Should Fishing Guides Be Licensed?

[DonAndersen]

Guys/Gals,

 

One of the topics that will come up @ the Provincial Fisheries Roundtable is slated to be whether or not fishing guides be licensed. And if they are licensed, what criteria should be used to acquire a license?

 

A couple of thoughts:

 

* if you license someone, they do have a larger voice in how the resource is managed?

* if you don't license someone, they have no voice and are counted with all others

* licenses may/could incorporate things like location restrictions, age, insurance coverage & first aid training

* licences for guides handling boats may/could require certificate of competency

* typical resource exploiters [ oil/gas, coal, wood] pay about 15% of gross income as a "user fee/royalty/stumpage etc" - is this appropriate for fishing guides?

* if a license system was set up, who should pay for administration - you & I, the Govt, the license holders et al?

* how long should the license be in effect. Yearly, 5 years, quarterly, fishing season only?

* should all types of fishing guides be licensed? What about fly in camps, ice fishing guides, horsey outfitters whose wranglers point you @ the creek

* could license holders justifiability restrict the public to certain locations if their business is effected.

* conversely, should the public, on crowded waters, restrict guides

* should guides have to adhere to a higher level of conduct and if so, who develops the ethics for guides

* how would a guide and/or a guided operation be identified?

* should owners of business who supply guiding services be licensed? Should these license fees be greater that the guide license?

 

 

Or should the whole question of licensing guides be dumped and the free for all continue?

 

catch ya'

 

 

Don

[dryfly]

Generally, yes. This is a tad of a sideways jag and a bit of a rant.

 

A guide from another province (I didn't even say BC ... ) can make $500 per day guiding his clients an NOT PAY ONE CENT in licenses, fees or taxes in Alberta! A guide from somewhere else (I didn't even say BC again ... ) who does not fish does not even need a fishing license!! It is simply bullshit.

 

Guides make money from the resources that my tax dollars protect--such as it is.

 

Why should I subsidize his business? It is simply wrong.

[Flytyer]

Generally, yes. This is a tad of a sideways jag and a bit of a rant.

 

A guide from another province (I didn't even say BC ... ) can make $500 per day guiding his clients an NOT PAY ONE CENT in licenses, fees or taxes in Alberta! A guide from somewhere else (I didn't even say BC again ... ) who does not fish does not even need a fishing license!! It is simply bullshit.

 

Guides make money from the resources that my tax dollars protect--such as it is.

 

Why should I subsidize his business? It is simply wrong.

 

Very well put and I agree completely.

[Glenbow]

I do not think that they should be licensed. Period.

 

* if you license someone, they do have a larger voice in how the resource is managed? - No

* if you don't license someone, they have no voice and are counted with all others - Correct

* licenses may/could incorporate things like location restrictions, age, insurance coverage & first aid training - No

* licences for guides handling boats may/could require certificate of competency - No

* typical resource exploiters [ oil/gas, coal, wood] pay about 15% of gross income as a "user fee/royalty/stumpage etc" - is this appropriate for fishing guides? - No

* if a license system was set up, who should pay for administration - you & I, the Govt, the license holders et al? - Not the Public

* how long should the license be in effect. Yearly, 5 years, quarterly, fishing season only? - Not at all

* should all types of fishing guides be licensed? What about fly in camps, ice fishing guides, horsey outfitters whose wranglers point you @ the creek - No

* could license holders justifiability restrict the public to certain locations if their business is effected. - Absolultely Not!

* conversely, should the public, on crowded waters, restrict guides - Absolutely Not!

