"...it is surely the capitalist principle of supply and demand."

Perhaps so, but I'm not so sure. Are guided moose or caribou hunts as expensive as guided brown bear, Dall sheep, and mountain goat (which are legally required of non-residents)? If not, there goes your pure Adam Smith economic model.

I wish the rest of the wildlife management/harvest up here was more aligned with pure capitalist principal instead of these socialist/tyranical allocation programs forced on us (subsistence and commercial fish allocations come to mind).

Does anyone know why the prices of hunting have gotten so high in B.C. and Alaska? You can hunt Ibex in Kirgizia,Mongolia, or Turkey for about 1/2 the cost of a Mtn. Goat hunt and have a much better chance of killing the Ibex. There must be greater demand for the Alaskan hunts than in Asia.

I think Rob has pretty well hit the nail on the head. I've never heard of rich guides. Unless you've been involved in it, it's easy to be unaware of all the costs involved.

Another thing that hasn't been mentioned is the increasing loss of hunting territory. Large areas have been locked up in one manner or another - from "no hunting allowed" to "special priviledge" hunting for a few. With the loss of territory, guides are forced more & more to operate closer together. A good example is ANWR where the guide areas only allow 1 registered guide and he has to "bid" on it. If a guide loses his area there, he could well be forced to move operations to the open areas on state land. This will place more pressure on the game resources in that area along with more competition from guides already operating in the area. I'm not a registered guide but have worked as an assistant & have seen this.

Also, transportation to hunting areas in the state is expensive and should be kept in mind. It ain't cheap to fly & maintain a plane & I know that I'm willing to pay the big bucks for a reputable flying service to take me in & bring me out. Anyone going to the local "watering hole" and talking "Joe", whom you've never met, into flying you into the Brooks Range for sheep or to take you into Afognak Island from Kodiak, is a fool.
This is about all I have to say on the subject. Bear In Fairbanks

I believe there is a general lack of appreciation or rather realization of the costs involved in running any operation in a roadless environment, in the first world. There is also a lack of understanding of the relatively small population of game in the Alaska.

It's funny how some folks on the one hand will complain about how there jobs are threatened by low cost third world labor, yet in the next breath they complane about the exspense of hunting in the US vs the third world.

I'm not a guide nor do I hold any illusions of becoming one. The vast majority of Alaskan guides work very hard during a short season, and their profits are a small portion of their exspenses and overhead. There is also a fair amount of work to be done during the off season for a guide to be successful in his hunting area.

One other thought, there are much greater chances, Africa excepted, of one having unintended adventures when hunting in the developing countries.

Bear in Fairbanks,
I agree that the country is big and hard to hunt but 99% of the Guides either charge extra to fly you in or you must pay for a charter flight to get to the hunting camp.

Paul H,
Your coment about the cheap labor thing is like comparing apples to oranges. I hunted Africa and took 10 trophies including airfare the hunt was less than a Moose- Caribou hunt in Alaska. I just can't justify the Alaska & B.C. prices. I would like to have a Mtn. Goat but for the price I can almost take 2 Ibex hunts and they are a much more impressive trophy. As far as the danger in hunting other countries I have hunted many times on 5 continents and have never felt threatened or even concerned. I stay away from the cities and any Bar or Night Clubs and don't consume alcohol when hunting in foreign countries.

Hawkeye47

Hawkeye, let us suppose that on one of your foreign hunts the guide screws up and wrecks the vehicle you are driving in turning you into a paraplegic, unable to work and earn a living and unable to hunt anymore. Do you suppose that ibex guide in Kyrgikistan (or however you spell it) is going to have the financial responsibility to take care of you for the rest of your life? Even if he does, what are the legal services going to cost to recover those funds going to cost? If this risk doesn't bother you then that is fine, but in Alaska, the guide has to be financially responsible and there is a legal system that will protect your rights.

What are the guide and his assitants educational background and what is their standard of living? Do they have alternative ways to make a living? Comparing hunting costs in a country where assistants make $150 to 200 per day, to one where they make $1.50 to 2.00 is comparing apples to oranges.

