Just read a thread where a hunter is about to sue a Master Guide. I already have.

My question is what exactly is a 'master guide'?
My particular POS has/had a master guide license. But he'd previously been found guilty of some offense either in Alaska or Montana such that they confiscated his airplane. The WHOLE airplane!!

How does Alaska allow POS like this to be able to hang a shingle that says 'master guide'?

Isn't that an insult to law abiding outfitters?

Yes it is an insult and if found guilty I hope he serves time.
The Master Guide license can be awarded to a Registered Guide who has guided 12 out of the past 15 years without a violation on his record. I don't know the details of this one but he could have been fully legal in the past and decided to make a little extra by breaking the law - or he might have been doing it all along and getting away with it. Loosing a plane is standard practise as any gear involved in a game violation in the state is usually taken. For resident or non-resident.
Back in the "good-ole-days" some guides simply considered loosing an airplane simply a cost of doing business. Fortunately the state, with the assistance of the APHA, is now trying to tighten things up.

My question would be...

Did he get his airplane back???

If not, how/why would the State take and keep his plane and not suspend his Guide License as well???

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
Fortunately the state, with the assistance of the APHA, is now trying to tighten things up.

I am surprised to read you say the APHA is envolved in that. They have such a long history of not doing the right thing on behalf of the hunters, that I would not have expected that. Remember, the APHA is an organization for Guides/outfitters, not hunters.

For the majority of the life of the APHA their officers were all too often the ones loosing airplanes. So much so that it was a standing joke that everytime they had an election all the state had to do was arrest the president and they would have the biggest crook.
Fortunately with the help of folks like Joe Klutch and Bobby Fithian they are working hard to shed that image and make the guiding industry and real, respectable, industry.
I don't agree with everything the APHA does, like any other organization it can be abit too self-serving and short sighted, but for the most part it is working hard not only for it's members but for wildlife as well and that helps all hunters.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

Fortunately with the help of folks like Joe Klutch and Bobby Fithian they are working hard to shed that image and make the guiding industry and real, respectable, industry.
I don't agree with everything the APHA does, like any other organization it can be abit too self-serving and short sighted, but for the most part it is working hard not only for it's members but for wildlife as well and that helps all hunters.

Joe Klutsch Is an Excellent Moose Outfitter and should be considered reputable.

If the APHA really wants to shed it's past bad image, then when hunters have issues with their members, they need to get involved and police their own. Much the way the Guide Outfitter association does in British Columbia, the GOABC. A much more successful and reputable organization for outfitter than the APHA. MHO, based on experience with both.

Cold Zero,

you maybe right for GOABC but you can operate an outfit in BC without being a GOABC member seems it s not the same in Alaska ?

I would say the percentage of Outfitters who are GOABC members is higher, than AK Outfitters who are members of APHA.

APHA is definitely helping to improve the commercial hunting industry in Alaska, but they are not a friend of the Alaska resident hunter.

I will admit that APHA - like any other group - can at times be self serving but it also is concerned about the health of Alaskan's game and that IS a benefit to all Alaskans.
There are way too many groups in the state working against hunters, proper game management and willing to trade our fish and wildlife for jobs and a cash economy.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
I will admit that APHA - like any other group - can at times be self serving but it also is concerned about the health of Alaskan's game and that IS a benefit to all Alaskans.
There are way too many groups in the state working against hunters, proper game management and willing to trade our fish and wildlife for jobs and a cash economy.

Yes, but I think we need to recognize that the guided hunting industry is a commercial enterprise with interests often competing with Alaska residents. Too often I hear the mantra repeated that all hunters should try to get along because we're all in it together. No we are not - the commercial hunting industry in Alaska is doing everything it can to reduce resident access to key species like Dall sheep. Unfortunately recent Board of Game decisions indicate that they favor commercial hunters over Alaska resident sport hunters. The situation will get worse once the new APHA/DNR exclusive guide use area is fully implemented.

