Licenses For Guides???

[mkm]

I love this discussion!!! In my humble opinion I think guides should need to be licensed. I know this will not sit well with some however as it is now anyone can call themselves a guide, make $450+ off clients, and use the public resource for free. I believe that if your making your business off a great resource like our fisheries then you shouldn't have a problem paying a nominal fee which would be reinvested into our resourse (e.g. more CO's, research into maintaining quality, etc.) And on a side note I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for my basic fishing license if it meant better management. I don't want to see a classified system like in BC however more money could mean better service...seeing as we all talk about poachers and not having enough Co's. Just my thoughts though.

 

mkm

[SamIam]

I love this discussion!!! In my humble opinion I think guides should need to be licensed. I know this will not sit well with some however as it is now anyone can call themselves a guide, make $450+ off clients, and use the public resource for free. I believe that if your making your business off a great resource like our fisheries then you shouldn't have a problem paying a nominal fee which would be reinvested into our resourse (e.g. more CO's, research into maintaining quality, etc.) And on a side note I wouldn't mind paying a little extra for my basic fishing license if it meant better management. I don't want to see a classified system like in BC however more money could mean better service...seeing as we all talk about poachers and not having enough Co's. Just my thoughts though.

 

If what Don says is true, where would the money come from that is reinvested in the resources? They would actually be taking money from the "general fund" just to administer the licensing program. So since money is not to be gained, and actually lost, what other reasons are there for licensing fishing guides?

[mkm]

If what Don says is true, where would the money come from that is reinvested in the resources? They would actually be taking money from the "general fund" just to administer the licensing program. So since money is not to be gained, and actually lost, what other reasons are there for licensing fishing guides?

 

How big of a registry are we talking about? I would be guessing but don't think you would require a full office of staff to manage the number of Alberta guides. I see no problem with $450 for a yearly guide license..then again I'm not a guide. But for the number of days a guide is on the river I would assume their profits are pretty big. Correct me if I am wrong as I don't personally know any guides and the costs that confront them.

 

mkm

 

[headscan]

How big of a registry are we talking about? I would be guessing but don't think you would require a full office of staff to manage the number of Alberta guides. I see no problem with $450 for a yearly guide license..then again I'm not a guide. But for the number of days a guide is on the river I would assume their profits are pretty big. Correct me if I am wrong as I don't personally know any guides and the costs that confront them.

 

mkm

It wouldn't just be an issue of office staff to run this registry, but also enforcement. We already know that the CO's are stretched to the limit just checking for regular angling licenses and responding to other calls, so how would their current numbers be expected to check guides as well? Even at $450 a license for guides I don't think that would give you enough money for salaries, administration costs, office space, computers, a database for the registry, and other various overhead costs.

[Mikey]

Give someone enough rope and they hang themselves. No sense in spending tons of money for something that the customers will do for free. If you don't run a quality service they will put you out of business.

[Harps]

Why not a guide licence issued like fishing licences (I'd like them to take a test though). We pay enough for that IBM service. Applications and payment can be made online with regular licences on that new website.

Each guide company gets on that maybe lists the names of the guides.

CO's check it like they check licences... and with enough time on a river its easy to spot who the guides are.

A small increase in licence fees would be acceptable for residents, a nominal increase for non-residents, and a real increase for aliens.

 

 

The big thing would be to collect fishing info (rod days/ watershed) so we know what the pressure is from guiding.

Guide days can be limited in a waterbody/watershed where needed.

Voluntary creels would also be great.

[AndyW]

Why not a guide licence issued like fishing licences (I'd like them to take a test though). We pay enough for that IBM service. Applications and payment can be made online with regular licences on that new website.

Each guide company gets on that maybe lists the names of the guides.

CO's check it like they check licences... and with enough time on a river its easy to spot who the guides are.

A small increase in licence fees would be acceptable for residents, a nominal increase for non-residents, and a real increase for aliens.

 

 

The big thing would be to collect fishing info (rod days/ watershed) so we know what the pressure is from guiding.

Guide days can be limited in a waterbody/watershed where needed.

Voluntary creels would also be great.

 

A guide license, a test to get said license, creel reports, limiting guide days as/where needed. You are a breath away from creating what BC has with the classified watershed system. BC= Bring Cash!