As a resident, I routinely spend $2,000 a year to moose hunt, when you take into account air fare, food and depreciation on equipment. If you double that because you have to pay the expenses for the assistant guide to accompany you as well, then add in the assistant guide's wages, insurance, advertising and booking agency commissions, long distance charges, licenses, medical exams, etc., there isn't a whole lot of profit in an $8,000 moose hunt, especially when you have to pay 15% self-employment tax and up to 39% income tax on what is left over.

If you can go to Africa and hunt 10 animals for that price, then more power to you. Unfortunately there are minimum wage laws, mandatory insurance, and taxes, that make such a bargain impossible in Alaska.

Ok Rob,
Based on your last post and the one prior. Do you suggest we out of stater's are further ahead hunting in Alaska instead of Kyrgyzstan? This way, rather than becoming a victim of the unprinted to the public, Alaska spin game laws, we can perhaps become victims of a guide company in Kyrgyzstan with no liability insurance? What are the legal costs of bringing an Alaskan outfitter and the ADFG to the table? Your guides and your legal system know the cost would exceed the cost of the hunt, that is why they so blatantly screw the non-resident hunter and you know it. Do you really think in Alaska you just file a claim against the outfitter and a check arrives in the mail? These insurance people are just as defiant as your ADFG, Troopers, Commissioner, and on and on. Their attitude is, so you got screwed, too damn bad, we got your money, hire an attorney and litigate the case for $35,000. You say there is a legal system that will protect your rights. In your dreams. As I previously stated, sure we will protect your rights, hire an Alaskan attorney for $35,000 to represent you, and if all goes well, the court will award you the $14,000 the hunt cost you. Does not look like good business to me!!!!!!

BillG,

You should already know that I agree with you on the fact that the defintion of "take" is poor in reference to Alaska State law.

But... (there always a durn 'but' )

...in Africa if a hunter draws blood then the game is considered bought and paid for. Doesn't matter if said game is recovered.

Not much different than Alaska rules, except the Guide is required to recover the brown bear (sheep, and goat) with all possible means.

BTW, I've heard that Arizona has an equally tough definition of "take." I need to research that, but you as a webpage owner on the subject, may want to check it out.

The one thing that rings true during these topics is that there are few guides getting rich. There HAS to be a good reason for this, right? I believe it's the high cost of operating a quality guide service in the first place.

If we start demanding the kind of 100% guarantees you would like, we'll end up with just a few 'super-guide' outfits to deal with. Certainly a monopoly would not benefit the non-resident.

On a seperate issue, all the Alaska State statutes on big game hunting are easily obtained on-line and cannot be considered "unprinted" by any means. Here is the link I got by typing "Alaska big game laws" on Yahoo...

Alaska Statutes

Africa is a good deal, no doubt about that. I'd like to go myself in the next few years.

BW,
I did not read anyone requesting 100% guarantees. This is hunting and those of us that have been around the block a couple times know there are no guarantees in any hunting expedition including Africa.

With regard to the rules. Yes, you are right, the Alaska statutes are available on a website. So if I ever return to Alaska to hunt, while I am sitting on the mountain, I will just pull out my pocket computer and fill in the blanks. Everyone who reads this forum will know the rules and where behind the scenes they can find them also. But the guy that doesn't read this, becomes the next victim of the hidden rules I have referred to and the "Responsibilities of Guides". This thing goes much deeper than the "Take" definition and I have submitted a complaint to the B.O.G.regarding just that. The statute I love the most, is the one that hiring a guide means you have hired him to kill big game for you. Furthermore, if guides and the ADFG were ethical, a non-resident would know all these hidden rules long before a penny was transferred. Only problem is, once you read all the hidden stuff, you most likely would not book the hunt.

"...there are few guides getting rich,"

That all depends on your definition of rich.

The same can be said for teachers, who only work 9 months per year, and bring home as much money as me. Ditto commercial fishermen, some of whom only work 6 weeks per year, and bring home enough bacon for a year.

I write critically of the guiding industry at the risk of being labelled "anti-guide", but that simply isn't true. As hunting resources in Alaska go through it's cycles of scarcity, and the number of harvesters increase, it's guaranteed that we will see examples of selfishness and greed. Those with the best connections to the political powers will gain a political/legal edge.