What you call "commercial hunting" is in fact a misnomer. Nobody ( or at least nobody it is PC to talk about) is commercially hunting. Guides are simply assisting non-resident AND RESIDENT hunters who hire them. The issue is more resident vrs non-rsident and those issues are settled between the states, Feds and courts.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
What you call "commercial hunting" is in fact a misnomer. Nobody ( or at least nobody it is PC to talk about) is commercially hunting. Guides are simply assisting non-resident AND RESIDENT hunters who hire them. The issue is more resident vrs non-rsident and those issues are settled between the states, Feds and courts.

Not solely a resident versus non-res issue. I've had enough conversations with guides at various airstrips to know there are some of out there who truely resent the resident hunter because we represent a potential loss of income to them in that we are out there killing animals that could be taken by their commercial clients.

I think we are getting into the weeds in terms of semantics. I realize that legally guided hunting is not commercial in the sense of market hunting or commercial fishing, but in reality there is little difference between guided hunting, guided fishing, and commercial fishing. They are all making money by extracting the resource. That fact introduces an entirely different motivation and mindset than what I do.

I'm not taking the subsistence bait you offered.

Originally posted by Chisana

quote:

I've had enough conversations with guides at various airstrips to know there are some of out there who truely resent the resident hunter because we represent a potential loss of income to them in that we are out there killing animals that could be taken by their commercial clients.

Although what Chisana speaks of in the above quote dose happen I belive that it is only true of a minority of the guides.

As both a resident hunter myself and a Master guide there are few things that make my blood boil worse than hearing of a guide being propriatory about the game in his area.

I have heard the stories about some guides harassing hunters or trying to intimadate them into leaving the area.
This behaviour gives all guides a bad rap but most arn't guilty of this B.S.

If anyone here has conclusive evidense of these activities by a guide or has been a victom themselves then it is easy to contact the dep't of community and ecconomic development. If you have any problems with that PM me and I'll see to it that you get hold of the right person.

I have know guides who try to run off hunters by claiming that they own the area but it is illegal for a guide to harass a resident hunter who is legally hunting and if you report it to the guide board, F&G Trooper or land manager they will hear about it.

On the other hand I have seen a number of air-taxis and both resident and non-resident hunts who searched out guide camps and placed theirs close by - presumably because they thought that would be the best place. I have had drop-off hunters literally camp 100 yards from the front door my cabin and yell obcenities, shoot their rifles and keep fires going for days. Guides are not the only ones who exhibit poor behavior.

quote:

Originally posted by Cold Zero:
[QUOTE]If the APHA really wants to shed it's past bad image, then when hunters have issues with their members, they need to get involved and police their own. Much the way the Guide Outfitter association does in British Columbia, the GOABC. A much more successful and reputable organization for outfitter than the APHA. MHO, based on experience with both.

The GOABC is the major problem here in BC and they constantly lobby government to severely restrict we resident BC citizens from access to OUR game. They are a militant, extremist and foreign-financed organization and one which we resident hunters largely detest.

The ONLY "good" they do for wildlife and hunting here is what benefits them and makes larger profits for their often foreign membership. So, it sounds much like things are similar in Alaska.

I brought up GOABC since they do a much better job of policing their Outfitters who run into problems, than does the APHA.

Nothing to do with anything else. Very narrow focus.

That is a very disconcerting thing to hear as I know what the GOABC really do here and am sorry to hear that the Alaskan counterpart is worse.

I won't take this further here, but, you are mistaken in your premise and might want to check into some of the recent situations here.

It sounds like a smaller and less effective APHA might be a blessing. What I would like to see is an organization like the old East African PH organization that really policed and regulated it's members.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
What I would like to see is an organization like the old East African PH organization that really policed and regulated it's members.

Yes. Me too. I don't know that we will see that in your, or my lifetime.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:
What you call "commercial hunting" is in fact a misnomer. Nobody ( or at least nobody it is PC to talk about) is commercially hunting. Guides are simply assisting non-resident AND RESIDENT hunters who hire them. The issue is more resident vrs non-rsident and those issues are settled between the states, Feds and courts.

Just a few minutes ago a very well known brown bear guide on the west side of Kodiak Island testified to the Alaska Board of Fisheries that he is involved in the commercial fishing and commercial hunting industries. I guess I'm not the only one who believes that guiding hunters for monetary compensation is a commercial endeavor.

