Can someone help me understand trophy fees and the logic behind them? As I understand them, I hire a guide/outfitter to "take" me hunting. I purchase a license and tag from the state; this is all I need to legally harvest an animal.

The outfitter than performs the service contracted and paid for and an animal is successfully taken. Where does the trophy fee fit into this?

Its common in many places around the world but I don't know of any reputable Alaskan guide who does that, unless you are adding in extra animals after the primary one contracted for .

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Can someone help me understand trophy fees and the logic behind them? As I understand them, I hire a guide/outfitter to "take" me hunting. I purchase a license and tag from the state; this is all I need to legally harvest an animal.

The outfitter than performs the service contracted and paid for and an animal is successfully taken. Where does the trophy fee fit into this?

What Alaska outfitters are charging trophy fees? I ask because you did post your question in the Alaska hunting forum.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Can someone help me understand trophy fees and the logic behind them?

The outfitter than performs the service contracted and paid for and an animal is successfully taken. Where does the trophy fee fit into this?

Howard,
You are looking at it from the perspective of the hunter who has successfully taken an animal, and is now required to pay and additional fee, in the form of a trophy trophy fee.

But I think that you need to look at it from the perspective of the hunter who doesn’t get his target animal: he is accessed a lower total fee for the hunt. The money saved could be put towards an subsequent hunt.

So one way to look at trophy fees: the successful hunters pay the full price of the hunt(base fee + trophy fee), while the unsuccessful hunters pay a reduced rate price(the base fee only).

I don’t have an opinion one way or the other regarding trophy fees, but I have seen situations where unscrupulous outfitters have screwed hunters by placing them in areas devoid of game, or just plain not putting in the effort to get an animal for the client.

One recent example of this was a moose hunter who borrowed and saved to make a “once in a lifetime” moose hunt. Early snow prevented the outfitter from being able to fly in to pick up meat and horns. From what the client said, the guides were not happy with the prospect of having to pack meat/cape/antlers out in addition to packing out the camp itself by horse. So the guides did very little work as far as trying to locate moose, so the clients paid for a fully guided moose hunt, but received a wilderness camping trip.

I’m sure that client would have been happier with a base cost + trophy fee arrangement. As it was, he paid full price.

Howard, are you simply asking a general question ? Or do you have an example ?

It’s a general question. I was simply searching for grizzly hunts in Alaska. Came across a couple web sites that referenced “plus trophy fee”.

It’s unclear as to if the trophy fee always applies or is an additional cost for an add on animal of another species.

Regardless the fees are several thousands of dollars. I am not seeing the correlation between costs and additional fee. Haven’t I already booked and paid the costs associated with the full length of the hunt? If on a bear hunt and a moose is taken where is the extra cost?

Perhaps I’m just not understanding.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

Regardless the fees are several thousands of dollars. I am not seeing the correlation between costs and additional fee. Haven’t I already booked and paid the costs associated with the full length of the hunt? If on a bear hunt and a moose is taken where is the extra cost?

If the hunt for the additional animal(s) extends the actual hunting, then the outfitter could be looking at thousands of dollars in extra fuel, additional flights to transport camp or retrieve meat, antlers and cape from the field, not to mention added maintenance costs, food, etc.

So, while a grizzly shot while hunting for moose might not cost the outfitter much, a guy who kills a moose then hunts his remaining days looking for a grizzly does incur additional costs to the outfitter.

The trophy fees for additional animals is usually only about a third of the cost of a dedicated hunt for that particular animal. So the lucky hunter gets a discounted and the outfitter has the opportunity for additional revenue.

Howard, I think Jason pretty well explained "trophy fees". If you book a 10 day sheep hunt you are paying the outfitter for food, camps and guiding for up to 10 days of hunting. His (or her) expensises are the same whether or not you are fortunate enough to kill a sheep on day one or day ten. And you were fortunate enough to take what you agreed on and came for.
Then of you want to add the chance for a grizzly bear the outfitter will normally have to spend more time and money, plus additional logistics to accommodate you, plus will be killing a bear permit he might have been able to sell.