* should guides have to adhere to a higher level of conduct and if so, who develops the ethics for guides - No

* how would a guide and/or a guided operation be identified? - Up to them

* should owners of business who supply guiding services be licensed? Should these license fees be greater that the guide license? - No

 

I don't think that guides should have to conform to any of this. Free country, remember? Just because BC does things does not mean that we have to. I think that the more things like licenses and certificates and fees and access restrictions all take away from the enjoyment of life and the resources around us, not the other way around. In management of resources it should be the focus to preserve and enhance our resources, not tax or restrict them for purposes other than that. If you can be a guide and want to, go for it. If you stink, you get no more clients. If you are good at it, great - you do ok. In BC you have to buy your rod days on water, and I think that hampers any new guides (or existing also) as you have to try to 'sell' those days. You might not even have enough money on hand to buy them. At least here you have a chance at making a go of it, even if you start out part-time and go from there. I just think this is a proposal for something we do not need. These are my opinions only and I am replying to this topic as the poster requests feedback. Interesting topic, thanks for bringing it to our attention Don.

[dryfly]

GB ...

 

"Free country, remember?" Humm.....

 

Unfortunately, complete freedom is anarchy.

 

Why do we need fishing licenses?

 

Driver licenses?

 

Permits to cut trees?

 

Permits to own guns?

 

Business licenses in cities, towns and counties? (At least our local guides have to have business license and pay taxes...we hope anyway. )

 

Dog licensees?

 

Pussy permits in some cities? (Cats...we are talking cats here.)

 

Alas, we live in a controlled society.

 

Guides who don't pay one penny are freeloaders.

 

So are random campers.

 

Ooops! No opposition to RCers ... just that it should not be free.

 

Cheers!

 

Clive

[Glenbow]

Clive,

I understand your point and agree with a lot of it. I feel that we already sacrifice many freedoms and I am reluctant to see any more freedoms removed or restricted. I completely disagree with many of the licensed that are already in place (many of which you listed above) and I fail to see how more licenses and restrictions will improve the situation.

 

I personally do not feel that guides and random campers are freeloaders. Many random campers may be irresponsible and/or destructive, but I feel that is a different issue.

 

I think that if a guide has spent enough time learning water to know it well enough to offer guide services if somebody is interested in that, then good for him (read her also). He gets paid for some of the effort that he put in to learn that knowledge. This is not a question of if guides pay taxes after all. If it is a question of setting a professional standard, that is something that guides should collectively do if they want to see that.

 

As I said, I agree with a lot of the points you list but with regard to guides I do not think that licensing them and some of the other points of discussion in the opening post will improve anything. I feel that the more we restrict ourselves the more we remove our freedoms and that is not a life I wish to see. I am very pleased that we have the opportunity to discuss this and have some input into the decision making process.

[lonefisher]

I think Glen should be licenced just like any other large pet...... JK buddy (but seriously tell the GF to get you fixed atleast)

 

I gotta say I feel about the same way as Glen. I don't feel that licensing is the issue, but we should have better monitoring all users of the fisheries. If a guide guides fine..... but he should get hammered (so should everyone) for any regulation infractions. If a guide is obeying the regs what harm is he doing...... But that said a licensing system would be ok if it was not exclusive as I feel all Alberta guides should have even opportunity to guide on Albertas waters..... If some guide or company can monopolize the guiding rights to a water then its unfair to other guides. Thats to do with the whole rod days thing.... but honestly I am not completely familiar with the system so maybe I should not comment on it. I would kinda like it if only holders of an Alberta residents fishing license were allowed to guide on Albertas waters for money. But maybe thats unfair.... i dunno

[Pythagoras]

I would like to reply that guide need a licence...peroid...but Dryfly makes the point so much better than I can so I'll just stand beside and cheer him on....go Clive, good points!

[Badger]

...

[lonefisher]

Now I am actually kinda wondering what we are talkin about........ is this about a guiding license or a business license? I do feel that they should have to have a business license or more importantly pay taxes on the money earned...... just like any other income........

[CDone]

Along with licensing comes liability insurance, first aid certification, training courses, ect. I'd feel a lot more comfortable with a guide that was insured and knew what had to be done if I happened to go for a swim un-expectantly. Guides in BC are licensed, they all have to apply for the waters they want to guide on each year(not sure if there is a limit to how many guides can be on a certain river or not), all must complete certification, and must be insured.

