you want us to do that again, we're willing.

Uh I talked to Zach, he's he just said just tell me the date and we'll go and present it.

Um so uh I'll get that over to them.

Uh there was I was just waiting on a few like updated pictures so we could update the PowerPoint so it's not the exact same as we had last year, you know what I mean?

And um, and so I figured you know we put some new pictures in there of wildlife snapshots that they took this uh list last year, you know what I mean?

So we can update that.

So a lot of snake pictures, I guess, from what I understand, especially here in Carson.

That's what I thought would have been there was snakes.

Yeah, I thought I thought it would have been up there too.

But is this all calls or service generated through Endow?

Pretty cool, huh?

Yeah.

So this is this is actually something that I Zach and I worked on.

I presented the idea and said, you know, you guys really ought to start developing a database of that.

It'd be really super simple to do, right?

Right, yeah.

And so he agreed, and he's been doing it now since 2022.

Okay.

And so you can see, you know, now we're getting upwards of a rolling three years, you know what I mean?

Yeah.

And uh so it'll allow us to be able to I think it, you know, for the city it's great, I think, right?

Because they can decide, hey, we need to put a little more emphasis on you know, troubled areas and that sort of thing, you know what I mean.

That's the only thing that's not in here that we really kind of we're working on.

I'd like to see, you know, demographic the wards.

Oh, right.

Like I'd like to say, hey, how many of calls were in do a plot map or something where we say, you know, how many calls were in, you know, color code 'em in each ward in the city.

You know what I mean?

So we could say, hey, let's do some targeted messaging, right?

You know what I mean?

I I mean that's I think the next step, right?

And uh and you know, I'd like to present that to the board of supervisors and say, hey, what do you guys think?

Parks, what do you guys think about this, right?

Like would this help you think if we know, and would you guys be willing to extend some budget out for this to, you know, or parks.

You take it up, right?

This is something you guys you guys open space and parks, you guys should totally do that.

You know.

I know Jenford Budge isn't gonna like me to be proposing that, but it is what it is, right?

Does it really matter?

It doesn't, I don't care.

So anyway, I just wanted to present that to you guys.

Uh this is where we're at with it.

Um as far as any outreach that we did, um Dave Ruff and I got together and did a um presentation uh out of greenhouse garden center on plants that you know are there's no plant that's deer uh you know, deer exempt if you will.

But talked about plant shrubs and trees that uh you know deer don't typically like.

Uh rabbits pretty much will eat everything, so we talked about that, you know.

If you gotta, you know, the only thing that only way to keep those out is fencing and containing, right?

And um we even went into like you know, wood beavers don't like uh squirrels don't like, which is none you know what I mean?

Things like that, right?

Like if you want to try to keep squirrels out of your gutters and stuff, putting gutter screens and and uh um you know making sure that there's uh rods coming down your downspouts is the way to go, or in closed down spouts, right?

So um things like that or what we kind of just told everybody, and that was good because not a lot of people are like, man, I never would have thought of that.

You know what I mean?

Like so just some tips and tricks that I think everybody that attended, there was I was surprised how many frickin' people there were.

Like I think it was just people that were at the garden center that were like, hey, that sounds great.

I'm gonna check it out.

So um it worked out good, I think, and uh um we talked about maybe doing some more things like that in the future.

I don't know.

That's it, a little smart report.

Cool.

Any other additional comment?

Perfect.

Moving on for discussion only, reports or informational.

Agenda item A to AE, I believe, right?

Next week for it in.

Yeah.

Yep, AA to A E.

So anyone want to pull any of these just to talk about.

Uh so I do want to I do want to pull 8E real quick and just I received uh Doug, I'm sorry, not Doug, uh Gene Green, who all of you know.

Yep.

Uh stopped by my house and we had a lengthy conversation and he wanted to be here tonight, but he has a meeting he had to be at, and uh in fact I think he's in that meeting.

Um he just felt like uh he wanted wanted the board to know that um mountain lion um and bear predation on deer and and uh feral horses um is a problem in other states and that um uh you know the lions and bears are gonna go after what's easy pippings, right?

