Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 215

Thread: For the Record, ER King Package....

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default For the Record, ER King Package....

    Here is the truth about the early run package. It has been brought to my attention that the guides taking a lot of heat for this one.

    The guides got very little of what they wanted on the ER plan:

    1) THe guides wanted June 15th as a closure for the Killey River sanctuary knowing that many locals (guys from the Keys) fish that area. The guides didn't get it.

    2) Guides wanted no bait above the Moose River until July 1. F&G said no and wanted to be trusted that they wouldn't open it to bait.

    3) Guides wanted bait at the begining of the ER king season, F&G wanted the EO authority for bait and they got it, the guides lost

    4) Guides wanted to measure kings from the fork of the tail to the snout, the way point (fork of the tail) that F&G uses to measure fish. The guides lost. BTW, the tip of the tail is different when the fish is alive in the water vs. dead in the box, sometimes changeing the fish by a few inches.

    5) Guides wanted fishing after retention of a 28" or less king. The Department said "no". Guides lost


    Everything the Department wanted they got, it has been brought to my attention members of the Department are saying the guides wanted the Jan. 1 closure of the Killey River section. That is not true. The guides wanted it opened until June 15th so the locals could fish kings until trout opened. It was others that pushed for Jan. 1, not the guides.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    The guides wanted it opened until June 15th so the locals could fish kings until trout opened.
    Are you kidding? The guides wanted the June opening so they could fish it. Since when are the guides making proposals on behalf of locals from the Keys? Their proposal wasn't local-specific, it included themselves.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    Guides wanted no bait above the Moose River until July 1. F&G said no and wanted to be trusted that they wouldn't open it to bait.
    The guides wanted a regulation that gave them a full green-light to use bait after July 1. Why would F&G commit to using bait above the Moose after July 1, when they already have the power to restrict (or allow) bait after (or before) July 1? Tricky move by the Guides. The "Department" didn't bite.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    Guides wanted bait at the begining of the ER king season, F&G wanted the EO authority for bait and they got it, the guides lost
    Why would the guides want F&G to commit to bait at the beginning of the ER? Why would they want F&G to give up their EO authority to manage bait restrictions based on the ER escapement strength? After all, we know the ER can be sensetive to increased harvest due to bait. And we know in the past EO bait restrictions have helped to revive the ER (thank you F&G). The guides simply want an easier chacne to catch more fish earlier, with disregard for the ER escapement numbers.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    Guides wanted to measure kings from the fork of the tail to the snout, the way point (fork of the tail) that F&G uses to measure fish. The guides lost. BTW, the tip of the tail is different when the fish is alive in the water vs. dead in the box, sometimes changeing the fish by a few inches.
    A straight-line measurement from tip of snout to tip of tail is Alaska's regulation standard for measuring all fish. The tip of the tail has a finite ending point. Measuring to the "fork" requires putting the fish on its side, exposing gills to air, and defining the fork by spreading the tail. That takes handling time. BTW, the length of a fish from its nose to tip of tail does not change...unless your fishbox has some magical power.

    It's simple yukon. The guides want to measure to the fork because a 28" fish measured out to the tip of the tail is 25" at the "fork" (for example). This means their clients can retain another, larger fish per the 28" rule. A fish measured 28" to the tip means their clients can't retain another fish that day. Tricky. Again, the guides want more. The department didn't bite.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    Guides wanted fishing after retention of a 28" or less king. The Department said "no". Guides lost
    Of course the guides wanted more. They never get enough.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    ...the guides taking a lot of heat for this one...The guides got very little of what they wanted...
    Yukon, your continual "poor guide" song isn't sitting well with the public. And the more you post garbage like that, the more pizzed about the guides the public is getting.

  3. #3

    Default Look again

    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post

    It's simple yukon. The guides want to measure to the fork because a 28" fish measured out to the tip of the tail is 25" at the "fork" (for example). This means their clients can retain another, larger fish per the 28" rule.(emphasis mine) A fish measured 28" to the tip means their clients can't retain another fish that day. Tricky. Again, the guides want more. The department didn't bite.
    As I understand the changes, a fish between 20" and 28" doesn't count toward the annual limit (i.e. does not need to be recorded on the harvest record) but does count toward the daily limit. So a client, or anyone else for that matter would have to stop fishing out of a boat for the rest of the day after retaining an king larger than 20".