Thank you for the replies everyone, especially Jason and Phil. However the replies only reinforce my question.

Just what is the trophy fee for? what does it include? Extra days? The replies here only speculate as to that. I find nothing on the web sites about extra days.

Filling a bear permit they might have been able to sell to someone else for more money? If so I get that, however my understanding is they are available for purchase over the counter and the outfitter isn't including costs of license or tags in their quoted price. So what would they be selling to another? Again we don't know.

Maybe there is no generally accepted definition of a "trophy fee" and what it includes or doesn't include.

Back to my original question.

Frankly I think the answer is it's simply an add on fee they can charge and get paid for and what you are paying for is never clearly defined. Just if you want to shoot this species while I am guiding you for another this is what I am charging. I find it a curious way to charge for services rendered but I do get supply and demand and I totally support market driven pricing.

Just for my money I would want the terms and services clearly defined.

Phil,

How do you charge? I book a 10 day grizzly hunt and in that 10 days I take not only my bear but a moose as well. Is there an extra charge? How much and what is it for?

Howard

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Phil,

How do you charge? I book a 10 day grizzly hunt and in that 10 days I take not only my bear but a moose as well. Is there an extra charge? How much and what is it for?

Howard

Our moose and bear seasons on the peninsula don't overlap so it's not an issue. When we had our guide area along the Yukon border we had grizzly & black bears as well as sheep, moose, wolves and caribou so we simply booked combination hunts with one price for everything you wanted to purchase tags for .

But from a guides perspective, combination hunts require considerable more logistics and expense to the outfitter and on many guide concessions there are additional fees imposed on the outfitter for each species of animal.

Then there is the "headache" factor when the paying client insists on hunting continuously while, at least in Alaska, all the meat must be hauled out of the field and the antlers and capes property prepared for shipping.
Alaskan guides and outfitters don't have the option, like the African outfits, of inexpensivly hiring a full staff of employees to do all the camp chores. It's simply an integral part of hunting and one most African clients miss.

Phil

What you say about the time for pack out etc makes sense. Considering the logistics of AK hunting I’d find it reasonable and expected that this time takes away from client “hunting” time.

It’s all in clearly communicating expectations on both sides.

My conclusion here is that “trophy fee” doesn’t have a standard definition and specifics need to be obtained from the outfitter in question.

Howard.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Phil

What you say about the time for pack out etc makes sense. Considering the logistics of AK hunting I’d find it reasonable and expected that this time takes away from client “hunting” time.

It’s all in clearly communicating expectations on both sides.

My conclusion here is that “trophy fee” doesn’t have a standard definition and specifics need to be obtained from the outfitter in question.

Howard.

Just be aware that you may have "Clearly Communicated Expectations" With the Guide who signed the "contract" between you and him. Likely no problems if he/she is actually the person guiding you in the field. That might not work, if you end up in the field with a guide he hired. It could be different then the agreement he/she has with the guide hired.

quote:

Originally posted by Alaskan Sourdough:

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Phil

What you say about the time for pack out etc makes sense. Considering the logistics of AK hunting I’d find it reasonable and expected that this time takes away from client “hunting” time.

It’s all in clearly communicating expectations on both sides.

My conclusion here is that “trophy fee” doesn’t have a standard definition and specifics need to be obtained from the outfitter in question.

Howard.

Just aware that you may have "Clearly Communicated Expectations" With the Guide who signed the "contract" between you and him. Likely no problems if he/she is actually the person guiding you in the field. That might not work, if you end up in the field with a guide he hired. It could be different then the agreement he/she has with the guide hired.

Shouldn’t the outfitter make sure that the actual guide is well aware of the clients desires??

