I re read the thread about getting gettind "screwed " by weather in alaska.And see some of the familiar opinions: meaning its hunting.
Well for arguments sake I will open this thread anew to see what responses are generated,have no hope that we will change the world.
Same applies to a fishing trip etc.

It is my opinion we have two spheres of interest here:
1: the outfitter whose yearly income depends on his ability to entice paying customers to buy .

2: the customer sometimes victim,wants to buy an experience and trophy.

So the victim asks and gets answers from the seller of services.He will mostly be given(in my humble experience) information that seems to offer exactly what he is looking for,the underlying reason is the need or desire to sell.

The outfitter will not disclose lousy or sub performance,problems with the weather ,animals,camp,guides,lack of game.
Oh yeah, he will state that its not a zoo,no 100% gurantees but he will usually make the prospective buyer understand that he will get what he asked for.He wants to sell.

Then there are the unpredictables,some call them "acts of God".Again I disagree.

1st big question: why should the customer shoulder all the cost of acts by GOD?
Granted the outfitter has fixed costs,but that is the way in any business.
The above pretty much sanctions that an outfitter has made his money after he collects it-
regardless of what cometh thereafter.

He is selling a hunt,due to outside circumstances ,he cannot provide what he sold.
Why should the buyer shoulder the total cost?

Point 2:The outfitter knows or should know the statistics: seasons,areas where for instance weather is a factor.
He should disclose that in no uncertain terms:
like in a 2 week hunt,expect to be grounded 7-10 days -during which time WE DO NO HUNT.
Instead of given the understanding that yes weather is there,but we are and will be successful.
But of course,honesty,might and will drive customers away- so its safer not to disclose
or say something about it only to rephrase it in a positive way.

Same issue with available game,or game of trophy quality
Some areas have been overhunted or never had numbers or quality.The outfitter is stuck with his "inferior" land,he will not disclose this fact.The outfitter will book late hunts in deep snow and steep mountains when he should and does know that the hunt might not be doable.
His greed thinks of the additional income-thats all,he will find some "excuses"as to why it happened.
He will mislead the prospective buyer.Its his livlihood.And during the hunt- after collection of ALL FEES UPFRONT,he will dribble out the reasons: weather too something this week,you are in no shape,I tried but you didnt want to ...,
you cant expect to see game every day,(right, how about every week?)

He will try his level best to explain a dismal hunt,he will not take any responsibility.

Now this all sound pretty awful,but I and many others experienced it and worse.I call that stealing by willful misrepresentation,nothing else.

Given the present set of arranging an outfitted hunt with all fees payed up front- amounts to an invitation for crooks to rip working folks off.

Are all outfitters that way?Thank God they are not.There are some that are honest,have ethics,
have what they sell and "make things right" even if "GOD" interfered

But as they say,you cant change the spots on a leopard,you cant teach ethics to a crook.

Best defense against this rampant behavior is a public forum like this,were people share their experiences.

sheephunter

[ 11-26-2003, 21:21: Message edited by: sheephunter ]

Sheephunter,

It's sad but true and it took me several bad trips to learn that a lot of people will tell you anything they think you want to hear to get your money. Once you pay you are screwed if the guys a crook. I'm very careful now but got burned by an outfit here in the US that book hunts in Russia. So even through booking agents you can be screwed.
I don't mind paying a fair price for a hunt if it is what they represent it to be but I feel for the chap that bought the goat hunt and was sent home early and no refund.

Hawkeye47

So how do you keep from getting screwed.

I�m not sure I would take getting screwed as well as some people here.

Would you suggest burying the body or letting the animal deal with it.

[ 11-23-2003, 06:58: Message edited by: ddunn ]

Think you have hit it on the head! Why pay total fees upfront?

What reputable outfitter would object to me showing him the colour of my money on the basis that I would pass the balance to him on the conclusion of the hunt?

Having noted that I have been comprehensively screwed on numerous occasions in the past, this seems to be the most certain way of ensuring satisfaction and value for money.

Not many it seems....... However, how often do you pay a workman in advance of successful completion of a job?

Maybe I should try this technique in my future dealings with outfitters. Please understand, I have no worries about paying a significant balance at the commencement of the hunt - I understand that there are fixed costs which may well need to be met, then again - do outfitters pay in advance for their guides?

IanF

Thanks - I'm assuming you also meant to post the words....'You'll need it!'