    Likewise, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment regarding the overall length of a fish changing. When a fish is in the water the tail is typically fluked out (spread out), while out of the water the tail is contracted (? can't think of a proper term for that... that is pointing straight back..). Geometrically, if you think of a triangle (as is the tail of a fish), an isoscolese triangle (that is one with two equal sides) with an acute apex is longer than one with an obtuse apex. That is what I am saying regarding the length of the fish... When the tail is obtuse (fluked) the fish will be shorter than when the tail is acute (contracted or what ever term would fit better here).

  4. #4
    Member fishNphysician's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Aberdeen WA
    Posts
    4,516

    Default

    AKFG is correct.

    Fork length is a MUCH more reliable and reproducible measurement which is far easier to accurately obtain than the very subjective "total" length. If the tips of the tail are swept back, one obtains a greater length than when the tail is splayed out... and yes there can be a couple inches difference in a large fish. In contrast, the fork length does not change no matter how far the tail fin is fanned out or compressed.

    That's why so many supposed "sealers" that are brought in to ADFG don't actually make the cut. Guys that have tried to turn in a "short sealer" in June have actually been issued a citation for retaining a slot fish!

    BTW, ADFG measures to the fork in all of their stock assessment work. (Actually they measure eye-fork length [eye to mid-fork of the tail] for greatest accuracy/reproducibility as well as to cancel out the kype-effect on mature males)
    "Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." Zane Grey
    http://www.piscatorialpursuits.com/uploads/UP12710.jpg
    The KeenEye MD

  5. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    Are you kidding? The guides wanted the June opening so they could fish it. Since when are the guides making proposals on behalf of locals from the Keys? Their proposal wasn't local-specific, it included themselves..
    Too bad you didn't participate and know the truth. I, for one, am concerned, as well as the others I have talked with. There are a group of guys that fish out there about every morning and they have become my friends over the years. While I only fish up there a couple times a year this closure really won't affect me, or the guides. There are only 2 or 3 guides that work that stretch of river daily. I would be willing to bet that the guides would support it being open for locals only, not a big deal to us.
    We try and stand up for the locals and you find a way to rip on us, you are unbelieveable. WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PLEASE YOU IN EVEN THE SMALLEST WAY.



    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    The guides wanted a regulation that gave them a full green-light to use bait after July 1. Why would F&G commit to using bait above the Moose after July 1, when they already have the power to restrict (or allow) bait after (or before) July 1? Tricky move by the Guides. The "Department" didn't bite..
    Wrong again, it is already in regulation that the entire river goes to bait on July 1 unless restricted by EO. The guides did not want to change that. Maybe you should have been at the BOF meeting.





    [QUOTE=Grampyfishes;214012]
    Why would the guides want F&G to commit to bait at the beginning of the ER? Why would they want F&G to give up their EO authority to manage bait restrictions based on the ER escapement strength? After all, we know the ER can be sensetive to increased harvest due to bait. And we know in the past EO bait restrictions have helped to revive the ER (thank you F&G). The guides simply want an easier chacne to catch more fish earlier, with disregard for the ER escapement numbers.

    I have no problem with F&G and their EO authority, I think it is a good thing. But, wouldn't bait also help the non-guided angler? Their effort seems to drastically increase when bait is allowed.



    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    A straight-line measurement from tip of snout to tip of tail is Alaska's regulation standard for measuring all fish. The tip of the tail has a finite ending point. Measuring to the "fork" requires putting the fish on its side, exposing gills to air, and defining the fork by spreading the tail. That takes handling time. BTW, the length of a fish from its nose to tip of tail does not change...unless your fishbox has some magical power.

    It's simple yukon. The guides want to measure to the fork because a 28" fish measured out to the tip of the tail is 25" at the "fork" (for example). This means their clients can retain another, larger fish per the 28" rule. A fish measured 28" to the tip means their clients can't retain another fish that day. Tricky. Again, the guides want more. The department didn't bite.
    .
    I think Doc and AKFG, covered this one enough.



