Anyone else see the myriad levels of hypocrisy and blatant Moose Nuggets, in that sentence?
Seems pretty obvious.
With the current state of some of our fisheries, coupled with a preference for Local Hire, why is our State being represented by, and our resources profited from, Non-Residents? It might be some decent midwinter banter to discuss viable alternatives that could
address some of these, and other related, issues.
While I'm aware it's illegal to ban non resident hire, why aren't the requirements more stringent than simply an extra $50 for a non res guide license?
Certainly there are members here more in the know. My question is why aren't there in place certain criteria that makes it more restrictive for these "guides"?
Raise the price significantly and economically non viable to obtain? Require certification after testing, on knowledge of basic Alaskan safety and environmental concerns, fish identification, bear safety, waste management, etc. etc. ?
I know if I ever travel to New Zealand, I'm hiring a local, hopefully Maori, guide. Alaska should likewise be represented by those that live here, and value our Home. We require a year of residency to receive a PFD, why aren't such standards applied to those who utilize not only our resource(s), but our very Name, and then scurry South before the snow flies?