 

This amounts to an infrastructure nightmare that would only be possible with money injected into the system- and lots of it. The net result would be joe angler having to pay more for a license, paying more if he chooses to be guided.

 

Fishing is a sport/passtime that should be and remain affordable for average people with kids. I don't see any benefit of how a big increase in license fees, rod days, etc would do anything but stop average tourists from fishing. All an increase in fees does is put more in general revenue for the Province. If you feel you should pay more for your license then make a donation to TU, this would make more sense from a conservation point of view.

 

[Harps]

A guide license, a test to get said license, creel reports, limiting guide days as/where needed. You are a breath away from creating what BC has with the classified watershed system. BC= Bring Cash!

 

This amounts to an infrastructure nightmare that would only be possible with money injected into the system- and lots of it. The net result would be joe angler having to pay more for a license, paying more if he chooses to be guided.

 

Fishing is a sport/passtime that should be and remain affordable for average people with kids. I don't see any benefit of how a big increase in license fees, rod days, etc would do anything but stop average tourists from fishing. All an increase in fees does is put more in general revenue for the Province. If you feel you should pay more for your license then make a donation to TU, this would make more sense from a conservation point of view.

 

Except for... Fishing classified waters is what... an extra $20 a year for BC residents? Cheap (10 coffees, 4 if you drink starbucks).

 

I think we could bump licences up to $30 for residents;

$60 for non-residents (+ a 3 day/week licence option);

$70 for aliens (+ a 3 day/week licence option);

$5 for senior residents... need to keep track of whose fishing;

$??100 for an annual guide licence, plus they must keep records (and depending where they fish pass an ID test plus Angling Education course like Hunters do).

 

If Joe angler can afford a guide he can afford an extra $5 a year,

plus kids under 16 should get a free province wide C&R licence... pay if they want to keep or fish with a guardian.

 

How is that making fishing not affordable?? And how does making guide get a licence hurt the Average Joe poor angler and his kids?

 

We shouldn't have to donate to a non-profit org to protect or resources (a Legislated RESPONSIBILITY of the Alberta Gov't!!!!!!)

[SamIam]

I agree with raising the fishing license fees, especially for non-residents & aliens. But I still have not seen any good reasons for licensing guides. This idea that it will weed out bad guides is silly. As Winston pointed out, this will take care of itself. And as Don pointed out earlier, the admin costs are higher than what you would bring in. So it just doesn't make any sense. I know it doesn't make any sense for the admin costs to be so high, but we have to remember we are talking about government and bureaucracy, EVERYTHING seems to cost more than what makes sense.

[Harps]

Licences won't weed out bad guides, just like they haven't weeded out bad drivers. There is much more important things than somebody getting ripped off with a bad guided experience.

 

Guides teach people to fish and are an excellent place to start good habits for anglers like proper fish handling, fish ID, and following regulations. Guides also spend a large amount of time on rivers and see things. As they are making money off of our resource, its only right that there is some sort of reporting mechanism in place. Plus O&G, forestry, and mining industries pay royalties/taxes... guides buy lunch?!?

 

I asked Ted Morton these questions on October 1st (with no response yet):

1. How many guides are operating in Alberta south of the Bow River, and how many clients do they take out each year? If the Alberta government doesn't know this, how can the government manage the fishery? Are there limits to the number of guides that can use an area or times that they can use an area?

 

2. Why are guides not required to be licensed in Alberta? Are there issues with business insurance and ethics (because they are a business operating on crown land, representing tourism in Alberta)?

 

3. Guides operate on crown land (forestry and parks) and make money on a public resource (Charging from $300-$600 per person per trip). Fishing is also a consumptive use of the resource. Do guides have to pay access fees, royalties, or anything of the sort? They make a lot of money from a public resource and should contribute to the maintenance of that resource.

 

4. Researchers have ethics to follow while handling animals, fish included. Qualified Aquatic Environmental Specialists under Alberta's Water Act need a licence to collect fish, even if they are released. Why can a guide without a license (business or fishing) take an inexperienced client out to the river and handle fish? Is there some sort of fish handling course that can be made mandatory?

 

 

Of course, Weedy sums it up with much more class: http://flyfishcalgary.com/board/index.php?...ost&p=66836