Then again - if Clients were all to start that sort of behaviour - just think, they would probably get exactly what they wanted!

Ian

I try to avoid being the screw-ee by staying with outfitters / agents that have done me a good job in the past. (I like personal recommendations when I try someone new.)

My experience is that hunts in the U.S. (or booked in the U.S.) have to be paid up-front. When I booked in RSA I hunted first, then settled up at the airport after the hunt was concluded. I can understand why many outfitters might not like that arrangement. Many of us are pricks / cry babies. We wound game, but swear we didn't. We blame the agent / outfitter / guide / tracker for our inadequacies and mistakes. We seem to think that simply because we had enough money to pay for the hunt that we're something special.

Some years ago I listened to a "hunter" whine for five days on an elk hunt. Nothing suited him. He showed up with his wife without providing prior notice, then bitched about the sleeping accommodations, and moved the cook and his wife out of their room so he and the Mrs. would be comfortable. The guides weren't working hard enough for him so he bad-mouthed them. His wife bitched because she was bored, and wanted a guide to drive her around looking at game. The rest of us thought the hunt was great. Mr. & Mrs. Important were a complete pain in the ass.

I couldn't be a outfitter / guide / agent / PH. Hunting is supposed to be fun. Putting up with "us" is more than I could handle.

I wouldn't expect "acts of God" to be covered unless it kept me from getting to the hunt area. Once I get to the field and the gun is in my hands, the guide and I are a team and we'll work through the "acts of God" issues together.

IanF- you hit the nail right on the head. I have been starting to do the same thing in paying after the hunt was completed. I think that it is up to us the hunters and forums like this to spread the word and make the changes. By, paying at the end of a hunt, you motivate the guide/outfitter to deliver what was promised.

Kensco- Even though I may agree with you that you will find a hunter that you can't please. That is is to be expected, but for the most part, we are honest hard working individuals that want a fair hunt for our money. In every job you will find clients that you can't please no matter what you do. Why should an outfitter/guide be any different.
I am sure that anyone who has hunted for a while will tell you a story or two about not getting what they were promised. Just this past hunt, the outfitter booked me first and then squeezed in just a few other hunters along with me. Those few were JUST 11 more. I will leave it at that and add no more. I can go on forever.

The funny thing is that your hunt has a fixed price that you compare to what you are originally offered on your hunt and as things change on the outfitters/guides end (accommodations, hunters to guide ratio, equipment failures etc etc..) your greenbacks DON'T!

just my 2 cents worth

[ 11-26-2003, 19:59: Message edited by: bow777 ]

It appears that many if not all here had really bad experiences with some outfitters.That is because the problem is real and widespread.
And its all possible because of the "upfront" paymment policy.
I grant without reservation that there are hunters that will try to weasel out of payment obligations and use same dishonest attitudes that outfitter use.Its not a one sided problem.

Nevertheless,today,many outfitters rob customers thru false promisses and non performance.And they get full payment.They get it because we hunters feel we have no choice,because thats what outfitters demand- to protect themselves,or to successfully rob us,as the case may be.

Furthermore they will try to explain their own unethical failure and greed by "blaming" the hunter,the weather,"GOD".
They will equate a ride in the bush with services rendered, never mind that there aint no elk in the county.
Nevermind that no knowledgable person would schedule a hunt in steep territory in deep snow
or fogged in landscape- UNLESS so specified and agreed to beforehand.

To change that,ethical outfitters can change to
accept payment after services provided.To make that work.Promissed services will have to be written down.The money can even be kept in escrow

Do I see that coming?-- NO

Not unless hunters demand so.There is no benefit to outfitters to endanger their income.

sheephunter

[ 11-27-2003, 01:25: Message edited by: sheephunter ]

SHEEP:

YOU SHOULD TAKE YOUR POST TO THE BIG GAME FORUM ALSO. I AM SURE THAT YOU WILL GET MORE REPLIES

It would be better if outfitters in Alaska would adopt a similar fee arrangement to the PH's in Africa - A daily fee that is fixed whether the trophy was collected or not, then a Trophy fee if the hunt was successful.

Palmer,

I'd be curious to hear what positive changes a daily rate would instill,besides more butter on the Outfitter's bread?

A fucking is still a fucking,be it lump sum or day rate.....................