And um he just said that you know um any kind of any kind of uh regulation on those on those you know to prevent that from happening uh you know, we shouldn't be in favor of is what he said, and I said, well, uh don't know the the the flavor that everybody has for that to begin with, especially anything that has to do with horses.

So I just told him I said, well, listen, I'll I'll make everybody know that you gave me testimony in person and that uh you provided public comment in person uh on this item.

Um so I know it's just gonna be a discussion item, it sounds like but he was hoping that he could be down, go down to Boulder City to attend, because he uh wanted to go to the field trip, which sounds like it'll be a lot of fun done at me.

You should do that when you're there.

Okay, yeah, I'm sure I've bring your family and stuff.

I'm sure I've done the field trip.

Um anyway, um so uh I just wanted to bring that up.

That's all I got on that one.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Mind her, just for discussion, no item, no action can be taken on any of the agenda item eights.

Thank you for your comment.

Thanks for passing along.

Let's move on to consent agenda items number nine.

This will be nine A through nine P.

Is there any items that wanted to be pulled?

So I do have some, but I'll let everybody else decide on if they want to do any before I tell you mine.

I was gonna pull J just because we did have the public comment.

Absolutely.

That's our biggest decider here, right?

Yep.

And then I'm open to any other than the ones you want to pull.

So anything from you, Kirk?

I would like to pull um 9L.

L.

Okay.

That was one of mine.

You should have jumped on.

I don't know.

I want to give you guys the opportunity.

Anyone else, Danny?

No, no, I'm good.

So I'd like to poll uh in conjunction with 9j and L.

I would like to poll um 9G and 9H.

G and H.

I'm sorry, not 9H.

I take that back.

9H has been pulled from the agenda.

Um what the heck?

This isn't right.

Oh, I see what you did, Zach.

You did not you posted the agenda with the with not the revised agenda.

So let me tell you.

So uh nine I has been pulled, but it's actually nine H on the c on the actual.

Oh, yeah, okay.

We I remember the district attorney emailed about that, but we already posted.

So it is what it is, right?

I mean, yeah.

So just so everybody understands 9i that we have listed as 9i is actually 9H on the on the uh um Dandow's agenda.

That so you're gonna need to know that for the meeting.

Um Mr.

Paul Padilla, uh that one was polled um because I believe it was settled.

Okay.

And he and or something, I forget.

But 9G and 9H I would like to poll for discussion.

Okay, so that's it.

Um and then did I say 9?

We said 9J and 9L, right?

Yep.

9M as well.

And I just want to on 9L and M, I just wanted to fill you guys in on some stuff that Jake, some information Jake and I had a conversation of.

So good on those?

Yep.

All right.

So I'm gonna go ahead before we start this.

I'm gonna look for a motion to approve consent agenda items 9A through F.

I'm gonna hold off on 9i of the Carson City agenda items since it's no longer a part of it.

Yeah.

So it's been pulled, so we'll just go ahead and well.

Yeah, so what I was gonna do is I was gonna just say if we just abstain from it since it's definitely our.

I was gonna say we can't really approve it.

Yep.

Because it is it is not on the agenda for and then 9K and then 9N through P for approval.

So I'll say that one more time.

I'm looking for an motion to approve 9A through F.

K through P for approval.

Got all that, Zach?

So moved as uh stated.

Second.

I'll second.

All in favor say I.

All opposed saying.

All right.

9A through F, K, and N through P are approved for O.

And then before we move on to discuss, I would like to, on the Carson City 9i consent agenda.

I look for a motion of gosh, don't know if just space the word.

What is that?

Where you don't put it, but you don't say yes or no.

Abstain.

Abstain.

Yeah, abstinence.

I guess we don't have to really.

Do we need to take a vote?

I guess we do.

Yeah, no act.

What do you say?

No action.

No action.

I'd look to five.

Okay.

Let's rebundle that.

I would look for a motion for 9i to do no action for 9I.

So I would move that we on 9I, Zach, that we move to take a vote of that no action should be taken on that.

Neither approved or disapproved, right?

Given the fact that it has been pulled from the it was pulled as a revised agenda from the Nevada Wildlife Commission agenda.

Do I hear a second?