Shouldn’t the outfitter make sure that the actual guide is well aware of the clients desires??[/QUOTE]

The actual guide, may have been in the field guiding other hunters for "months", (sometimes just short of three months) with zero communications with the employing guide the whole time.

Howard,

Here is the monetary answer. If the outfitter chooses or is only allowed to sell 3 sheep, 3 grizzly hunts and 3 moose for instance in his guide area at full price why would he allow you to take 2 or all 3 at no additional cost?

Mark

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by Alaskan Sourdough:

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:
Phil

What you say about the time for pack out etc makes sense. Considering the logistics of AK hunting I’d find it reasonable and expected that this time takes away from client “hunting” time.

It’s all in clearly communicating expectations on both sides.

My conclusion here is that “trophy fee” doesn’t have a standard definition and specifics need to be obtained from the outfitter in question.

Howard.

Just aware that you may have "Clearly Communicated Expectations" With the Guide who signed the "contract" between you and him. Likely no problems if he/she is actually the person guiding you in the field. That might not work, if you end up in the field with a guide he hired. It could be different then the agreement he/she has with the guide hired.

Shouldn’t the outfitter make sure that the actual guide is well aware of the clients desires??

Absolutely! The guides in the field work directly under the guide/outfitter who signed the contract and Is legally responsible for their conduct. And state law requires the guide/outfitter be in the game unit while the hunt is in progress.

I would say in the industry it's about 50/50 if the outfitter is also guiding clients on hunts themselves. But they have to be in close proximity and personally talk with the client to make sure he was satisfied and sign the end of the hunt report!

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Howard,

Here is the monetary answer. If the outfitter chooses or is only allowed to sell 3 sheep, 3 grizzly hunts and 3 moose for instance in his guide area at full price why would he allow you to take 2 or all 3 at no additional cost?

Mark

I don't understand this. Tags are sold by the State of AK, and are purchased by the hunter. Costs of tags and licenses are specifically excluded from every price list I have seen. Sorry I don't understand your point. The outfitter is not selling the tags.

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

Absolutely! The guides in the field work directly under the guide/outfitter who signed the contract and Is legally responsible for their conduct. And state law requires the guide/outfitter be in the game unit while the hunt is in progress.

I would say in the industry it's about 50/50 if the outfitter is also guiding clients on hunts themselves. But they have to be in close proximity and personally talk with the client to make sure he was satisfied and sign the end of the hunt report!

My point is There is also agreements between the contract signing guide and guides who work for him. For example, the guide in the field may have hired on, with the agreement he/she "only" guides ONE hunter at a time, (so-called One on One hunt), and only for one species.

quote:

Originally posted by Alaskan Sourdough:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

Absolutely! The guides in the field work directly under the guide/outfitter who signed the contract and Is legally responsible for their conduct. And state law requires the guide/outfitter be in the game unit while the hunt is in progress.

I would say in the industry it's about 50/50 if the outfitter is also guiding clients on hunts themselves. But they have to be in close proximity and personally talk with the client to make sure he was satisfied and sign the end of the hunt report!

My point is There is also agreements between the contract signing guide and guides who work for him. For example, the guide in the field may have hired on, with the agreement he/she "only" guides ONE hunter at a time, (so-called One on One hunt), and only for one species.

That makes no difference as the contractions guide bears full responsibility for the hunt and all guides and assistants working under him

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Howard,

Here is the monetary answer. If the outfitter chooses or is only allowed to sell 3 sheep, 3 grizzly hunts and 3 moose for instance in his guide area at full price why would he allow you to take 2 or all 3 at no additional cost?

Mark

I don't understand this. Tags are sold by the State of AK, and are purchased by the hunter. Costs of tags and licenses are specifically excluded from every price list I have seen. Sorry I don't understand your point. The outfitter is not selling the tags.