Gentlemen,
All good comments. Big stick, your closing comment says it all. You are all familiar with my case. On the subject of the latest screwing here it is. November 25,2003 this arrived in my mail box. From the Alaska State Troopers who have been reviewing my case.

"By contracting your guide for this big game hunt, you essentially hired him to stalk, pursue, track,kill or attempt to kill big game for you. (AS 08.54.790(7)(B)".

I was sure he must have minced words!!! I looked up the statute , and that is exactly what it reads. So if you are a non resident or a resident that requires a guide, you might as well just stay home, but of course send the money. I made a gesture along those lines on the huntersbeware web site, and here it is reality.

There are more than just the two entities sheephunter identified. There is also the resident Alaskan who is being slowly but steadily shut out by the monied interests on several sides:

1) The "subsistence" group claims they need the resource to survive, are supported with Alaska Native Corporate money, used by the environmental industry whenever it matches their needs, and are coddled by "King Ted" (AKA U.S. Senator Ted Stevens) because they are key to his campaign contributions (the same Alaska Native Corporations that he was key in creating and enriching in ANSCA).

2) The commercial hunting and fishing industries who already have firm control of you non-residents, and are buying the same control of resident non-subsistence Alaskans, who are the next largest users of "their" profit generating resources.

3) The wacky environmental industry, who also pander for "donations" to fight "the good fight" against all of us hunters (resident and non-resident alike), and who will eventually turn against their quasi-allies (the subsistence crowd) as soon as they politically kill the rest of us off. The industry is supported monetarily by complete imbeciles, who know absolutely nothing about wildlife except that they don't have any living near them in their stinking, crime ridden cities.

I have found that outfitters, rather than actually lie to you will just create "possible" scenario that allows you to believe what you want to believe about the hunt you are planning.

Sheephunter said: "So the victim asks and gets answers from the seller of services.He will mostly be given(in my humble experience) information that seems to offer exactly what he is looking for,the underlying reason is the need or desire to sell."

One way to avoid being given this type of an impression might be to submit a "quizz" type of written, be it via e-mail, information request.
Consisting of simple and direct questions and requesting breif answers relevant to the hunt in question.

Like:

1. Exactly how much of our time will be spent in a truck during this hunt?

2. Would you be surprised if we were to spend 5 or more days "holed up" due to bad weather?

3. How much time will the guides have spent scouting the area before we arrive?

4. How will the recovery and butchering of game be handled?

5. Exactly how far are we going to be from the nearest town, road and how much hunting pressure or other visitors can we expect?

The manner in which these questions are answered may reveal something about the outfitter you have before you.

I recently came back from a hunt I hoped or believed would have been more or less a wilderness setting, conducted from quads and argos as transport, then walking. I had corresponded with the outfit and knew they would be in the area much before my arrival, setting up camp so believed that adequent scouting would have been done.

What we got was almost exclusively road hunting, 2 hours from a major city, busy with other road hunters, caracass recovery and butchering was not organized, the guides had never been in the area before and the carcases were left to us to deal with. The few animals that were in the area were very poor in trophy quality and their density was also very low.
All of the hunters in the camp were murmoring and complaining.

I get the idea the carcasses were apparently abbandoned in the hope that most hunters would just leave them with the outfit.

The outfitter and his wife were very nice people and I can't find anything bad to say about how the camp was run or their company.
The guides for the most part were whoever they could muster at the last minute, and I did hear complaints about the outfitters organization from them too.

Now, can I saw I was lied to? No.

I was just allowed, not [I]led[/I, to believe whatever I liked the idea of.
There is a subtle difference.

I am of the mind that I would rather do it all myself than have an outfit that doesn't help me out.

Actually, I'd rather do it my self anyways...

As an Alaskan, I'm ashamed at the way some of the Regs are written. The definition of 'take' is outrageous. I know it was intended to be used in poaching cases, but it's obviously now being used to protect Guides. Soon they will be using it against residents whenever it suits them.

I also looked up the above regulation about Guides and the definition of 'service' here's the link...

Alaska Guide Laws

...for those who are interested.

That all said, I'm am NOT for repealing the guide requirement as it stands. It's too late for that as hundreds of Alaskans (and non-Alaskans) would lose their jobs and way of living. Most Guides do a great job and don't deserve to be lumped together with the crappy ones.

I still laugh at those who scoff at the weather related issue! Like everywhere in the world, but on a much higher scale, the weather here can kill faster than any other factor on a hunt. It happens all to frequently and the guides and transporters know it.