    Quote Originally Posted by Grampyfishes View Post
    Of course the guides wanted more. They never get enough.




    Yukon, your continual "poor guide" song isn't sitting well with the public. And the more you post garbage like that, the more pizzed about the guides the public is getting.

    The bottom line is this, it has been claimed that guides bully and get what they want, I am pointing out that they don't. Guides wanted to help a local group of fishermen and you don't believe it. We can do no good in your eyes, period.

    I am tired of you bringing up my alleged "poor guide" song. It isn't true. We have restrictions and no other group does. I can live with that. You continue to tell me how bad I am and how bad guides are, I am continually defending myself and guides, you call it "a poor guide song".

    What you fail to recognize is that you continually sing the "poor non-guided angler song" and whine and cry when there are absolutely no restrictions on this usergroup. Poor non-guides can't fish when guides are on the river, same old, same old. Seems to me guides have to fight continued restrictions while the non-guide puts in proposals to restrict the guides while the guides have to sit there and take it.

  6. #6

    Default

    Yukon,

    Truth be told, I have no personal beef with you as seem like an honorable man. However, unregulated business is a bad idea no matter what the business is and I am not saying that is what you proclaim that we do.

    Greed will overtake the majority of us, and soon all that matters is the dollar. You don't have to look to far back to see this; need I point out the Pinto, the Explorer tire problem, the GM saddle tank problem, the lead paint from China on toys, the reverse engineering in the computer world by Bill Gates, the fact that Warehouser and the other loggers would have cut every single stinking tree in the PNW if they had their way, the bankrupt Mining Company's in N. Idaho, Montana, Colorada, and other places that made their millions, sold the company, and left the tax payers holding the bill for cleanup. This goes on and on, and no we are not going to trust the so called honorable guides on the kenai as they are in this business to make as much money, for the least amount of work, in the shortest amount of time, as humanly possible. I guess you don't get it - this is why you are under constant scrutiny.

    Most guides are fishing on the Kenai as it is a way to make a good deal of money. When that resource runs out they will move onto the next one, leaving everyone else with a river similar to many in the lower 48. Because of this, even if the few guides that really do care about the river make a proposal that makes sense, it is highly scrutinized by everyone. It is part of being a guide, and whether you like it or not, part of what comes from making a profit on living natural resouce like the Kenai.

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alaskafishinguides
    As I understand the changes, a fish between 20" and 28" doesn't count toward the annual limit (i.e. does not need to be recorded on the harvest record) but does count toward the daily limit.
    As amended, that only applies May 1 - June 30. 20" is the size limit July 1 - July 31. I don't believe the rule on daily bag limit or annual limit has changed.

    The point is that while a retained fish measuring 28 inches to the tip of the tail would require the client to tag it, that same fish measured to the fork would not. The guide's idea to measure to the fork would give them an opportunity to retain more fish over a wider size range.


    Quote Originally Posted by alaskafishinguides
    So a client, or anyone else for that matter would have to stop fishing out of a boat for the rest of the day after retaining an king larger than 20".
    Again, if a 20" fish (as measured to the tip of the tail) is now measured to the fork, that same fish would not cause the client to stop fishing, or cause him to tag the fish if he retained it.


    Quote Originally Posted by alaskafishinguide
    Likewise, I must respectfully disagree with your assessment regarding the overall length of a fish changing.
    Disagree all you want...the length of a fish doesn't change...until you take it to a taxidermist. The only thing that changes is how you measure it.


    Quote Originally Posted by alaskafishinguide
    When a fish is in the water the tail is typically fluked out (spread out), while out of the water the tail is contracted
    Hopefully you're measuring the fish in the water...right-side-up, gills up current covered in water, tip of tail up.

    Measuring fish out of the water, and to the fork, is generally used for research methods and stock assessment, such as those used by ADF&G. Most of that reason is for standardization with other studies and data.