Just a few minutes ago a very well known brown bear guide on the west side of Kodiak Island testified to the Alaska Board of Fisheries that he is involved in the commercial fishing and commercial hunting industries. I guess I'm not the only one who believes that guiding hunters for monetary compensation is a commercial endeavor.[/QUOTE]

It is true that both professions are trying to make a living - so in that respect both are "commercial".
Commercial fishermen are actually catching fish. Alaskan hunting guide are simply being paid only for his services to guide another legal hunter to the game. By law he can not take game for the duration of the contracted hunt. A more apt comparison is a commercial fishermen vrs a charter boat captain.
When you take your wife, kids or in-laws hunting you are doing basically the same job as a guide.

quote:

Originally posted by tsturm:
Just a few minutes ago a very well known brown bear guide on the west side of Kodiak Island testified to the Alaska Board of Fisheries that he is involved in the commercial fishing and commercial hunting industries. I guess I'm not the only one who believes that guiding hunters for monetary compensation is a commercial endeavor.

[/QUOTE]


I include fishing guides in "Commercial" also, they just get way more per pound than the drift or set netter!!

A lot of very good replies . But in reality hunt guiding is a comercial hunt in that good sujms of money change hands and a contract is drawn up to the end result that an imals get killed . . What chaps me is how this state has regulayed its game to comerc@ial intrests wether hunt guides or tourism to the detrim/ent of the residents of the state . Case in point , brown bear in southeast

Keep in mind that guides cannot legally sell animals. There is a difference. One who guides fishing trips is a lot different than one who catches "common property" and sells it for an individual profit.

There is one other big difference in that if you are a logger, miner or commercial fisherman you only get paid for the product ("common property") that is delivered.
A guided hunt is no different than any other hunt and THE GUIDE IS ONLY PROVIDING A SERVICE TO THE LEGAL HUNTER. It is entirely possible, and with many guides probable, that the hunter can go home empty handed without taking any "common property".

I wouldn't say it was (probable ) that a client "hunter" goes home with no dead animal. Tho it does happen. I have no idea what the percentage is of clients who do go home empty handed. Hunt guiding must be a profitable venture. For some professional hunters anyway. Fish guiding seems a lot more profitable. Since both use a common ressource, and are a commercial venture that requires a bussiness liscense and commercial insurance. If a guide consistantly didn't produce dead fish or game to the satisfaction of his clients. He wouldn't be in bussiness or employed for very long

Gumboot, there are a number of long standing master guides I could mention with success rates less than 50% and I have known some who have had seasons where they did not kill anything - yet still somehow manage to find clients for the following year,
So while success is important, it is not the entire reason a guide is successful in a business sense.
WE GET PAID FOR GUIDING - NOT KILLING.
Miners, loggers and commercial fishermen get paid only for the resources they take.

I read somewhere but don't remember where that the success rate for nonresident hunters is 50% across the state.I would say that is about right based on my own observations.

The problem is that for every guide out there with a better than 50% record there is someone else doing really poorley.

In many cases this must be qualified by pointing out that not all hunts where a hunter buys a bear tag is the bear the primary target. Sometimes a hunter will go on a moose hunt and work out a deal for a bear if they have time after the moose or whatever the other game may be. In a situation like this you can't really count this against the guides success rate.

Haveing said that there are guides out there who sell bear hunts knowing that in the area they are booking the chances are poor but I bet thats not the way it is portrayed to the client.

We in the industrie know who many of these guys are and we hate this unethical practis because it reflects poorley on the guiding business as a whole.
Fortunantly this board and others like it help weed these guys out. I remember a couple years ago a AR member was asking about a guide in the area I hunt who is probably one of the worst case examples of useing these decietfull booking tactics. I diplomaticly suggested the guy research his choice closley before booking. Others here were not so diplomaic and the situation got sorted out quickly.

I didn't, t know the potential success rate was that low. I agree a guide doesn't do the killing, unless when wheels are about to fall off.

It is a land use, by and large for a commercial purpose.

No doubt this has gotten far off the original topic and for that I do appoligize.