It's Alaska folks, the weather is a major part of the hunt, deal with it or stay home.

Brian,
the question is not the reality of weather and the fact that it has to be dealt with.
The question is HOW to deal with it.
Why does the customer have to deal with it by loosing the value of the hunt,and the outfitter keeps smiling?
For instance:weather prevented the outfitter from providing contracted for services: full reimbursement is in order ,just the flip side eh. ,then there is the issue of lost wages,transportation,lost opportunity and other damages to the hunter ..

More realistically:
I personally I believe it would be fair to disclose "in no uncertian terms" that weather at location x at time y can prevent any hunting,or would prevent it for 1 week etc.

The outfitter knows that far better than the hunter ,who usually doesnt live there and is not familiar with the details.

It is perfectly Ok to offer a hunt in late October at 8000' feet in steep terrain - if it stated that the mountains are usually or possible impassible at that time.Allow the consumer to play the lottery,but give him the straight scoop,and if still contracted:be willing to perform as you promissed.
You the outfitter chose to be out there!

But weather is only 1 factor of dishonesty among many outfitters,how many offer hunts in areas that have little or no trophy game?
Pushing a hunter around and giving him the "scenic tour" does not constitute fullfillment of contract.Matter of fact the contract could never be fullfilled other than by sheer luck,as the outfitter/guide did not actually know that game would be available.
They were selling something they were at best hoping for,they cant loose in this game,they have been paid in full

To the latter point I hear frequently the response "thats hunting" or "thats fishing" etc

That is neither,that is crooked business.

There is a difference between selling a hunting trip and a scenic tour,even when a rifle is packed with the tour.

How many outfitters use "warm cheap bodies" as guides? I have been on some hunts were I was required to use a guide and chose to ask him to take a nap on the mountainside,because he trampled thru the woods like a locomotive.
Everything knew we were coming ,never mind questioning his knowledge of the area,game preferences and habits

sheephunter

I hate to beat this subject,as there will be no change.But I think at least we can forewarn newbies that not all outfitters are upstanding businessmen.
Maybe its my infantile outlook on life,or just maybe I didnt fall on my head hard enough.I dont buy anything you are selling BW.,sorry.
Please correct me were I am missing:
1: hunts are not contracted with outfitters to enable them to make a living - or to stay in business-at all cost -to the client.
Any business that does not or cannot provide what it is selling goes under,thats the way a free enterprise works.
No goods,no service,no money.

2 If and when "the government" deems a local huntable,does not make the outfitter a honest enterprise if he advertises goods and services he cannot or does not deliver.
The reason are many: the land is big,you have to know where to go when and how to hunt,
The outside hunter relies on the knowledge and expertise of the outfitter and his guides to accomplish that.
If all or some is missing the advertised hunt turns into a sightseeing tour.
If the outfitter is only contracted to drop the hunter into a ready made camp with cook,maybe horses and provide companionship,thats OK,dont know whether photos would be in order to chose.
3 Again,the lame statement ,that a hunt in the wilderness is no guarantee,is not a ranch hunt or a park in the zoo is an infantile copout,sorry.
While very true,the hunter knows that,and for that reason chose to contract and is willing to pay for the services of an outfitter.
He relies on statements of success and huntability,he realizes that there are hurdles,
but he did not contract to just scout.
He probably did not contract for a hunt that cannot be pulled off because the outfitter advertised a hunt during a time that he knows its very iffy,weatherwise
etc,erc
The consumer/hunter wishes the outfitter to stay in business and prosper for an honest job,not for
selling a clever picture.

Yes there are risks,but risks are and need to be managed to succeed,not taken as an excuse for nonperformance.

Year after year some outfitter manage that just fine,yes they work hard and know their land.There are also hords that view the existing setup as a means of ripping people off.

sheephunter

sheephunter,

I'm more on your side then you may realize.

When you describe dishonest guides (there are no 'outfitters' liscensed in Alaska anymore) who book hunts in areas with no game, or in a late season with little chance of a weather break, it's hard not to agree.

It's the fact that weather is darn near impossible to forecast in this State, especially in the Fall, where an honest guide could run into trouble with your 'weather clause.' If you start challenging guides to take hunters in nasty weather, you end up with more dead guides and hunters.

There's an old mariner saying which goes...

It's better to be at the dock wishing you were out on the water, than being out on the water wishing you were at the dock.