The guiding industry and the subsistence community have greater political muscle than the resident personal use and the non-resident sport communities. Why? Because the guiding industry (as a commercial entity, fueled by money) and the subsistence community (empowered by Native corporate money) buy political power, and the personal use/sport crowd don't.

It's really that simple.

I'm confused as to all the "hidden rules" that are being referred to. ADF&G hunting regs are thick, and complex due to all the game units in the state, but that doesn't excuse any hunter for not bothering to read them. Just like any activity or product, if you aren't an informed consumer, your chances of getting screwed go up. I've recieved bad advice from doctors, but since I bothered to read up on my own, I was able to realize that, instead of blindly following the advice.

There are undoubtedly bad guides in Alaska, and anyone who has the unfortunate experience of hunting with them will feel gipped. There are also bad clients that will say the best of guides didn't make them happy.

Hunting in Alaska is expensive, just as the cost of living is. Hunting in 3rd world countries is less exspensive, just as the cost of living is. If one wants to hunt or live in Alaska, they either have to pony up the dollars, or not.

I can't say that Alaska offers a better experience for the dollars spent compared to Africa. They are both different experiences. The primary driver for the high costs of hunting in Alaska are transportation. Even if your hunt doesn't include the Beaver flight to the hunting local, the guide, his assistant and all their supplies, as well as those for you had to be flown in as well. Transportation, direct or indirect likely accounts for upwards of 1/2 the cost of hunting in Alaska.

Personally, I don't mind the high transportation costs, as having the state criss crossed with roads would ruin it. You would not have the same wilderness experience that makes Alaska unique. Not only do you not have game fences a few miles away from where your hunting, but you likely don't even have a road within 100 miles.

I think a fair cost comparison of an Alaskan Bear hunt would be more along the lines of an fly-in tent camp African Lion hunt. Something in Tanzania or in other far flung corner that doesn't have road access. What is the minimum required days, 21? At the daily rate, plus trophy fees, a bear hunt should seem to be in line or cheaper with those costs. Incidental game would be lacking, though. Compare Dall Sheep with Altai Argali, Marco Polo, Mt. Nyala, and it becomes a bargain as well.

There is at least one outfit that offers a month long Alaskan hunt up here for all game species located here, for $30K. Compared to a Bongo hunt or Mt. Nyala, that might seem to be a pretty good deal.

Bill,
I don't know the specifics of why your guide ended shooting the bear you missed. If the bear was heading for the alders and he thought you hit it, well, it is his responsibility to stop it, protection of the client and so on. Maybe he was just a bad apple, I don't know. But for you to broadly brush all the guides here in Alaska in such a distasteful manner is not right.

By the way, I've seen Mongolian hunts for 2 animals exceed $50,000 USD. Alaskan hunts are cheaper by a long shot.

The rates may be high, but nobody is getting rich doing this.

I would suggest that before you book a hunt in Alaska, do your homework and research. Find out what the costs are, what the laws and regulations are. If you find that it leaves a bad taste in your mouth, maybe you would be happier hunting someplace else. Yes, there are a few bad apples in the guiding profession up here, but most are professional and very good at what they do. I think its the same as anywhere else.

Paul,

The hidden rules are just that. If you read the "Alaska Hunting Regulations No. 44", which is the current issue, you will NOT find any of the statutes or administrative codes that can screw the non-resident. Those rules are ONLY in the book issued to the guides. That is why under the heading, "Responsibilities of Guides", it clearly states that a guide is legally responsible for advising the paying client of all state and federal laws and statutes that pertain to land use, hunting etc... (12AAC 75.310 (a) (8). Don't take my word for it look it up. You will not find one word in the (#44) rule book which is what is available to the unsuspecting non-resident. Don't tell me I didn't read them, I have read that book cover to cover and I am correct in my statement. The investigator from the Alaska DCED guide licensing division, did NOT know that wording existed until I was screaming it at him over the phone. And you are right, now that I have been screwed, I know the rules book is really not the rules book. One also needs the internet and an attorney. Sounds like pretty unethical practice to me.



DPhillips,

I was typing while you were posting. An Alaskan guide has a responsibility to stop the bear you say. He also has an obligation to be responsible, he is supposed to be a professional. If you read the above, had I been advised up front of what I know today, which is a legal obligation on behalf of the guide, none of this would be here, because I for one would not have booked the hunt.