Has nothing to do with the tags. The state allots a certain number of tags for a given unit. Outfitters are licensed in said unit, and the state allots each one a certain number of those tags. They can only sell hunts based on the number of tags Alaska give them. In Mark’s example, the outfitter can only sell 9 hunts, but he may also sell fewer hunts. So, he could sell a combo hunt of bear, sheep, and moose for $60,000. Or, he could sell a sheep hunt, for $20,000, with an add on of a bear or a moose, for $20,000 trophy fee, each. So, you the hunter show up for your hunt, and shoot your sheep, but see nary a bear or moose on the trip. Which deal would you rather have struck with the outfitter?

quote:

Originally posted by pointblank:

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by MARK H. YOUNG:
Howard,

Here is the monetary answer. If the outfitter chooses or is only allowed to sell 3 sheep, 3 grizzly hunts and 3 moose for instance in his guide area at full price why would he allow you to take 2 or all 3 at no additional cost?

Mark

I don't understand this. Tags are sold by the State of AK, and are purchased by the hunter. Costs of tags and licenses are specifically excluded from every price list I have seen. Sorry I don't understand your point. The outfitter is not selling the tags.

Has nothing to do with the tags. The state allots a certain number of tags for a given unit. Outfitters are licensed in said unit, and the state allots each one a certain number of those tags. They can only sell hunts based on the number of tags Alaska give them. In Mark’s example, the outfitter can only sell 9 hunts, but he may also sell fewer hunts. So, he could sell a combo hunt of bear, sheep, and moose for $60,000. Or, he could sell a sheep hunt, for $20,000, with an add on of a bear or a moose, for $20,000 trophy fee, each. So, you the hunter show up for your hunt, and shoot your sheep, but see nary a bear or moose on the trip. Which deal would you rather have struck with the outfitter?

To add further confusion, on Federal concessions the number of hunting clients are restricted, because in essence the game belongs to the state. So on federal concessions I can only take a set number of clients, even if they don't fill their tag.

what a overly complicated confusing mess. Can we put them in charge of health care too?

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


That makes no difference as the contractions guide bears full responsibility for the hunt and all guides and assistants working under him

Yes.....In a "perfect" world. Sadly that is often not how it plays out. Yes....it is the contract signing guides responsibility. But if the hunter shows up and tells the Registered guide who is working for the contracting guide, that he (hunter) negotiated a special deal that is "outside" the two guides agreement......there is a problem.

quote:

Originally posted by Alaskan Sourdough:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:


That makes no difference as the contractions guide bears full responsibility for the hunt and all guides and assistants working under him

Yes.....In a "perfect" world. Sadly that is often not how it plays out. Yes....it is the contract signing guides responsibility. But if the hunter shows up and tells the Registered guide who is working for the contracting guide, that he (hunter) negotiated a special deal that is "outside" the two guides agreement......there is a problem.

The registered or master guide then has a serious problem with their employee , but the law is perfectly clear and if someone wants to break it then that is a different problem.

The first rule of booking any hunt is to talk with the guide person in charge and read the written, legal contract . There is also another legal requirement, as a statement of financial remuneration (aka Hunt Report) must also be filled out and signed prior to the hunt . It contains all the license numbers, animals to be hunted and dates of the hunt .

Hi Phil

With respect to the 'Hunt Report'. Does the hunter sign this document as well?

Thanks for all of the insight guys.

quote:

Originally posted by ilw:
Hi Phil

With respect to the 'Hunt Report'. Does the hunter sign this document as well?

Thanks for all of the insight guys.

Absolutely, and they have to carry a copy along with their license and tags while on the hunt !
And then the guide who booked the hunt has to sign an affidavit attesting to talking with the client AFTER THE HUNT about his satisfaction !

In my old (retired now) line of work contracts almost always had incentive clauses, so all the dogs were pulling the sled in the right direction. For employees, a sliding bonus scale for meeting or exceeding goals. Ditto trophy fees. I like the concept.

I can see charging more for an extra animal.

As it entails more work.

All fees should be up front. Calling them trophy fees might be the wrong wording.