That applies to nearly all of Alaska which is off the road system.

Say, isn't it time to apply for Dall Sheep?

Take care...

i'm sure sheephunter will agree....

having a written contract is not the protection that one might think that it is.

isn't a contract suppose to protect both sides?
aren't both parties to live up to their obligations? not.

cold zero

I think Sheephunter has said it for me. My experience with "Guides" has been limited to Africa. When I was planning my second hunt I was talking to a PH who asked who I had hunted with before. When I told him he replied "It will be hard for me to beat or equal that experience since you hunted with one of the three best in the business your first time". He did his best to arrange a good hunt but our times didn't match. One of these days I'm sure I'll hunt with him.
I've always setted up in camp the last night after sending a deposit initially. My PH has always been satisfactory but I do have some reservations about taxidermists.

These problems are not just limited to Alaska. I have seen myself big money moose hunts for 'trophy bulls' in Sweden advertised for months when the only chance you would have of getting a trophy was to pick the antler off the snow....

Moose hunting with it's lower densities is especialy open to misrepresentation. Questions such as 'what is the moose density in that area?' and 'How many will have been taken before I arrive?' help sort things out.

The Swedish Hunting regularly hears of hunts being offered in areas where there are to all intents no moose...

I agree 100% with cold zero
a contract is not the "save it all answer" for crooked behavior.
A contract is of some value for both parties:It forces honest minds to put in writing and live up to promisses.Sometimes we "remember" things or interprete things differently than intended.We hear what we want to hear and the outfitter phrases his cautioning words to state them a warning but rephrases it swiftly,not to loose the game,ah hunter.
So if written honestly and read honestly,the written word often helps- between honest people.

When dealing with a crook it is of no value.
As 1 lawyer once enlightened me: a contract only specifies how much it costs when I want to break it!

Never forget that!Posession is 99% of the law.
Justice today costs a ton of money-it aint free.

Moreover most contracts between us dont specify what it costs to break the contract,so again one quibbles in court.

Then add travel time and other expenses for the litigation: as any contractor knows: its rarely worth the time or money of the customer to sue and demand justice.Being right and getting justice are 2 different things.
No,the only solution is keeping the funds and paying on job completion.
We are supposed to trust the outfitter's honesty and integrity.Lets do so.Let him also trust ours
Everything else will always be a gamble
sheephunter

if u paid the balance on exiting. i would bet a lot of the things that go on that people don't like would not go on.

cold zero

Coldzero,
You certainly are right on target with that thought. Keeping people accountable would weed out the undesirables, but there would still be a certain amount of victims until nature took it's course, which can be a slow process. The sad part is many people in positions of helping that cause, choose their advertisers good and bad over the unsuspecting client's outcome.

Hmmm...

After re-reading this entire thread, I've come to a personal conclusion.

That being...

Go to Texas, and leave real hunting to the big boys...

Bunch of freak'in whiners in my opinion.

We want guaranteed weather, game, and hot drinks to boot, or we don't pay

You know what makes a successful Alaskan hunt a trophy to brag about?. It's beating the odds, and coming home with a respectful animal.

You want guarantees, then find a fence. Because there are NO fences in Alaska.

I'm sorry if I offend, but I get tired of pandering to those who expect Alaska to be an easy hunt.

Alaska is tough, and gives no excuse. Don't try to change it, or you'll ruin everything it stands for.

[ 12-04-2003, 15:03: Message edited by: BW ]

I've been following this thread for a while and wasn't going to respond but now I have to make some comments. I don't always agree with BW but in this case I do. Are there some guides that don't always operate on the "up & up"? Surely. Are there guides that are honest and give their all for the client? You bet.

You guys that belly ache because "the weather turned sour" or the outfitter didn't have hot water for showers, etc. oughta get real. The hunting in Alaska is tough, there are few roads and virtually every hunting trip is to a remote spot. When I was an assistant guide, we saw all kinds of clients, good & bad.

The last client my partner & I were with left his knee high boots at the lake. We were up in the Brooks Range for sheep & had to hike about 7 miles with all of our gear to get to the sheep area. I hauled the tent, food & my personal gear. The client, when advised to take his knee-highs elected instead to cache them at the lake & take his bottle of whiskey instead. He said his "top quality" leather boots were very well made & could stand up to the wetness. The next day, we woke up to snow & fog - no sheep hunting. My partner & I went back to the lake for more food and before we left, the client begged me (literally) to please bring his knee highs back with me. To say I was pissed is putting it mildly. I finally decided to take them back for him but was very reluctant to do so. In short, his booze was more important than his feet.