A second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

Alright, passes 4-0.

Let's go ahead and move on to item number 9G.

The appeal for Mr.

Daniel King at the March 13, 2026 meeting of the Nevada Board of Wildlife Commissioners.

Mr.

King will appeal the denial of his sub guide lease.

Okay.

So the situation on this is that uh this guy uh had a um had a uh in 2025 had a uh trail camera violation, which is an automatic six demerit point violation.

So he has he has been given a revoc a three-year revocation, which could be up to five years, and he's appealing that.

And so the commission could absolutely, and this is where the this is where the CABs, you know, can even state this, but the commission could actually say, well, you're appealing this.

We don't agree with the action and now law enforcement took on this.

We're gonna up the revocation to five years.

You know, if they really wanted to.

Yeah.

So I don't I doubt that they will do that, but you know, if again it's uh it's a trail cam violation, you know, putting trail cams in an area that they were gonna hunt when you know nobody's allowed to do that.

And so um uh that's what the situation is there.

So I'm in support of uh the department's revocation uh when it comes to that, because you know, guides are held to a higher standard, and at the very least you have to maintain the standard.

Uh you know, you can not agree with it, but the law's the law, right?

It is what it is, right?

And so um I'm sure there's people in Texas that don't agree with the fact that you can't have pot in Texas, right?

But the law's still upheld, right?

So uh way to put it.

That's okay.

I mean, it is what it is, right?

So that's the story on that one.

So I I mean I would move to I would move to support the and uphold the um uphold the revocation that's in place for this.

Uh that would be my that would be my motion.

Yeah.

On 9G.

Any other final comments on 9G?

No, I I I agree.

They need to be held to a higher standard there.

Yeah.

And they pretty much said a pattern of practice because I remember in several guides and sub guides being their license revocated, based off of using um cams.

And that's really the thing, man, is we all need to understand, just as further discussion on this.

We all need to understand that, you know, and these guides need to understand that there's a new sheriff in town.

In the past, they haven't been put under a microscope as much, but Jake, you all of us know.

Yeah, hey, he's not playing, right?

Like, you do something wrong, he's gonna hold you to it, and and rightfully so.

It's his job, right?

So, you know, I I commend him for for his integrity and just being consistent, right?

Like if we give one person a break, then what's that gonna be for everybody?

Right?

We have to be consistent.

And that's it.

That's exactly.

That's why laws are in place, regardless of who it is, right?

So yeah.

So uh that's on that one.

Perfect.

So for 9G, do I hear move a motion to approve?

So I moved to approve it.

Do I hear a second?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All opposed say nay.

All right, approves.

G for support.

Support or revocation.

And then let's move on to our Carson City 9H, which is the appeal of Mr.

Tyler Hubbard at the March 13, 2026 meeting of the Bad War of Wildlife Commissioners.

Mr.

Hubbard is appealing the denial of his Hubbard is out of uh is out of Lincoln County and uh he his license was revoked because he has an outstanding warrant for his arrest out of Lincoln County.

Um and he didn't take care of it, and Jake gave him multiple opportunities to go and turn himself in and take care of it, and he chose not to do so.

And so um, you know, he's gonna come to the meeting, and I can already tell you he's gonna be this is my only income and blah blah blah blah, and Jake is prepared to say, dude, you you could have handled this a lot easier, man.

And I gave you that opportunity before we revoked, but specific in st in regulation.

Yeah, if you have an outstanding warrant, you do not qualify for for a guide license.

Did he clean up his warrant?

No.

Still outstanding.

As of today.

They're gonna arrest them break in at the meeting.

That's what I asked.

I asked him the same thing.

I go, he better not show up at the meeting, right?

You just arrest them.

Yeah, it's down in Boulder Boulder City, too.

So I don't know if I don't know if they want to do a I mean they have to call Lincoln County and say, hey, do you want to come and pick the guy up?

Well no, no, you just hook him in and you book him and break in Clark County.

Yeah, but if it's extra county, but the the law.

But Clark County is very specific, and that if the county that doesn't want to extra if they don't want to extradite them and come and get them, they're not gonna put him in their jail.