I am not broadly brushing ALL the Alaskan guides. If you read the entire case you would clearly see this issue is about (1) guide company, and a lot about hidden regulations. I publicly apologize to any Alaskan guide that thinks my website or any postings are directed at them rather than the people responsible for enforcing what is written. Don't kid yourself, I have a number of E-mails from Alaskan guides and residents that are damn happy I have stepped up to the plate on this issue.



You think Mongolian hunts for two animals is expensive, that little desert bighorn fellow down in Mexico is around $55,000. That is for (1) by the way.



I would suggest you take a look at the responsibilities of guides, you may be the one that get's a surprise.

The hunting regs are available to anyone free of charge and its the hunters' responsibility to know them. Guess I'm extra "thick" in the head - I don't understand the point of a pocket computer on the side of a mountain. When I go hunting, I always take a copy of the regs with me but leave it in base camp.

Regarding bush plane expenses. My partner & I went to Afognak Island this past Oct. for elk. The plane from Kodiak to our hunt area was a Beaver and cost us right around $1200.00. The flight was roughly 1 hour making a total of 4 hrs. flying time in & out. Due to weather, we tried once to get to the area but had to turn back. No, we weren't charged for that failed attempt. Payload on the plane was 1200 lbs and we used about 1125 of that. This means the cost for us was $300/ hr. I don't have a problem with that cost knowing the quality of the service.

In Aug. of last year, my same partner & I chartered a Cessna 180 on floats out of Fbks. to get to the Brooks Range for sheep. Cost was $2600.00 roundtrip. About 3 1/2 hrs. one way as I recall, and that comes to roughly $185.00/hr. The point is, you guys coming up from the Lower 48 would pay the same rate but yet you're complaining about it. You don't think twice about going to Africa & paying for an animal you wounded or lost. Nor do you complain about paying for an animal your PH puts down after you screw up the shot. But, let an Alaskan guide kill your brown bear after you screwed up the shot, then, "whoa Andy", people bitch, piss & moan about "hidden game regulations" and "unethical guides".

In short, hunting Alaska is a different experience. You don't have hot showers & warm toddys for the body after a day of sweating it out from climbing sheep mountains or fighting alders & pecker brush looking for a big bear. If you don't want the Alaska "experience" fine, go elsewhere. I'm all for ya. Bear in Fairbanks

Bear In Fairbanks,
For starters, NO ONE has ever shot at or had to clean up anything I ever started in the bush. When a person tells a guide, "Do not shoot unless one of us is in harms way", and there is no dispute, you get the distinct impression you have an understanding. When you take a shot and miss and are immediately receiving a muzzle blast on the side of your head from the guides gun, you wonder what went wrong. Now, that might be a lot for you to grasp, but at that point I did not know if I was coming or going. You had better go back and read what is hidden because you are mis-informed. This is where your thick in the head admission may be applicable. Show me where in the Number (44) regulations book anything regarding the responsibilities of guides is even remotely mentioned. While you are at it show the readers of this forum, especially the non-residents, where they can find the statute that says, by hiring a guide you have hired him to stalk, track,.... and kill big game for you. AS 08.54.790(7) (B). Call it what you like, but I think hidden is quite appropriate since they are not present. Your un-ethical guides comment, yup, I think I am right on the money with that one in this case also. If you choose to have your guide shoot your animals for you, and you find that acceptable, I think that is nice.

"I am not broadly brushing ALL the Alaskan guides..."

Let me do so...:

I need Alaskan guides like I need a nuclear explosion in my front pants pocket.

Many of you need them. I don't. Indeed, they are a pain in my back pocket area, and I don't even pay them.

I'd like to see them go away.

If you can hunt, come on up. If you need a guide, stay home.

"Nuff said."

Bill G:
Whoa there guy. First, the gist of my previous comments were to show that anyone, including non-residents, would have had to pay the same bush plane fees that we did. Secondly, my comments were directed towards hunting regulations, not guiding regulations.