    Quote Originally Posted by alakakafishinguide
    Geometrically, if you think of a triangle (as is the tail of a fish), an isoscolese triangle (that is one with two equal sides) with an acute apex is longer than one with an obtuse apex. That is what I am saying regarding the length of the fish... When the tail is obtuse (fluked) the fish will be shorter than when the tail is acute (contracted or what ever term would fit better here).
    Following your geometry, ask yourself what the fork of the tail does as the two sides of your isosceles triangle come closer together ("contracted")? Hint: Make a "peace sign" with your index and middle fingers. Move the two fingers together, watching the web between them.

  8. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphsician
    AKFG is correct.

    Fork length is a MUCH more reliable and reproducible measurement which is far easier to accurately obtain than the very subjective "total" length.
    Oh really...

    Per Study: Comparison of Standard Length, Fork Length, and Total Length for Measuring West Coast Marine Fishes:

    "This study suggests that there is no best way to measure fish. Proper technique and consistency is probably more important in producing reliable lengths than the method used."

    "Total length is commonly used for length regulations in both commercial and sportfishing on the west coast of the United States because no training is required to make the measurement, perhaps making it the most desirable measure."

    "Although fork length was the most reproducible method of measuring fish in our study, it had a high level of bias among readers."

    "There was very little difference in the average amount of time it took to measure each fish using the three different methods"

    "The results showed that mean total length, standard length, and fork length were very consistent between readers with little evidence of bias."

    "When selecting a method, the researcher should consider the trade-off between precision and bias and evaluate the consequences for the intended use of the data."


    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician
    If the tips of the tail are swept back, one obtains a greater length than when the tail is splayed out... and yes there can be a couple inches difference in a large fish. In contrast, the fork length does not change no matter how far the tail fin is fanned out or compressed.
    You better do the "peace-sign" test. Make a "peace sign" with your index and middle fingers. Move the two fingers together, watching the web between them.

    Also, to do the total length using standard practices...

    "Total length measures the length from the tip of the longest jaw or the end of the snout to the longest caudal lobe pushed together."


    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician
    That's why so many supposed "sealers" that are brought in to ADFG don't actually make the cut.
    How many "sealers" were brought to ADFG that didn't "make the cut"?

    Fish aren't measured wrong just because they are measured to the tip of the tail instead of the fork. They are measured wrong because our regulations do a very poor job of educating/showing fishermen how to do it properly. Most fishermen don't have the practice, training, education to do it properly. That's not the tip of the tail's fault.


    Quote Originally Posted by fishNphysician
    BTW, ADFG measures to the fork in all of their stock assessment work. (Actually they measure eye-fork length [eye to mid-fork of the tail] for greatest accuracy/reproducibility as well as to cancel out the kype-effect on mature males)
    You're talking research and stock assessment performed by educated, trained, and practiced professionals. They are collecting biological data and measuring many of their fish out of the water. I'm talking about a fisherman trying to follow a regulation, and measuring his fish in the water.

    "As the fish grow, total length and fork length are more commonly used for research and stock assessment purposes. Prior to 1990, total length was the conventional method for measuring groundfish species (i.e. rockfish, flatfish, sablefish, lingcod, and other species of roundfish) in California, while in both Oregon and Washington, researchers have used fork length. This created confusion among researchers using data from all three states. In 1991, California began using fork length to end the confusion. While it was not clear that fork length was a more precise method, it did offer the advantage of standardization (Erwin
    1)."

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,293

    Default

    Grampy, slow down. I am even getting alienated here, and I generally side with you.

    I think Yukon is all right. The guy does his best to explain his positions and ideas. I can't say I swallow it all, but he seems pretty honest to me. If he's a paid consultant I take that back!

    Yukon, to claim you are the ONLY restriced user group is forgetting the MOST restricted user group........the commercial fishermen.

    I agree with the above post that guides in general will be viewed with scepticism (sp?) as they are in the biz to make money. As such any proposal will be looked at very closely. To say that the MAJORITY of proposal by guides or guiding organizations are not for THEIR benifit is not very truthful or honest.

    Now to everyone that seems to have a problem with that???? I say why??? The process more or less works. Every user group from C and R fishermen (FnP) to dipnetters. (thewhop) to sport/meat fishers (me) to concerned citizens (Nerka) is looking out for what they think is best. Now sometimes it if for the greater good, sometimes it is for thier own benefit. I really don't have a problem with any of it. As long as things are done out in the open, and the process is followed, I think we'll be alright.