Another story. This past Aug. this same friend was with a client up in the Brooks for sheep & the weather had been very bad - rain & lots of it. The creek where the spike camp was set up was flooded and couldn't be crossed. During the entire trip, they couldn't really hunt sheep because of the weather. Given the costs & logistics, should my friend give the client back any fees? I think not.

Here's another too. My first brown bear hunt was to Shuyak Island around 1976. Shuyak, for those interested, is north of Afognak Island which is north of Kodiak. My partner had just barely met the residency requirement and had not been on a hunting trip in Alaska. The plane didn't come in to pick us up on schedule. After being late for the first day, my partner started complaining that the flying service had forgotten about us. I told him that wasn't the case but probably due to bad weather in Kodiak. He said it couldn't be bad weather since the sun was shining where we were & the weather was just fine. The plane came in about 3 days late to pick us up & the pilot said that Kodiak had been socked in.

In short, nobody has the right to bitch about hunting conditions in Alaska. If you want a walk in the park, go to Africa or even a Texas ranch. If you want a real hunt, earn your trophy & have the experience of a life time try it up here. That's all for now, now let the flaming start.
Bear in Fairbanks

[ 12-04-2003, 22:49: Message edited by: Bear in Fairbanks ]

You dont scare me a bit Bear in Fairbanks
I'll catch your flaming ball anytime.
To give you an idea of my take: we are not talking about "soft cry baby customers that would like to shoot a tiger in the zoo".You are trying to change the subject
But lets talk about your subject:we dont have to admit-we know there are moma boys with money that want to become weekendheros without getting wet.The outfitter knows that,the guide knows that.Both chose to cater a business where those fellows are an occurence.
There are various ways to deal with that situation,none of them include misrepresentation and offering what you cant provide.Lets stay on track here.
If the outfitter or guide despises "city slickers in crocodile leather boots coming to hunt in the last frontier" thats fine.
I suggest he have another look at his chosen profession.I suggest he look at his advertising and education of his prospective client.
I suggest he filters out what he does not want or cannot deal with.
The outfitter is the man that advertises and induces the customer to come to him.He cannot possibly assume that the client knows the details of the upcoming hunt,so he has the obligation to educate.
And if the education states :heh body,its tough cold and unfriendly here,you have to carry your own weight including toilet paper,you can expect 13 out of 14 days rain or snow making a hunt a lucky shot- fine,let them state so.

If the customer is allowed booze- so be it-
you already stated that he has to carry it.Stick to your rules-we dont complain.
If he wants to go barefoot- -- well now we are getting serious,aren't we,does the outfitter/guide have a responsibility for the safety of the hunter? we are getting into a difficult area were guides judgement and preference clashes with hunters perception and may be lack of insight.
Remember you let this crybaby come up,now you deal with him,but dont hide behind him
None of this has to do with the topic although it is of course an every day event for the outfitter.And he has our sympathy

sheephunter

An Analogy
Lets say:
You are contracted to cater a party on date X at
X o'clock...
You buy the food,hire the help,prep the hall.You set the tables and are ready to provide your service.

Lets say a snowstorm makes travel impossible,and
the party does not go off...Will any court side
with the customer when they demand their money back or a refund? I don't think so.

You contract a hunt from a start day to an end day.Weather delays are part of the game.

sheephunter
I do both DIY and guided hunts.
I book my guided hunts through an agent.EVERY trip
I have to sign a release.It states hunting is
hazardous,travel to wilderness is dangerous,weather may affect your trip adversly.
Life is full of risk.We as men,bear the consequences.
My .02

cold zero
Please do not take this the wrong way.I read both
sides of your dispute with Jim and I am unclear on one point.

Jim's reply stated that you were out with the guide in the field.Did You make the call and decide to "come in" to get dry or did Jim demand
you to come in?

Regards
Jeff

I've read this with great interest as I have three hunting buddies who felt that they too "were screwed" on their hunts to AK. All three are real HUNTERS, not afraid to work for their game, nor afraid to gut or pack out,none expected the Taj Mahal for camp either,etc. IMHO all three would be THE sort of hunter a Guide would like; they can all shoot, have extensive hunting experience, etc.