This looks like an argument of semantics. Wouldn't it be safe to define "commercial" fishing or hunting as the accumulation of product to sell commercially, as in for profit. I see a vast difference between harvesting for sport, with or without a guides help, as opposed to harvesting for the general public market, as in canned salmon on the Safeway shelves.

quote:

Originally posted by gumboot458:

It is a land use, by and large for a commercial purpose.
.

Gumboot has prety much nailed it. Guiding is using land, either public or private, for commercial purposes. While commercial hunters, fishermen, loggers or miners are actually taking or extracting a commodity, as well as using the land.

It seems no group can properly police themselves. In all cases there are conflicting interests and definitions. After endless discussions it is seen that definitions and objectives should perhaps have been dealt with first. Has it ever been otherwise?

If this is all not such a big deal and all that is being provided is guiding then why does a non res not have a choice on weather or not he wants to use a guide for bear sheep and goats. If I want to moose hunt on the penninsula I can do it with out a guide theres plenty of bears there. I can deer hunt on Kodiak without a guide theres plenty of bears there too. If I wanted to go backpacking all through the Chugach or AK Range or the Brooks I could climb all the way to the top if I wanted and walk right past all those sheep and goats to get there , don't need a guide for that either . The guide requirement forces it to be a commercial enteprise and a way for the prices of such hunt to rise to ridiculous numbers because its "exclusive or limited access only" . I don't want to hear it's not commercial , it doesn't get anymore commercial. Black bear hunt under 5 thousand all said and done unguided, brown bear guided hunt 20 thousand and then some. Really...really ?

so wait its a land use thing you say right ? Lets take the brown bear out of the picture then . If its not about the bear as a rescource then lets see all you guys go to the next tree hugger gathering and try to sell them a camping trip into the wilderness for 20 plus grand. Let me know how that works out.

Originally posted by Wild One

quote:

so wait its a land use thing you say right ? Lets take the brown bear out of the picture then . If its not about the bear as a rescource then lets see all you guys go to the next tree hugger gathering and try to sell them a camping trip into the wilderness for 20 plus grand. Let me know how that works out.

I understand your frustration and I actully agree with some of it, These laws to some degree were imposed with strong lobbying from the guide industry.

Still these animals are the property of the people of Alaska and I have never heard of any resident hunters opposing this law.

Since you can hunt moose, deer, black bear, etc without a guide maybe you should count yourself lucky on that and take advantage of it.I think you will find that by going around useing a guide hunting in Alaska will still come at a high price.

Other states have some guide restrictions also, I belive sheep hunting in Wyoming also requiers a guide for a nonresident.

Yes these laws are very anoying sometimes but when we travel to states we don't live in we have to play by their rules. I know that when I go down to visit friends in Indiana I'm not allowed to use a rifle. Now I have to say that just seems like the most rediculas thing. I have hunted 4 continants 11 countrys all with a rifle but in Indiana nope if I do it there big touble.
It's not just Indiana that has this stupid law, parts of MN,IA,MI,OH,IL and oh ya New York.

I guess we all need to work on our hunting laws,

been hunting up there unguided for nearly 10 years now and will be in the interior again this year with a bud from the SE. Also don't consider this a personal attack here guys, one of my good friends is a master guide . As far as the hunting with a rifle thing , it was not an exception for non residents here in NY . That law applied to Anyone hunting in that area of the state resident or not. That law was done away with years ago and nearly the entire state is rifle now accept for a few counties where population densities do not make it practical .

The laws pertaining to us guides who use Federal lands were not at all influenced by guides but were first set by USFWS and then adopted by USFS, NPS and BLM. WE have quota's for moose hunters, seperate quatos for caribou, and bears, and fishermen and even eco-tourists.

The initial discussion here was whether or not we were professional hunters - who kill things for a living, just as miners dig gold for a living or loggers cut trees for a living ---- or were we guides who use public lands and provide a service - whether or not the client kills anything or not.

Originally posted by 458win

quote:

The laws pertaining to us guides who use Federal lands were not at all influenced by guides but were first set by USFWS

Phil -I'm not sure what your getting at here. The fed regs you follow as a commercial operator on U.S.F&W service lands have nothing to do with state regulations requiering a nonresident to have a guide for hunting sheep goat and brown bear.