I'll agree with you that it isn't pleasant to have a rifle touched off right next to your ear nor would I want to have a guide put down an animal that I obviously missed. Those weren't the issues put forward by the originator of this thread but rather "Prices of Alaska Hunting". I was simply trying to point out the policy, as I understand it, of the client being charged trophy fees for animals wounded and lost. Understand, I neither support nor condemn the practice. I just don't see difference between Africa and what occasionally occurs here. So what's the complaint about? Bear in Fairbanks

BillG,

I wasn't clear when I mentioned the 100% guarantee. I didn't mean the killing of a animal. What I was referring to was the weather guarantee you were discussing with another poster here.

My mistake there.

So Alaksa is too expensive, the weather sucks, and the regulations don't fit your needs. Why do you even bother with this forum?

Are we being ignored here, partner?

How about all this writing about guides. Have you ever hired one? I haven't.

I'm one to write bad about guides. Not many do. That's okay. I'm strange in the old Alaskan way, anyway. Never needed a "guide". Never will.

Those who need a guide don't need to come here. I'm not qualified to reject your investment in our state. But I do so nonetheless.

No, I don't like the guides. I hope they go away. And I don't need to do squat to insure that. The subsistence folks are here to ensure that.

The commercial industry has used the rest of us far too long.

I hope the commercial fishing industry is paying attention.

Indeed, they've used the rest of us Alaskans way too much during their last breathes of air.

You die first.

Ok, I'll admit to being illiterate so would someone please show me in this Alaska Statute that Billg keeps bring up that a guide is there too kill his animal wether wounded or not. Or just for the hell of it. Just for the hell of it is the part I'm really interested in because Billg keeps thinking that his guide shot a bear for him just for the hell of it.

AS 08.54.790. Definitions.
In this chapter,


(1) "big game" means brown bear, grizzly bear, caribou, moose, black bear, bison, Sitka blacktail deer, elk, mountain goat, musk-ox, and mountain or Dall sheep; "big game" includes wolf and wolverine when taken under hunting regulations;


(2) "big game hunting service" means a service for which the provider of the service must obtain a registered guide, class-A assistant guide, or assistant guide license; "big game hunting service" includes guiding services and outfitting services;


(3) "compensation" means payment for services including wages or other remuneration but not including reimbursement for actual expenses incurred;


(4) "department" means the Department of Community and Economic Development;


(5) "field" means an area outside of established year-round dwellings, businesses, or other developments usually associated with a city, town, or village; "field" does not include permanent hotels or roadhouses on the state road system or state or federally maintained airports;


(6) "game management unit" means one of the 26 geographic areas defined by the Board of Game for game management purposes;


(7) "guide" means to provide, for compensation or with the intent or with an agreement to receive compensation, services, equipment, or facilities to a big game hunter in the field by a person who accompanies or is present with the big game hunter in the field either personally or through an assistant; in this paragraph, "services" includes


(A) contracting to guide or outfit big game hunts;


(B) stalking, pursuing, tracking, killing, or attempting to kill big game;


(C) packing, preparing, salvaging, or caring for meat, except that which is required to properly and safely load the meat on the mode of transportation being used by a transporter;


(D) field preparation of trophies, including skinning and caping;


(E) selling, leasing, or renting goods when the transaction occurs in the field;


(F) using guiding or outfitting equipment, including spotting scopes and firearms, for the benefit of a hunter; and


(G) providing camping or hunting equipment or supplies which are already located in the field;


(8) "outfit" means to provide, for compensation or with the intent to receive compensation, services, supplies, or facilities to a big game hunter in the field, by a person who neither accompanies nor is present with the big game hunter in the field either personally or by an assistant;


(9) "transportation services" means the carriage for compensation of big game hunters, their equipment, or big game animals harvested by hunters to, from, or in the field; "transportation services" does not include the carriage by aircraft of big game hunters, their equipment, or big game animals harvested by hunters


(A) on nonstop flights between airports listed in the Alaska supplement to the Airmen's Guide published by the Federal Aviation Administration; or


(B) by an air taxi operator or air carrier for which the carriage of big game hunters, their equipment, or big game animals harvested by hunters is only an incidental portion of its business; in this subparagraph, "incidental" means transportation provided to a big game hunter by an air taxi operator or air carrier who does not


(i) charge more than the usual tariff or charter rate for the carriage of big game hunters, their equipment, or big game animals harvested by hunters; or


(ii) advertise transportation services or big game hunting services to the public; in this sub-subparagraph, "advertise" means soliciting big game hunters to be customers of an air taxi operator or air carrier for the purpose of providing air transportation to, from, or in the field through the use of print or electronic media, including advertising at trade shows, or the use of hunt broker services or other promotional services.