All three stated that once they got there people with their hands out for payments never seemed to end. Fees previously agreed on were now higher due to a variety of reason. Aircraft charters in ALL three situation were markedly higher then quoted once they were there and needed a ride BACK OUT!!

I have no personal experience to add ref AK. But have heard more horror stories regarding Alaska than any other hunting venue. Must be something to it.

FN in MT

JeffP good analogy,if the snowstorm came unpredictable.Remember we can make a farce out of any argument by pushing the parameters to the extreme.So lets do that
You sell and cater a party,disclosing per your written flyer that weather may be extreme,nature is dangerous and you may die.I submit you wont attract many takers for your party?
You probably said that one may have a few cold days and rain,but overall the party /hunt is doable,if enough days are allocated.
You dont guarantee that the hunter will shoot a A1 trophy,but you will probably state that their is, by your past knowledge and experience, huntable game of this quality there and moreover your guide is qualified to find them?
Also we are not accusing you,maybe you are the prime example of honesty and integrity ,suffering from hunters that cannot walk,dont get their milk warm etc
We are lining out the rampant abuse of the prepaid system,that allows switching an advertised hunt to a sight seeing tour and blaming something else
sheephunter

[ 12-05-2003, 04:02: Message edited by: sheephunter ]

BW,
You let me down. Your earlier post stated that you are embarrassed about the shape Alaska's laws are taking, as you should be. On that note, my hat goes off to you for stepping up to the plate. Next you are suggesting that people from the lower (48) are expecting a "canned hunt". I don't think that is what we are addressing here, do you? Really?

Bear in Fairbanks, I did not see anyone asking for a hot shower did you?

If you folks from Alaska think that we are all that demanding then might I suggest this. Bear in Fairbanks, tighten up your client requirements. In your brochure or what ever line of advertising you use, spell it right out, no booze, no fags, no cigarette smokers, no religious zealots, and on....

BW, I do not know your field of expertise but you have a good perception as to what is on the horizon for Alaska if something does not change regarding the laws. If you are a guide, just speak up, up front in the same way I have suggested to Bear in Fairbanks.

No one that has weighed in on this thread has asked for anything too demanding. A fair shake is all. You folks in the guiding business, this was your choice. I spent (10) days in a remote moose camp in the Koyakuk in 2002 with some guy with a Lebanese background. That SOB I swear knew more about 9/11 by some of his comments than the FBI. He thought the rest of us including my wife and Paul Newsom from Paul's Great Outdoors show and his hunting partner, were nothing shy of swine because he could see the bottom's of our shoes one evening!!!!!!!! I do not envy a guide his position, but only you can do something about it. Be selective to your standards or get out of the business.

On the subject of analogy, regarding Alaska's hidden from the public until it is too late game laws. I sent a proposal to the BOG for review, although as a non-resident I am sure they will can it. I used this analogy in reference to my case. " If I were a car dealer, and you showed up, gave me your money, I handed you the keys, but then took them away and kept your money because you failed to start the car on the first try, you would be as angry as I. Maybe that comparison will help those that are perhaps a little developmentally delayed and were instrumental in screwing me, put this situation in perspective.""

Gentlemen, get this thing back on track, we are all on the same team.

in no particular order;

to answer jeff p's q;
no, i didn't take it the wrong way and thanks for asking and taking the time to read both sides. i beleive the outfitter should be able to tell his side also. i was wet on that hunt from the very beginning till the very end. it was not the first time and has not been the last time either. in fact, i hope there will be more in the future.

u as the professional have a background understanding of guide regs', use that and the paragraph below to make up your own mind.

alaska state guide regulations clearly state that the outfitter is responsible for the clients safety.
the outfitter is the professional here and is supposed to have good judgement, from his experience. this is the reason that when chasing a wounded b.b., it is the guide who goes into the heavy brush to finish the animal, not the client. even though i know many a client who would prefer to do it themselves, myself included. they are not allowed , because the outfitter is making the decisions.

that was the long answer. the short answer is that due to the above, it was jim h. keeline inc. that made the decision to terminate my hunt due to unsafe conditions that would be caused by incoming bad weather. which never came, by the way. i did not quit on that hunt or any other hunt for that matter. i can go anywhere a guide can go in the mtns. and i have only met one so far that can go there a little faster than i. he's inhuman. i have had hypothermia in the field before on more than one hunt and also had injuries and still did not quit. overcoming adversity is part of the experience in my opinion. keeline looked for an excuse to pull the plug and took it, simple as that.