Well, I I'm just saying that's quite a bit.

And they tried to say, oh well, Washoe County's the same way.

I thought, nah, pretty sure Watch up County Areno, if they if someone nailed somebody on a warrant, I'm not sure, but yeah, if it's within a state, they're gonna so that's the situation on that one.

Yeah.

Uh and given that, you know, uh I got glad we got this intel, and that's why I wanted to pass it along to all you, um, especially you, Corbett, since you're gonna be attending the meeting.

Um, you know, these are all when you have this in intel and you and this comes up, it's always great to be able to, you know, uh it's always great to be able to have that intel ahead of time so you know kind of what's going on there.

But I can't imagine the commission's going to entertain an the idea of of being relaxed on this guy, given the fact that it's written right in.

I mean the the I can assure you that the that the um the DAG is going to pretty much tell the commission you don't have a choice.

By you letting this guy go, you're breaking the law.

Yeah, and I don't think there's anybody that's gonna want to do that.

So it'd be my motion to uh support the revocation and uh you know even encourage that this guy I don't want to put anybody in jail, but you know, I I guess just support the revocation.

I'm not gonna go on record saying arrest the dude.

Second that all in favor say aye.

Aye.

All posts and name all right, passage unanimously.

Let's move on to 9J Commission Regulation 2610 migratory game bird seasons, bag limits and special regulations for waterfall and webless migratory game birds, public hunting limited on wildlife management areas and designated state lands 2026-2027 season.

I'm not gonna read all that because I think we all have a general understanding of what this is.

So I will say that we had the public comment, which was in support of the later October 17, 2026 date.

I'm pretty sure I know how the board stands because we've talked about this multiple times of pushing all the way out to the furthest that we can.

Well, I think the thing to point out that Doug points out in is if I recall, I think it's the same letter he sent me, but um I think it actually takes into consideration a whole 105-day max 105-day season limit that the federal government allows, right?

And we're always in favor of that.

There's there are multiple in, you know, the rebuttal to it, let's just so everybody understands is there's a lot of old timers that there's a lot of old timers that um are in favor of starting earlier because the teal season is a lot you know is usually earlier.

And so that those weeks, if you will, right prior in October, or even in September, you know, like Norm Sakey would love to have the season start in September so that they could take in the teal season where you get all the blue wings, the green wings and the and the cinnamons that are all going down to migrate.

They're the first migrators, and they're usually in early season.

So that being said, you know, I mean, Norm would argue that, and who, and there's not a person in on in the entire state that knows ducks, a waterfowl better than Norm Sakey.

He flies it, flies all the areas, Carson Sink, still water, Persian County, everything.

He flies it at least monthly.

So he gives a outstanding report that anybody can access, by the way.

And so he argues that the TL and stuff are in during those times.

I mean, maybe in one area, maybe, but you know, he he and a couple other, a whole bunch of other old timers, which I more power to them, right?

They much rather be in better weather than uh being in cold stormy weather, right?

And so I get it, you know, it is what it is, but I think for the majority of the population that hunts waterfowl, they would much rather see it start later and have the ability to shoot mature birds, and you still pick up teal in the latter in the latter months, right?

In January, and uh, you know, albeit it's you know, and and they're better plumage birds, you know what I mean?

So the argument really kind of doesn't stand so much, but I feel bad for those guys, and anything you can do to help old guys like that that you know have a hard time with mobility and all that stuff.

I'm a hundred percent in favor of trying to do that, but you know, at what detriment, right?

So um so I think it's I I'm I'm I approve as written.

Uh I will say that I'm a little displeased that we opened up swan permits to non-residents, but um, you know, it's the third year that that's happened, and this year uh they actually had so many applicants that uh that uh they had to turn people away for the first time ever.

So wow.

Yeah.

We my son and I were one of the lucky ones to get a tag and were unsuccessful, unfortunately, but um, but yeah, it was uh first year ever in history that we have given out all the tags and and we had to turn down applicants.

So like like 1,600 people apply for tags and only give 750.

Nice.

Not really, but huh?

I said nice, but not really.

All right, do I hear a motion to approve 9J as Britain?

I make uh uh I make a motion to approve 9J as right.