 

Heres a thread on another board in regards to guiding in BC. http://www.flybc.ca/forum/index.php?showtopic=7267

 

Colin

[Flytyer]

I'm going to proably open a can of worms here but I believe this to be a valid point.

We've gone through a oil and gas royalty debate so what is the difference if an oil and gas company exploits a natural resource over a guide doing the same thing but in the guides case he/she pays nothing? Face it both are profitting from a natural resource that belongs to the public.

 

I know that there are a lot of shady characters out there that go around under the name of guide but they are giving the legitamate guides a bad name. At some point accountability has to come into play.

[ladystrange]

i would like to know what the purpose of the licence would be. where does the money go? what would it be used for that we, the general angler, dont already contribute to? maybe mor CO to babysit the guides, chase them down on the river and ask for 15 sets of paperwork?

 

yes guides should have business licence if they operate a business, a smart guide would have insurance - at least a liability policy to save his/her own but from being sued if a client takes a tummble and decides it is the guides fault for putting them into that position, or what have you. obivously they are paying income taxes (at least on traceable transactions ) but buyer beware, if you, as the general public, wants to take a trip to some backwater place with limited access in dangerous terrain, it is up to you if you have a guide who has insurance or first aid or not. it should be up to the public to ask the questions, good reputation of the guide, knowledge of the area, survival knowledge, first aid and so on, like a sat-phone. conversely, a day on the bow river in the city stretch, these things may not be as important. since liability waivers arent worth the paper they are written on and any smart lawyer can win a negligence suit. these are things that a guide should be thinking about but personally i dont think the government needs to hold our hands to tell us what to do and a guide has to pay the government for the privledge.

 

so i agree with colin, i would feel more comfortable if a guide was insured, was operating with a proper business licence ahd first aid. but i dont think it should be the government's responsibility to make sure that the guide has all these things for me. i'm an adult, most people going on these trips are adults, let these people ask the questions themselves.

 

even if there were a licencing system, does the government then become responsible to make sure that the guides are on the up and up, i dont think 'permitted' guides should have better, more or exclusive rights to a waterway over anyother angler who has paid for a yearly licence. nor should the general public be able to tell a guide to shove off if there are too many people on a river section.

 

there really isnt anything else to regulate that doesnt already fall under the fishing regulations. one could bring up the number of people on a guided trip, but that is already self regulated. the guides i know won't take more than 4 people out with just one guide.

 

if the purpose of the licence would be to have the guides pay royalties for the usage of the water, then bill it as a percentage off of the provincial income tax every year to the company - not the individual guide (read set up numbered corporation and employ yourself). i would like to see the money go back to the fisheries directly for improvements, clean ups, hatchery & stocking programs and not just a cash grab excuse for the government.

 

clive asks

Why do we need fishing licenses? to help fund conservation efforts, stocking programs and pay CO

 

Driver licenses? because vehicles are complicated and deadly and there are rules to follow in order to operate one safely, without killing your self or anyone else, this does not always work, there are accidents but that is why it is called accidents

 

Permits to cut trees? to stop companies or people from raping and piligeding the land and clear cutting it into oblivion - ie: amazon jungle.

 

Permits to own guns? cash grab, other than domestic incidents, the majority of the gun commited crimes are done by the people without a permit

 

Business licenses? part accountibility, part cash grab, part tracking system, part governmental make work project

 

Dog licensees? cash grab, municiple make work project, pay for vet and food for unwanted/abandoned animals so we dont turn into mexico

 

Pussy permits in some cities? (Cats...we are talking cats here.) same as the dogs

[Guest guito]

I feel that gudes in Alberta should be licensed, have a business set up and also have insurance and first aid training. It will help cut out the unqualified and unscrupulous and tax cheaters etc. I think that the Bow River would benefit from a bit more control and it might help with the poor ethics and the sometimes "gong show" that can occur. It really pisses me off to see American guides up here, with customers and they act like they own the place and don't put a nickle into the local economy..There should only be Albertan "guides" on Albertan waters PERIOD!!