Bear in Fairbanks,
Your opening comment in your post was, "The hunting regulations are available......... So I explained that that is not exactly the case, where, how, and why. You quoted me later about the hidden regulations, and once again I pointed out where and why. Granted the original issue was about prices of Alaska hunting, but please note, I have not commented on the cost only the fringe issues associated with the prices. When the insurance issue was mentioned by Rob, that is an area I am venturing into at the moment and chose to comment on that.

Huntersnorth,
You and I certainly agree on a lot of things but the comment about ,"those who need a guide don't have to come here". You are correct, but in the case of a few animals that some of us choose to hunt, your state dictates that one must have a guide. I for one do not have an issue with that as long as I know all the hidden crap associated with that up front before a contract is consummated, that does not seem like an unreasonable request since by rights, it is the law. 12AAC75.310 (a)(8)

Allen,
First off, I do not know what my guides intentions were when he first agreed to my request, then ignored that, muzzle blasted me and ultimately killed an un-wounded bear. That is sparsley an issue of the reg's issue I have pointed out.

The hidden reg's as I have pointed out are not in the (#44) rule book. You did not find this statute in your post out of that referenced book, and that is my point.

No sir , you are not illiterate and I do not know why you would have said that. You have the statute written, go down to (7) "Services" being key word here, then move to (B) and you will clearly see "kill big game".

Last but least gentlemen, I am only the messenger. The whole assanine use of the "Take" poaching verbiage was utilized by your ADFG in my case. Trooper's active and retired, attorney's, and guides all told me the state screwed me on the use of that term. The above statute use, explanation, and intended use came from your, Captain Howard Starbard, Alaska State Troopers, Alaska Bureau of Wildlife Enforcement, in these EXACT words in a letter to me dated 11/19/03. "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)) among numerous other duties."

The fact that none of the statutes, administrative codes, and laws governing guides are not listed in the (#44) rule book, that is my discovery, and I think every hunter resident and non-resident has a right to know what they may be getting into. If every hunter that comes to Alaska reads this thread, has a computer, and knows the rule book is not exactly the rule book, problem solved, RIGHT!!!!!!

Interesting to follow this discussion. Participants in this thread who expect rational discourse may want to read the email I got from Bill G. That email is posted near the end of a previous thread "guide question from the lower 48". I have participated in lots of internet discussions, some pretty heated, but that email set a new low standard. What amazes me is that anyone would guide someone like this no matter how much they pay. Or are these attitudes now typical?

Gentlemen

Strange that the prices are lower in areas just as remote as Alaska, I think the hunting there will be just as good. Some guides behave like diva's others are alright.

I will go were I can maximize the use of my money. There is no such thing as lojalty...

/ JOHAN

Just a reminder.

The little reg book that comes out in July is just a summary of the regulations. To see the complete set you have to go to an ADF&G office. It says this right in the regulation summary booklet.

Ok Guys: I'm fed up with the turn this thread has taken & all the guide "bashing".



For the record, guides are licensed by the State Division of Occupational Licensing, NOT the Dep't. of Fish & Game. Anyone wishing to peruse the guide regulations may do so by going to:

http://www.dced.state.us/occ/pub/BGCSStatutes.pdf



Now, can we show the originator of this thread a bit of respect and redirect this thread back towards it's original path? If ya wanna keep bashing guides how about starting another thread or going back to the one of a month or so ago? Bear in Fairbanks

Bear in Fairbanks,

Actually the original post had to be directed towards the guiding industry. Since tags are mostly free or cheap for residents, the topic was surely directed towards the non-resident hunter.

I also am tired of BillG using nearly every thread as a platform for his anti-Alaska agenda. Looks like he scared Johan off now.

Hunting in Alaska is expensive because the means needed to hunt Alaska are expensive. Just the amphib floats for a Beaver cost $100,000. The little 130hp engine on my next boat cost $9,000. Insurance rates for air-taxi operators and boat operators have risen at alarming rates too.