Do I hear a second?

All second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

All right.

Approved unanimously.

Let's move on to 9L, Commission General Regulation 517 automatic range binding scopes.

Okay.

So Christy Knight, Chief Knight is going to be from Endow Law Enforcement is going to be presenting on this.

Uh the regulation is interesting to say the least.

Uh I don't know if you guys took a look at it, but uh it states that uh shoot, I didn't print it, darn it.

Uh but it states that there are um that so there's two theories of thought here, right?

So this what this does is it addresses people that want to use the newest technology out there, which are scopes that can be mounted on a rifle, handgun, bow, that actually detects range, uh it detects it has a barometer, it has a windage meter out to that area, you know, to that range, all that stuff, and then it automatically adjusts your turrets to be able to effectively hit that animal at that range.

Okay.

And so there's a lot of people that are 100% in favor of that, mainly from the standpoint that it allows for a better success of an ethical shot, right?

And then there's the people against it are saying, well, that's not a fair chase, and B that's not that that's going to promote more people to take longer shots that they're maybe not trained for.

I think I think that, you know, I mean both arguments, I think are we have to look at them and say, yeah, valid arguments, both both of them, right?

The ethical are a fair chase uh argument to me is a mute point in the fact that you're already allowed to use all that stuff, right?

Just handheld stuff.

So if so is it different if you so is it different whether it's automatically done or if you turn the turret yourself is is that are you still saying that that is that that is would be considered not fair chase?

Because I disagree with that.

Right?

Well no, I I know, I I I agree the way we do it now is I would consider that fair chaste where you're ranging it because you already shot your dope, you know your windage, and you have to make the adjustments through this calculator that's up here, rather than rigging like the new vortex system where they have this.

Automatically does it for you.

People are gonna be taking shots, they shouldn't be taking shots at.

And that's the argument, right?

That's the argument I think that it's a justifiable argument.

Yeah, you know what I mean.

Yeah.

But people are already taking shots.

That's what I'm saying probably shouldn't be taking.

That's the rebuttal, right?

Because we have that's not restricted right now.

But but that but that's on them.

They're not being to totally 100% guided through artificial intelligence and taking the shot.

I know, but it's this is experience and training.

Yeah, but just because you can get a car that can go 200 miles per hour doesn't mean you should go 200 miles per hour.

Absolutely.

And then you put it down to the people and you got $800 highs, like can I actually make it?

And I guess my argument yards.

I guess my argument is is the person that's taken the thousand yard shot, right?

Even if they have a drop compensation scope, that's a manual one, right?

If they don't have the training to be able to do that and they haven't like shot at that distance and practice at that distance, they really have no business taking that shot, right?

That's an ethical thing.

So how far do we take it, right?

Like, that's already happening, potentially, right?

To me, the argument would be if you have this technology that's available, and you still choose to take that shot.

Are you gonna have a better chance of hitting that animal at a a thousand yards versus somebody that that is manually doing it?

I think the argument can be m probably made.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Yeah.

Right?

Because it's automatic, it's you know what I mean.

It's computer right.

And so I look at it from that standpoint that I'd much rather have, in my opinion, right?

Like, you know, do we do we limit that, or is that something that we look at as, hey, this put could potentially provide a a better opportunity for an ethical kill, right?

And I think that's how a lot of the public's looking at it as well.

But you still have to you have to still input the data correctly.

That means you still have to go out and you still have to get velocity.

You still put the scope on the case.

You still have to do all this stuff.

Yeah, but to make it work correctly.

I I don't I don't like it.

I still look at right when I read this, I looked at it, not even thinking about a thousand-yard shot.

I was thinking of like a two, three hundred, four hundred yard shot where people are gonna do it, which I think matters.

I think is the majority, right?

Where the inches go from an ethical shot where they kill it to an ethical where it takes off run and you don't find it.

And that's where the adjustment of not just doing it on calculation out on the field right there, goes from a long shot to a gutshot.

Yeah.

Where when you're at a thousand already, it could be adjusted on that, and I don't think a lot of people will.

That's how I so my thing is is that you know, I've hunted a lot, man.