    Having said that there is also nothing wrong with tryng to make things better and believing your opinion is the correct one. In the end I'm one for the river. So b/c of that I think I understand Grampy very well. I just don't think taking out Any and all dislikes of guides on Yukon is very fair. He is one of the only ones willing to take the heat of these discussions. I am glad he does as I value his opinion.

    Have a good night.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    yukon, you aren't going to find sympathy or vindication from me or the public. The guides have pulled one too many punches, and they continue to leave a trail of destruction. Actions and track-records speak louder than words.

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    Too bad you didn't participate and know the truth...Maybe you should have been at the BOF meeting.
    You obviously don't know who I am. You have no idea how I participated, or what I know.

    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    I would be willing to bet that the guides would support it being open for locals only, not a big deal to us...We try and stand up for the locals and you find a way to rip on us, you are unbelieveable. WE WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO PLEASE YOU IN EVEN THE SMALLEST WAY.
    Save it. What happened to the locals and public over the 50 hp increase? The guides fought them. What happened when the locals and public wanted more drift boat days? The guide's fought them. What happens when the locals and public want guide numbers reduced? The guides fight them. How many other issues do you want me to list?

    Yukon, I am easily pleased. And I'll be pleased when I see you practice what you preach.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    But, wouldn't bait also help the non-guided angler? Their effort seems to drastically increase when bait is allowed.
    Who's talking about non-guided anglers? They didn't propose it. The guides did so they could take more advantage of the ER Kings. Are you really going to tell us the guides proposed it for the sake of the non-guided angler? Come on. The ER is just getting its feet back on the ground (in the big picture of things). We don't need to commit to a regulation for bait use just so guides can catch more fish easier.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    I think Doc and AKFG, covered this one enough.
    Better think again. Read my last post.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    it has been claimed that guides bully and get what they want, I am pointing out that they don't.
    Where do you want me to start?...with the 50 hp increase, hydrocarbons, erosion, drift boats, Bob Penney,.....

    Yukon, your attempts at vindication are futile. Actions speak louder than words. You can't erase your track-record.


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    We have restrictions and no other group does... Seems to me guides have to fight continued restrictions
    You profit financially from the River. No other user does. Your clients take and leave, at the expense of the River's resources, environment, and the community. Your commercial impact is currently unlimited. What in tarnation makes you think you should compare yourselves to "other" groups, and be exempt from tighter restrictions?!


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    while the non-guide puts in proposals to restrict the guides while the guides have to sit there and take it.
    The only thing the guides "sit there and take" is their money to the bank. It's the River that suffers. It's the locals, the public, and the community. Our kid's kids.

    Keep sing'n your song yukon, "Woe is Me, the Poor Guide".

  11. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Grumpyfishes, you win, I won't ever please you. I am done trying to reason with you, you can't admit the slightest good from guides, you will find fault in everything I say. Have a good night, DK.

    BTW, I just got off the phone with the GUIDE coordinator for the Wounder Warrior fishing day on the Kenai. I bet you will find a way guides are going to profit from donating their time in taking over 200 wounded warriors fishing. Go ahead, shoot away.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    AKbrownsfan, I don't know anything about yukon. And nothing I ever post on these issues is aimed at being personal.

    When I see a post by yukon I see a post by a Kenai River guide. I see someone who's a member of KRGA, KRSA, and Bob Penney's "economic engine run hard" clan. I see someone who utilizes the River for money. I see a lot of talk about caring, making sacrifices, etc., but no action. I don't see the person yukon, I see what his comments, thinking, and level of rationality and naivety represent. I don't contend the person yukon, I contend the issues and how yukon puts them in front of me.

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Yukon, the Wounded Warrior fishing day is a great thing. Kudos.

    However, I am dissapointed that you feel compelled to advertise that good deed in this thread, as a means to try and vidicate the public's view of guides, and to argue your case. The best kind of good deeds are those that are humble and heart-felt, not those advertised or used for alterior motives.