It's an industry that cannot move it's 'manafacturing plant' to a third world country and take advantage of cheap slave labor.

Some folks understand, and accept, the challenges of Alaska hunting. Some folks whine.

Johan,
Thank you for stepping up to the plate. It is quite obvious the truth can be a painful thing. Some people even have to resort to accusations of posts that did not exist on my behalf and other's have to post bald faced lies because they cannot accept the truth. I hope lot's of perspective Alaskan hunter's are watching this unfold. Good luck to you on all your hunting adventures including Alaska if that is where you choose to hunt, I hope I have helped you and all hunter's to be cautious in the areas earlier discussed in this thread, as you can clearly see, it was all the truth. Happy Holidays!!!!!!!!!!!!

Johan,

That makes sense to me. I don't feel like I should hunt Africa until I get all the animals I want here in Alaska. If I lived in Europe, I'd be looking around too.

BillG,

The way I read it, Johan is reluctant to hunt Alaska because he can get a better deal closer to home.

Not really an example of somebody else 'stepping up to the plate' for your cause.

I supported you at the 24HourCampfire website. That in direct opposition to my other Alaskan friends on that site. I thought you got a raw deal then, but your negative stance on Alaska is growing old. Perhaps in future threads I can look forward to reading something positive about Alaska hunting coming from your direction?

BW,
In your last post you stated,"Looks like he scared Johan off now." Now you are saying it's because he can get a better deal. Which is it? I did not say he was stepping up to the plate for my cause because he wasn't. He made his statement to counter your accusation that I scared him off, and he clearly states that. If that were the case that I scared him off, shame on him. There is not one thing in one of these open to the public forums that would change my mind about any hunting location. Keep a recommendation in mind, of course, a heads up, of course.

Taking my side should have been because you believed in what you were standing behind, no other reason. The negative stance comment, you can put where the sun doesn't shine. If you do not see the value in feedback that I am putting forth to both resident and non-resident, then don't read them. The "take" issue, which is actually something you brought up in this thread. 99.9% of the viewers, guides, attorney's, trooper's and on and on had NOT heard of this usage before. I hope they got a heads up. This most recent thing about hiring a guide means you have hired him to kill game for you. 100% of the viewers had not heard of this before. I hope everyone got a heads up. None of this is a negative stance, it's the facts, it's the truth, it's about "watch out". I owe my fellow hunter's in the USA all of that. And to set the record straight, I do not recall a statement on my behalf about the prices or the weather, get your facts straight. I've spent more on (1) hunting expedition than you will likely make in the next (2) years. I know hunting is expensive, and I know it rains in Alaska.

Here you want a positive comment on Alaska. Two out of three hunts there were fantastic. Both with my good friend Virgil Umphenour of Hunt Alaska out of Fairbanks. We took one 59" moose and a 56" moose. Also caught a 23lb. pike. Also caught a 19" grayling and a 20" grayling.

Happy Holidays!

How does the old saying go "ignorance of the law is no excuse"

BillG wrote...

Quote:

---

In your last post you stated,"Looks like he scared Johan off now." Now you are saying it's because he can get a better deal. Which is it? I did not say he was stepping up to the plate for my cause because he wasn't.

---

BillG,



IF you look back you'll see that wasn't my "last post". My last post was to you. That was several posts ago, and in the mean time I had made this post...

Quote:

---

#508928

Johan,



That makes sense to me. I don't feel like I should hunt Africa until I get all the animals I want here in Alaska. If I lived in Europe, I'd be looking around too.

---

...which clearly is me accepting Johans reason for not hunting Alaska now.



There's no need to ask "Which is it?" because my statements are clear. Just read the post.



Looking back at the other threads I see that your basically correct. You did not comment on weather or expense as negative reasons for hunting Alaska. But in both threads you've managed to wrangle in your recent problem. Apperently I've come to associate everthing you have to say about Alaska as a negative. Hummm, I wonder why? Still, when I make a mistake, I like to admit it, and you appear to be correct on that matter.

Quote:

---

I've spent more on (1) hunting expedition than you will likely make in the next (2) years.