I've hunted a big game a lot.

I'm just saying from my own experience, right?

I have never ever been in a situation where I've seen an animal that I can't get, at least within 400 yards, right?

Like there's I can think of one time I saw a big old buck, you know, up on top of this skyline in this mountain up there, right?

And it was up, it stopped, and then went over the hill.

And even in a situation like that, I don't care how good of a shot you are, you're not gonna you're not taking that shot when you'll have that little bit of a time, right?

It's just not gonna happen.

And so you gotta set up for that.

I don't care how good you are.

You know what I mean?

So I don't know.

I I think there's two rules of thumb that are two rules of thing or uh, you know, ways of thinking about it, you know what I mean?

And I could see both, you know, uh I can see arguments for both, I guess.

Uh but I just want to make sure everybody was aware of kind of where this was heading, and you know, the department, of course, wants to completely limit it 100%.

They want to do away with it completely and not even have them.

How are they gonna enforce that?

I don't know.

See, and that's the thing is I look at it from a law enforcement standpoint, dude.

Nightmare that would be, right?

Well, you would have to catch it with it.

I almost like to get it.

Yeah, you have to if you even if you have it in possession, it's not you'd get you'd it's a violation.

Well, yeah, just in possession of it.

I I just I I don't agree with it.

I you're taking away a tool that's in the toolbox, and it we shouldn't be doing that to people.

I mean, and I mean we can make that argument for range finders.

We can make that argument for you I mean uh they've already got it, don't they already have it like with the new swamp?

Yeah, buy those do everything.

My binoculars have range finders in them.

I got a vortex.

But it doesn't automatically adjust a rifle.

No, it doesn't, but I could be sitting there going, yep, dude, I got, you know.

But it's not but it's not automatically adjusting the rifle.

It's not.

It's not again.

I think I go back to, you know, is that a bad thing?

And the g given the fact that it's an you know provides an ethical shot opportunity, I think, but I don't know.

I think it's cool technology, don't get me wrong.

Like, I don't know if I can afford it, but damn spending.

So it's like five grand.

It's like five grand.

But it's gonna get more affordable, I think, you know, and I don't know.

But um so I know the Burris eliminator six was twenty-eight hundred dollars.

Is it yeah, see I mean that's that's a little bit more affordable.

I can't afford twenty hundred bucks.

And I wouldn't buy a burst.

So yeah, I mean, and I got that's the other option.

I mean, it's pretty good.

Some of their scopes are cheap.

Some of them are all right.

But yeah, so anyway, that's the argument.

I just wanted to I felt like it was it warranted us having a discussion on, and you know, not even if we don't all agree on it, you know, taking a position uh this is one of those that you know we should probably take a position on it and uh I don't view it as much different than that what we already have.

The only difference is now we don't have this or this, it's just gonna automatically do it, which actually makes it more ethical than someone out in the field.

I think that or you're excited and you go three clicks over instead of two clicks or something like that.

And that's the argument that a lot of people have, right?

And so I don't know.

I it'll be interesting to see what the what the flavor is of all the other caps and and I'm and I'm good taking a neutral position on it uh or in favor of I'm sorry, uh against uh negative or a not supporting position on this from the standpoint that it could potentially increase taking an ethical shot.

So that's where I stand on it.

I support it as written.

What is how is it written?

Is it written that they don't they want to get rid of it?

No.

Can't use it.

No, they want to implement it.

They're holding a workshop to for this regulation to implement it.

I I disagree with it, so I I don't think we should support it, but that's just me.

I'm on curtain side with that too.

So I would I would so I could move, and this is one of those situations that everybody can have their opinion on it, right?

Like it doesn't mean you're a bad guy.

Um, but then I would move that we um take a vote or make I'll make a motion that we um say that we are not in support of this for the reason that it pro potentially provides uh a better opportunity for an ethical shot, right?

Um yeah.

All in favor, say I.

Aye.

All against say nay.

Nay.

Okay.

Passes three to one.

And I think that, you know, if you if you get the opportunity to voice that, yeah, that you should give the give the how the board what the what we discussed, right?

And and and make it known that, you know, we had one member of the board that feels like, you know, uh is on the side of that that you know, it's it's a fair chase principle, right?