    This thread was about "For the Record, ER King Package". You started this thread, and you posted the issues of contention. Your motive, clearly evidenced in your initial post, was to vindicate and sympthize the guides. I didn't buy it, cause I've seen that approach for 30 years now. In fact I was offended. I'm further offended by your crusade to make me "admit the slightest good from guides". I didn't sign up for that in this thread. I will acknowledge the guides when I see something worth acknowledging. So now the going gets tough, and rather than stick to the issues and prove your case, you bail.

    I am not inhibiting you here yukon. You have every opportunity to make your case.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Grampy, I if I could I would take it off, too late to edit now. It was fresh in my mind, as I just had gotten off the phone with the coordinator. I was merely trying to show that we are not all bad as you seem to indicate, nothing more, nothing less. Guides do all kinds of things like that all the time and don't seek publicity, that is not why we do it. I am very hurt that you are insuinating that I have alterior motives by posting what I did, it is not true. It will be one of, if not the best, day on the water for me this year, whether we catch a fish or not, I am honored to participate. No motive, just saying how I feel.

    I've made my case and pointed out things and thoughts you do not want to believe, nothing more I can do..........I am going to let this thread die, others can take it if they want.

  15. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Yukon, when you start threads like this looking for guide sympathy...or crusade to vindicate the guides...or try to convince others that guides have been good for the River...or try to exclude yourself as a guide from what they do...or play naive to their actions, track-record, and path of destruction...or tell us how the guides have been wronged - I will be here to show you otherwise.

    Anytime you want to discuss the issues let me know.

  16. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,519

    Default Question for Yukon

    At the Board meeting guides pushed and received a fishing on Sunday in June for charity. They put this in at the last second and the Board did not explore it very much and passed it. However, what was left unsaid was that guides can get paid for doing this work. The charity can pay them. So they got to fish on a day when the public had guides off the river and they may receive money for it. However, they did not say they would fish without compensation, they did not say they would give up a day of money making in the rest of the week, they went after a guide restriction Sunday in June to complete with the private angler. How is that doing a good deed? It appears to a number of us to be a greedy move using charities to achieve that end. Please respond since you brought up the issue. This is what makes guides look bad. They say they are doing things for one reason but do not fully disclose all the facts on the issue or be honest about the issue.

  17. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,073

    Default

    Guides will not be recieving any money for doing the event. They do a couple events during the year, take a kid fishing, and a Veterens Fishing day on Sept.11, there has never been compensation, it has never been asked for, never has been mentioned and never will be, period.
    Nerka, I am very disappointed in you, this is how false rumors get spread, and you know it, just adding fuel to the fire, agian, very disappointed, I expect this from Grampyfishes, not you.
    I can't believe you even posted what you did.
    Last edited by yukon; 02-16-2008 at 10:54. Reason: Mispelled "grampyfishes" "grumpyfishes"

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Soldotna AK
    Posts
    506

    Thumbs down

    What the next things were going to here. This is absolutely ridicules. GUIDES just keep pushing locals off the river. Come on that is not charitie work, there is zero sacrifice, i would be ashamed to drive a boat with a sticker on it. Do i hate guides as a hole no. We have some very good ones here in town. Whoever come up with this June Sunday thang needs to repent. This is nuts.

  19. #19

    Default chuckle

    Yukon,

    Your reason for editing your last post is funny. I got it.

    I would image Nerka and others might have the impression that guides are paid for charity work b/c the classic is billed as a charity for the Kenai River and improving habitat. It is pretty common knowledge that guides are paid for that one.

    To keep unnecessary fuel off the fire, that event is not held on one of the non-guide Sunday. I'm glad to hear that the events the KRPGA sponsor are not conducted in the same manner.

  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    2,883

    Default

    Wait a minute.....I missed this one....

    Are you saying guides can now fish a Sunday in June, under the premise of "charity"?

    !! OMG !!

    What proposal was that?

    Yukon, was there a stipulation in that proposal that guides can not take payment? Or is that up to the guide and charity?

    Either way, isn't it a tax right-off benefit for the guides (money)? And either way, doesn't it put guides on the River on Sunday?


    Quote Originally Posted by yukon
    I expect this from Grampyfishes, not you.
    Can you explain that, or are you just sour grapes because I hit the nail on the head in your thread?

Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •