Guides, clients and competition for game.

[bizymocha]

I think the companion topic to the non-resident guide issue is how many guides does the State allow? Obviously you are dealing with a finite amount of land to hunt and "they" aren't making anymore anytime soon. So, is there a possibility that Alaska can have too many guides? Resident guides should get priority - not some fellow who guides and then goes back to Nebraska to live. I understand there are no "concessions" like in Canada so guides can "snipe from each others area". However I understand guides are legal in up to three Units to take clients. Are ethics the only thing which keeps guides from encroaching? If so, that can't go too far considering the value of some of these hunts. It could result in lowering the quality of a hunt experience for the client.
Such complicated topics!

[AlleninAlaska]

Too the best of my knowledge big game guiding is not under the Limited Entry System.

[martentrapper]

Biz, I'm getting the impression your a new guide and are not enjoying working within the normal free enterprise system.

[JDM]

Guide Use Areas...

Registered Guides must test for each Game Management Unit that they wish to guide in and receive a score of at least 75% on the test that includes things such as geography, game abundance/presence, location of nearest acute medical care facilities, state maintained runways/airports, land ownership/management, and a host of other things.
As of the last meeting of the Big Game Commercial Services Board, Guides are now required to provide proof( hunt contracts) that they have physically guided for a minimum of 60 days in the area [I]before[I] they are allowed to test for the area. This equates to working for another guide that is licensed for that area for a minimum of 60 as an assitant guide. The impications of this new ruling is that few Registered Guides will employ someone for 60 days if said employment simply serves to have another Regisered Guide hunting in the same area competing for the same resource.
As far as the three areas that a Registered Guide may have clients/hunters in...The guide must register annually for these areas...known as Guide Use Areas....These Guide Use areas are not the same as Game Management Areas...GMA's are divided up into many Guide Use areas...so in GMA 17 for instance, the Guide Use areas are 17-01, 17-02....etc. So a guide may hunt in three different GMA's using one Guide use area in each, and each Guide Use Area differs in square milage and space, some being rather large, some being relatively small.
On State owned land, a land use permit and base camp registration is necessary to operate within the state law, unless the base of operations is on private land. On Federal lands, there are concessions that are known as Exclusive Guide Use areas in which the operator is chosen based upon an application process and weighted scoring as well as bids.
Many Guides would like to go back to exclusive Guide Use areas on State owned land as was the case years age, for some of the reasons mentioned in the opening thread.
I have guided in each of the scenerio's mentioned above and have found the quality of the hunt far superior on the Exclusive Guide Use Federal Lands for obvious reasons...no other guides in the area...only the few resident hunters that may show up and thus far that number has been 0.
I can certianly see the advantages of Exclusive Guide Use areas on State land to those who might be lucky enough to receive them...but I really don't expect that to happen in the near future...could be suprised though.

[bizymocha]

Guides, clients and competition

JDM, Thanks for a great explanation on the present system. Clears up a lot of questions.

Martentrapper, No I'm not, but I wish I was born in another State! I'm 2500 miles away but absolutely value every chance I get to "go north".

I'm just trying to understand how the system works. Regardless of your residency, all outdoor users want a quality experience. Putting meat in the freezer and/or a trophy on the wall is a real bonus. I turned down 4 rams last years as they were marginal. This years' ram was a real trophy. I may just end it there and focus elsewhere.

[BRWNBR]

Land use is all well and good and permits and fees...but i'd bet at least 50 percent of the guides out there don't have land use permits for federal, state or private land. Most native corps won't police the hunters and the state certianly won't and in my experience BLM doesn't either. So feel free to think the state has a handle on it, but when reality drops in the truth will too....very few are actually legally guiding. i know in my area, i'm the only one with a land use permit, but i know of five other guides who freqent the area, i've never seen them but have talked with them.
i wish they stop in and check every guide camp for land use permits.

[BRWNBR]

Land use is all well and good and permits and fees...but i'd bet at least 50 percent of the guides out there don't have land use permits for federal, state or private land. Most native corps won't police the hunters and the state certianly won't and in my experience BLM doesn't either. So feel free to think the state has a handle on it, but when reality drops in the truth will too....very few are actually legally guiding. i know in my area, i'm the only one with a land use permit, but i know of five other guides who freqent the area, i've never seen them but have talked with them.
i wish they stop in and check every guide camp for land use permits.

[Michael Strahan]

Guide Use Areas

JDM had a pretty good explanation of the present situation. I believe our current guide board is moving toward restricting how easy it is to become a guide in Alaska. We already have too many guides, and the current standards have allowed many incompetent folks to obtain a license. Somehow we have to find a way to stop this.

I also agree that land use permits are a sore spot. I don't know whether there are guides who don't get the permits, but it wouldn't surprise me. Especially after hearing and seeing what some of them are doing in violation of the law; harassing other hunters out of "their" area, aerial spotting of game, same-day airborne hunting, etc. We need to raise the standard. Regrettably, with some of these folks the only way to do that is with more restrictive laws and better enforcement. They're certainly not going to do it themselves. None of that takes away from the many conscientious, hard-working, law-abiding guides we have. But it's often the bad apples that give the whole group a bad taste in the mind of the public or even with other hunters who are not intimately acquainted with the workings of the guide system in Alaska.

For what it's worth, I have a much bigger issue with incompetent guides than I do with non-resident guides. Give me a guy who knows his stuff and I'll look at that before checking his address every time.

-Mike

[CuriousOne]

Land Use Permits

A little bit off the subject but----I think all would be suprised how many guides (good and bad) that do not have land use permits as required by the state. If one looks up the DNR regulations it states: commercial businesses that have quests overnight on state land have to have a permit. Even floating facilities (boats) that use submerged land (within 3 miles of mean high tide)! However, looking for the DNR permits for these businesses, there are very very few that actually have the land permit for the state! There are several that don't even register for the day use permit. They might have the Forest Service permit but not the state permit. Most use the excuse, I move every 7 days so I don't need the permit. However the actual regulations state: "this permit is required of any commercial recreation business planning to use. . . (ii) a floating facility for any length of time on tide/submerged lands." Now with the new "5000 acres of upland" approval needed to use the state coastal land, it is hopeful that these guides will be forced to get the state land use permit that is required! Good/bad/resident/non-resident, there are guides that "get away" with things and some that do not. In the long run, it just ends up costing the state!