The only guided hunt I went on. We were told that we could hang around until our time was up after we took our game.

So we decided that we could do some coyote calling as we had an few days.

It became very apparent that the guide service really did not want us around.

They wanted to wrap things up.

I run a base price for a hunt for a animal.
If that animal is harvested and a guy wants to stay and keep hunting I just charge a daily rate.
If a animal comes long that isn’t the targeted animal and the client wants to shoot it, I don’t charge anything. I consider this incidental to the intended hunt. Unless there are flying costs to get that animal out of the field so it doesn’t spoil. Then client covers that. I hate trophy fees. But a lot of outfitters use them in alaska for “extra” species.

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
I run a base price for a hunt for a animal.
If that animal is harvested and a guy wants to stay and keep hunting I just charge a daily rate.
If a animal comes long that isn’t the targeted animal and the client wants to shoot it, I don’t charge anything. I consider this incidental to the intended hunt. Unless there are flying costs to get that animal out of the field so it doesn’t spoil. Then client covers that. I hate trophy fees. But a lot of outfitters use them in alaska for “extra” species.

To me this makes the most sense. The whole idea of a trophy fee if successful just smacks of, "well yes you have paid me but if you want my best effort you need to agree to a bonus if successful".

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by Fourtyonesix:
I run a base price for a hunt for a animal.
If that animal is harvested and a guy wants to stay and keep hunting I just charge a daily rate.
If a animal comes long that isn’t the targeted animal and the client wants to shoot it, I don’t charge anything. I consider this incidental to the intended hunt. Unless there are flying costs to get that animal out of the field so it doesn’t spoil. Then client covers that. I hate trophy fees. But a lot of outfitters use them in alaska for “extra” species.

To me this makes the most sense. The whole idea of a trophy fee if successful just smacks of, "well yes you have paid me but if you want my best effort you need to agree to a bonus if successful".

There are plenty of hunting rules, laws and customs around the world and many clients like the trophy fee because they are only paying for the animals they kill, rather than just a chance to maybe shoot one .

I have always found adding fees after the fact as tacky and usually disliked , but so long as they are discussed and agreed upon before the hunt then it's a contract between two individuals and totally up to them .

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

There are plenty of hunting rules, laws and customs around the world and many clients like the trophy fee because they are only paying for the animals they kill, rather than just a chance to maybe shoot one .

Only time I have stumbled across what I would consider a trophy fee is hunting Africa and in those cases you pay a daily rate which includes everything except the animal.

In AK where you must purchase/pay for a specific animal BEFORE you can hunt it such a trophy fee seems disingenuous.

quote:

Originally posted by Howard:

quote:

Originally posted by 458Win:

There are plenty of hunting rules, laws and customs around the world and many clients like the trophy fee because they are only paying for the animals they kill, rather than just a chance to maybe shoot one .

Only time I have stumbled across what I would consider a trophy fee is hunting Africa and in those cases you pay a daily rate which includes everything except the animal.

In AK where you must purchase/pay for a specific animal BEFORE you can hunt it such a trophy fee seems disingenuous.

Exactly ! Which makes me wonder about the ethics and legality of those alluding that it seems to happen in Alaska with regularity.

Although it is entirely possible for a client to use their tag for an entirely different species ( so long as the tags is of equal or greater value) and then purchase another tag for their targeted animal. And I have never heard of any additional fees ever being required in that case.

I like the rule about only letting so many hunts being conducted on areas. I know of several outfitters who were rumored to book 6 guys for 4 animal quota areas and send 2 or 3 to lesser areas knowing they wouldn't kill. Doomed from the start.

I for one like the trophy fee idea. I don't mind paying a honest fee up front to cover the outfitters basic expenses and then paying an elevated "kill fee" upon success. I have always thought it helped keep some outfitters and guides "motivated".

I know the best outfitters and guides don't always need this. But having real skin in the game keeps everyone honest.