when i go on a mtn. hunt i insist on carrying half the food and half the camping supplies, i.e. u take the tent and i take the fuel, stove, tent poles and stakes, etc. the hunt with keeline was no different and i did the same on that hunt.

bear in fairbanks;
just like there are many wimpy clients. there are wimpy guides as well. being a resident does not automatically make u tuff. the above mentioned outfitter is a good example. when a client is paying $700-1,300/day and the guide does not put out, that is a problem too. i like foul weather, cold, windy, snow, rain, hopefully no fog. these things are, to me also part of the experience and too must be overcome. however, some, not all outfitters will use this as a reason not to hunt. but, still get paid.

to answer your question, no i do not think that the client in that case is entitled to any money back for that hunt. however, i do think that the outfitter should offer a substantial discount on another hunt if the client would like to come again. why should the client bear all of the financial burden for the bad weather. the client can't control the bad weather any more than the outfitter can.

like you have had clients some good some bad, i to have seen some outfitters good and some bad. i think most people would say that i have been to alaska (and other n. american mtn hunts) enough times to say i have tried a represetative sampling.

last year i carried 115lbs. 21 miles up and down to the nearest road to get out of chugach state park with my sheep and guide. u can bet that a lot of that stuff belonged to the outfitter. it was my sheep, so i carried as much of it as i possibly could. so what would be the big deal about carrying a pair of boots for a money paying client when u were not even overloaded at the time? i certainly would not complain about it and would carry the guides boots if he asked me to.

as for the booze. an important topic. if it is a mtn. hunt then the only thing i drink is mtn creek water, preferably the glacial melt kind. if it is a camp hunt, then i am bringing beer and hard liquor. i will carry it myself and have had almost no exceptions for guides that did not want some at the end of the day, by the end of the week. last week, i took one case of beer and .5 ltr of rum for me and my friend. we spent so much time in camp due to bad weather we wished we had brought twice as much, one of the guides included in the wishing. afterall, i am on vacation. i am usually the one to blow revele in the morning as i don't sleep much and u better eat your wheaties if u are going to keep ahead of me.

sheephunter;
is a contract like a false sense of security or what? like pulling the covers over your head when scaird, like that will protect u. sometimes they are worth less than the paper and ink. u agree?

frank;
welcome to camp glad u could made it. now where is the balance?

welcome to guided big game hunting.

i have only been to one camp where they did not ask for the balance on arrival, instead on the way out. i did not take an elk on that trip, but that was a hunt! these guys put out 110%. despite the lite bags on the way home my guide was well rewarded for his efforts/weight loss. wish more outfitters were like this guy.

cold zero

stepping down from the pulpit

Reading this thread I tend to agree with BW and Bear in Ancorage.
Is this thread about "getting screwed" in alaska or just a ongoing continuation of complaining about everything in general ?

Thanks Sheephunter for the warning concerning the very poor Alaska big game guide service.

I think I will play it safe and not hunt brown bear, dall sheep, or mountain goat in Alaska until the State of Alaska properly regulates the guide service or I am certain of a reputable guide service.

Meanwhile, I can still go to Alaska as a non-resident and conduct a do-it-yourself hunt for caribou, moose, elk, wolf and other big game animals; as a non-resident no guide service is necessary to hunt them.

Bill G,

I'm not in the hunting business at all. Just a Coast Guard helo mechanic.

I do however pay attention to the various laws and regulations. There's a Guide here in the S.E. area who helps keep me up to date too.

When I retire next year I was thinking about providing tranporter services to hunters for black bear (brown also for residents), deer, and wolf. This would be off a large boat with sleeping quarters, etc.

However the Feds and the State are watching Transporters like hawks, and the rules might get even tougher in the future.

In any case, hunting via a boat means that weather is going to be the most important factor every day. It's almost a certainty that sometime during the hunting seasons weather is going to affect someones hunt negatively. For what I'm thinking about doing, it would take a hurricane to completely stop the hunting. Out of 6 or 7 days, I can see losing 1-2 days to weather.

Perhaps the Guides and Transporter should charge the clients for booking at times when the weather was crappy. After all, who usually sets the dates?

Poor service and dishonest operations I can agree with you and Sheephunter, but trying to tie in the weather related issues is going too far.