And and three members were in favor because of it being more of an you know ethical shot opportunity.

Yep.

I will do that.

I'll make sure that's the first time we've had a split.

Yeah.

Well, it's okay.

Yeah, it's totally okay.

Yeah, because I can see I can see it now, but again, with a guide with a hunter puts puts uh the his scope uh his rifle under with that type of scope, points it at the animal, tells the client, all right, go ahead, press the trigger.

All right.

I think that's fucked up.

Oh, excuse me, that's on record.

Daddy comms, yeah.

You know, my thing is though, is that that's gonna happen.

You know, what's he squeezes the trigger on it?

He jerks the trigger, right?

That's gonna happen regardless.

Oh, regardless, regardless, it it already happens.

It already happens.

Totally does, man.

But I don't think that's a good idea.

Make that happen is gonna change the change now that you know you have your guide with a 300 PRC in that vortex system, where it can see the 400 uh point out, get 1600 yards away, and they're and they're making kill shots.

And I just I think that is just unethical hunting.

Yeah.

I know people that think that it's unethical to take a bow shot at over 50 yards.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, with that one, new bows, though.

This would this would make it happen, dude.

Right?

Because the scopes for or the sites that they're coming out with for bows are gonna be the exact same thing.

It would automatically change it to where it lifts your sights exactly where it needs to be.

Garmin's already got one out on the market today.

All right.

Moving on to item 9M, Commission General Regulation 526 thermal imaging equipment.

So this is an interesting one, you guys.

I had a conversation with Jake on this.

I was confused.

So this is this is nine, this is uh Jake's regulation.

Um no, I'm sorry, the thermal imaging is Jake's remnant uh uh regulation, and this one is Christineites.

Okay.

Um the regulation as written states that except as otherwise provided in subsection three, a person shall not possess or use uh at any time during a period beginning August 1st and ending December 4th, so during the entire season for big game, right?

Hunting uh for hunting or take of any wildlife.

And that's the key right there.

Uh in management unit areas, 1122, 23, 24, pretty much all white pine and um uh Lincoln County, Lander County.

So why is it regulated only to certain areas?

That's what I said.

Why are you only because the majority of big game kills are in those areas?

When you look at big horn sheep, when you look at elk, deer, uh the majority of big game are being harvested in those areas.

And so the big rebuttal is is of course from the the coyote community.

Uh George Forebush who's who heads up the Nevada Predator Control or Predator Alliance or whatever it's called.

Uh he reached out to me and uh he wanted to let us know that they are 100% against this, and the fact that if they're gonna pass something like this, they want us to be able to uh they want to be able to exclude coyotes.

So any wildlife that is not a regulated wildlife.

Yeah.

And of course, the argument from the law enforcement division on that is how the heck are we gonna enforce that, man?

Anyone could just have could have that on their firearm uh to be able to and say, well, I'm using it for coyotes.

Well, what stops them from doing that right now?

Yeah.

You know what I mean?

I don't know.

I don't like it.

I think we're overregulating, is what I think with this, to be honest with you.

Yeah, it's already against the law to use it, right?

Now we're just gonna stop everything from using it.

Uh is it?

I don't think it is.

You can use it for big game.

I don't think you can use thermal for big game hunting.

I don't think it's been passed yet.

I don't think it has.

I think this is it.

They're trying to pass a car block.

I don't think that it's uh already uh let me tell you.

I think thermal imaging's more of a fair chase concern than oh, the last one.

Yeah.

I mean it does.

I mean, guides can definitely misuse it.

There's no doubt about it, dude.

Like it can track an ammo through tonight.

Yeah.

You totally could.

Yeah.

Yeah.

I think that's a huge bear chase.

But I also I mean, people use the crap out of it for coyote hunting.

Yeah.

That's pretty cool when you use it for coyote.

There should be a cutout.

It should be a cutout, but again, but again, how do you regulate it?

Force it.

So anyway, that's that's that in a nutshell.

Um it states here, yes, using thermal image gene devices to hunt or locate big game mammal mammals or birds.

Is illegal in Nevada?