I also support rules that if the client quits or can't physically fulfill the hunt, they owe the additional fee. Basically if a client gets a legitimate shot at the target animal, the Fee is due, kill or no kill.

quote:

Originally posted by p dog shooter:
I can see charging more for an extra animal.

As it entails more work.

All fees should be up front. Calling them trophy fees might be the wrong wording.

The only guided hunt I went on. We were told that we could hang around until our time was up after we took our game.

So we decided that we could do some coyote calling as we had an few days.

It became very apparent that the guide service really did not want us around.

They wanted to wrap things up.

This is what I don't understand. You paid for the time, food and people. If you want to relax and use your time, they should be happy to have you around. I don't add on extra game on a hunt, unless it is a 2 bear area that I am allowed 2 bears on my tag. Having both a black and grizzly on my tag would also have me hunting on, but I would be ok with an additional charge if that was the contract I signed. I don't like "flying out" early as that will result in extra charges to me in hotel rooms and flight change charges.

quote:

Originally posted by scott f.:
I have always thought it helped keep some outfitters and guides "motivated".

I know the best outfitters and guides don't always need this. But having real skin in the game keeps everyone honest.

If "I" wanted to motivate anyone it would be the guide in the field who is actually doing the guiding. The ways I would do that is by "HELPING" him/her (in the field) do their job. By assisting them I would adding time and energy to my hunt. If I was planning to add financial motivation, I would do that with the actual guide in the field.
I would try to remember they are likely "more" interested in news of what is happening in the (Outside) world, then hearing me jabber about what a great hunter I am. This is especially true if they have been several months in the field guiding a dozen other hunters "before" I arrived, cut off from world events. I would try to remember that I am showing up, excited and full of energy for my hunt. The guide in the field may have lost 20 or 30 pounds in the last few months, is exhausted and burned-out, but doing their best to "give" their best to my hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by Arniet:
In my old (retired now) line of work contracts almost always had incentive clauses, so all the dogs were pulling the sled in the right direction. For employees, a sliding bonus scale for meeting or exceeding goals. Ditto trophy fees. I like the concept.

I don’t.

This is bloody awful!

A client hires an outfit, at an agreed price, to hunt a specific animal or animals.

The outfits job is to make sure the client gets what he had paid for.

If at the end he feels that he wishes to reward the outfit, it is his prerogative.

Having a sliding scale is not, under any circumstances, acceptable to me.

That is why I would never consider hunting in Europe or New Zealand.

I have been hunting Africa all my life.

I pay a daily fee.

I pay for any animals I shoot.

The price is exactly the same, regardless of size.

quote:

Originally posted by scott f.:
I like the rule about only letting so many hunts being conducted on areas. I know of several outfitters who were rumored to book 6 guys for 4 animal quota areas and send 2 or 3 to lesser areas knowing they wouldn't kill. Doomed from the start.

I for one like the trophy fee idea. I don't mind paying a honest fee up front to cover the outfitters basic expenses and then paying an elevated "kill fee" upon success. I have always thought it helped keep some outfitters and guides "motivated".

I know the best outfitters and guides don't always need this. But having real skin in the game keeps everyone honest.

I also support rules that if the client quits or can't physically fulfill the hunt, they owe the additional fee. Basically if a client gets a legitimate shot at the target animal, the Fee is due, kill or no kill.

The issue of only paying a trophy fee is that yes, it motivates the guide, but all too often to do things illegally, or to push the client into shooting a sub par animal. And even 100% honest and hard working guides can not guarantee the hunter can shoot, or hike or even get out of bed !

Most,is not all, of the problem pointed out in this thread could have been avoided if the client had done due diligence and CHECKED REFERENCES !
It's too bad guides don't have that option

I have checked references of a client before. They tell me two or three horror stories and I email the guides they hunted with to find out the other side. That’s a red flag to me when I hear multiple bad stories in a row…they all only have one common denominator. Lol