---

Are you talking about how much I make at work? Why? How does that in anyway qualify any statements you have made to date?



I've heard that kind of talk before. Usually I discover there are underlying personal issues involved.

i have been silent long enough. thanks to canuck, saeed, lawcop for their help with me overcoming this "new and improved" format....

since i have a substantial income and networth, i am qualified to weigh in here.......just kidding.

in all fairness to bill g., he is not the only one to have had problems with spiridon bear camp. i too had a bad experience with them several years ago. those interested, can read the report, outfitters rebuttal and my response in the feb. hunt report.

i have to take at least some of the responsibility for mr. gentner's decision to hunt with spiridon. i did not file the usual reports when i came back because i he told me that he was selling his area and retiring. that is why forums like these and hunt reports are a valuable tool for getting the word out, both good and bad. now i know that that was not the case. had i filed it, bill g. an s.c.i. member and hunt report subscriber would likely have seen it and went the other way. those looking, should steer clear of spiridon. anyone can have a bad experience once, when it becomes a pattern, they should be avoided. my friend too had a bad trip. in bill's case, they can use the vagueness of the game laws to cover their ass if they want. they know that options for cleints recourse are limited. some outfitters know this and take advantage of this. this should not be taken as "all outfitters are bad", i have hunted with some real good ones.

i can tell u from talking to the locals in kodiak that what happened on his trip is common knowledge and the feeling is shooting cleints bears is bad for business. i heard their business is off sharply.

i needed to keep silent on this info until recently, because i was threathend by email from this same outfitter in part due to a trip that i had booked with a friend of his, that is now over. i did not wish to fan the flames of spiridon bear camp's ruined business/reputation at that time. apparently, the p.r. and etc. of mr. gentner had an effect on them and their reputation.

cold zero

I started the thread on 24 hour Campfire regarding Bill G's hunt. I said all I want to over there about it but have been following this one with some interest.

I have a friend who guides on the Pennisula and around Illiamna. He has a house on Mercer Island Washington, one of the most upscale areas around Seattle, a house in Anchorage, a Fishing Lodge on Illimana for fly out fishing, a Beaver, a 185 and a Super Cub. It depends on who's standard is used as to whether or not he is getting rich but he is doing alright.

I think that all of you guys should attend the seminar at the SCI Convention entitled 'Are Alaka guides Trigger Happy?' It should be a hoot. Oh, I think that some are and some aren't.

Mickey,
I couldn't agree with you more, "some are and some aren't". I do not recall whether it was on this forum or an E-mail or whatever...The guy that does my fish taxidermy, hunts Kodiak for ducks every year. He told me while sitting at lodge dinner tables with Alaskan guides, "they claim" very few bears leave that island without (2) different bullets in them. Each individual will have to decide if that is trigger happy or not.

BW,
Your perception as to what is going on here is astonishing. I will tell you again. If you do not like the facts about hidden game laws that I have brought forth do not read them.

My statement regarding my most expensive expedition was along the lines of someone making a post about, "weather and prices". FOLLOW????? If I will spend that much money on a hunt, obviously money is not an issue with me as someone falsely stated. Right? Follow?

And, oh my, the fact that I said, "in your last post", and it was not that post but the previous one. Wow, that was certainly worth noting. You stated I scared someone away, he stated that was not true, I thanked him for pointing out the inaccuracy of the fact that I had not scared him away. Follow????

Underlying personal issues. I cannot expand on that subject, since I have none.

Happy Holidays.

deleted by BW

Coldzero,
If it is any consolation, that outfit did a fair share of lying regarding me also. Little did I know until just a few days ago and some phone record investigation, your favorite person Mr. Francisco, had called Larry Van Daele before I arrived at the ADFG office so he could have all his ducks in a row. Leon told me on the way to that office, that he had NOT talked to them, turns out he had. NOT NICE TO LIE TO BILL G !!!!!!

Then Fred Roberts posted a bald faced lie on the Hunting Report, about camp policies. NOT NICE TO LIE TO BILL G !!!

Needless to say, they have made their own choices.

You are correct. If guy's like you and I do not tell the public events like we have experienced, then they become victims also. Keep up the good work, it is the right thing to do.

Happy Holidays.

Deleted by BW.



Happy holidays to all!