Um current regulations prohibit possession or use of thermal imaging infrared and other enhanced night vision equipment for hunting as they are deemed to provide an unfair advantage.

Right there, I think it's already.

So yeah, we already have a law.

Yeah, so I disagree with this one.

Why do we need more?

I don't know.

Yeah, in those areas, you know, I don't know.

I wonder if this is not accurate, to be honest with you.

I hate to say, but I mean they presented it, but you're looking up understanding.

Oh, just this looking at uh areas I wonder why it's so uh concentrated specifically because it should be the entire state if we're going to do it, not to a certain area.

That makes no sense to me.

Yeah, it's interesting.

Well, how much written takes away from coyote and how it written basically takes it away from being able to go out and just use it if you're just I don't know, enthusiasts you think it's cool when you want to look at it kind of thing, right?

Yeah, does it state anything if it's on your gun?

Or is it just anything with thermal?

Yeah, it just states that they're thermal.

To it.

I don't know, man.

To me, I just don't think that's it is passed.

Because again, why would they do this if there's already a state regulation?

Then why are we just seems seems redundant, you know?

Yeah.

So anyway.

Mr.

Thompson.

Oh, I I like you said I agree that it is for this falls more under the whole fair chase thing, but it just makes no sense why it's only isolated to the four areas.

And it's gonna cover all animals that are I don't think that it should cover all animals.

It should be a cutoff of predator.

I mean you just gotta, you know, wardens need to witness somebody using it, you know, witness somebody shooting at an animal or witness somebody out checking out ding, you know, checking out a guide checking out a unit, and then they go back there and harvest an animal in that unit that morning.

Yeah, I mean, I think you got a pretty good case, you know?

You just gotta do your job a little bit, right?

I mean, because you can use a thermal dinner during a day too, a thermal scope during a day.

But uh I I agree that there needs to be a cutout.

It should be entirely, it should do it, it should be the entire state that cut off the predator hunt.

I agree with that.

I can support that.

So your motion for 9M support, not supporting as written, but supporting the nature of the thermal imaging for big game and for the whole entire state, excluding predator, predators.

Yeah, excluding non-regulated predators.

Non-regulated wildlife.

Perfect.

Okay.

Did you get that, Zach?

I believe I did.

So you want to say it back to me and see what you got?

Uh non-supporting is written, but supporting the nature of thermal imaging for big game and for the entirety of the whole state excluding non-regulated wildlife.

What do you think, Danny?

Yeah, I agree with that.

You want to make that motion, Danny?

Uh I make the emotion that we do that's uh 9 M.

We do not support as written, but support an amendment.

Um dedicated the provision to the entire state and excluding um non-game species of animals.

Unregulated.

Non-regulated.

All do I hear second?

I'll second it.

All in favor say aye.

All right.

I'll oppose a nay.

All right, passage unanimously.

4-0.

Alright, that closes up consent agenda items.

Go ahead and move on now to item number 10.

We're discussion only.

The Carson City Advisory Board to Manage Wildlife will discuss members committed to the March 13th, 14th of Boulder City, and then the May 8th, May 9th of 2026.

I will be down in Boulder City.

May 8th and 9th in Reno.

Do we have any commitment?

I have a honorette class on May 9th that I gotta teach, so I won't be able to do that.

I may be able to do May 8th, though.

I I may.

I think this guy might have a conflict.

I think that I'm running my dog in uh navda punt test.

I don't know if it's the weekend of the 8th or the weekend of the 15th.

I'm not too concerned before we go at us at one point.

Yeah, we can bring it up at our next meeting.

Boulder City I will be there.

What's the field trip in Boulder City?

Uh it is um it is to Lake Mead to some of the where they do like the hatchery stuff and the cool yeah.

All right, move on to item number 11, future for discussion only, future agenda items.

Anything I don't have any.

No, I got none.

All right.

Moving on to the final public comment period number 12.

No one's here, so I'm gonna assume no public comment.

At 534 P or 634 p.m.

Do I hear a motion to adjourn the meeting?

I'm uh move to a motion to adjourn.

I'll second.

631.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

A little fast on the watch today.

I got your time.

Yeah.