 

These are my thoughts exactly. The only thing I might add is to have large fines for anyone caught guiding without proper licenses.

 

Guito

[Guest bigbadbrent]

define guiding...I know lots of guys that have their own boats, and take out their friends..So, who ever is rowing the boat is guiding, whoever's vehicle is towing the trailer is now guiding?

 

If i pay 20 bucks to a friend for gas, is he suddenly guiding me..what if i borrow some flies from him, or get some casting advice?

 

 

 

Guiding is way too vague, and easy to take advantage of, even if there are licenses issued..Any guy from the states could come up, tell his clients to tell anyone who asks that they're all really good friends.

 

 

What if a known guide is having his friends out and they're not paying him..he's suddenly guiding?

 

 

waayyyy to vague

[Flytyer]

define guiding...I know lots of guys that have their own boats, and take out their friends..So, who ever is paddling the boat is guiding, whoever's vehicle is guiding?

 

If i pay 20 bucks to a friend for gas, is he suddenly guiding me..what if i borrow some flies from him, or get some casting advice?

 

Brent what you are describing is cost sharing/equipment sharing......big difference if you are paying or receiving hundreds of $$$

[Guest bigbadbrent]

Yeah, but who's going to be able to prove how much money they're recieving, if any

[Flytyer]

Yeah, but who's going to be able to prove how much money they're recieving, if any

now you are getting into policing areas that most of us are not qualified to answer as it would be speculating on the answer........there is nothing wrong with a guide taking friends out for a day or half day of fishing provided they are not being paid.......besides most friends wouldn't charge friends for this anyway

[Guest guito]

I think it is quite easy to distinguish which people on the river are being guided or are just out fishing with friends.

[SamIam]

regulations / protectionists = communist

 

What exactly would be gained by the fishery by having licensed guides?

[Flytyer]

regulations / protectionists = communist

 

What exactly would be gained by the fishery by having licensed guides?

 

Your statement above shows contempt in my eyes....communist eh? Do you even have a clue?

[DonAndersen]

Folks,

 

As a bit of background. The Provincial Fisheries Roundtable asked of it's attendees what "hots" they had. The guiding issue was wayyyyyy down the list but on the list it was. Hence the question.

As far as guides guiding "friends". I've often wondered how prostitution does it. Could be a friend - or not.

 

So far, looks like an even split with the commy comments coming outta of the woodwork.

 

Is licensing a civil liberties question?

 

regards,

 

 

Don

[reevesr1]

regulations / protectionists = communist

 

That's exactly what it says in The Communist Manifesto, or maybe it's Mao's Little Red Book. I get them confused. Whatever, the first step to a communist state is to regulate and license independent contractors.

 

Please buddy. A little overstated perhaps?

[dryfly]

I've question for anyone--everyone:

 

Why do I have to pay to fish the Crow and a guide does not have to pay one cent?

 

And he makes money of the resource I pay to maintain!? And if the guide is from another province he would pay zero taxes here at all.

 

Absolutely NUTS!

 

Democratic societies are ALL about user fees these days.

 

Apparently not when it comes to guiding.

 

Supplementary question: Why do we pay for fishing and hunting licenses and bird watchers, hikers and random campers don't? Yet it's our license money that goes to the ACA to protect "dickie birds" ... as Don once called them.

 

Cheers!

 

Clive

[birchy]

I've question for anyone--everyone:

 

Why do I have to pay to fish the Crow and a guide does not have to pay one cent?

 

And he makes money of the resource I pay to maintain!? And if the guide is from another province he would pay zero taxes here at all.

 

Absolutely NUTS!

 

Democratic societies are ALL about user fees these days.

 

Apparently not when it comes to guiding.

 

Supplementary question: Why do we pay for fishing and hunting licenses and bird watchers, hikers and random campers don't? Yet it's our license money that goes to the ACA to protect "dickie birds" ... as Don once called them.

 

Cheers!

 

Clive

 

Seriously? Guides fish for free?

 

(Forgive me for being naive)