Earl
|
|
Check out this article by Dennis Anderson in today's Star Tribune.
http://www.startribune.com/sports/outdoors/70586622.html?elr=KArks:DCiU1PciUoaEYY_4PcUU
I have made a point over the past couple of years to stay away from these on-line pissing matches, but this one really has my blood up. Anderson is right on in his opinion in the article. I know of several long time local guides who have decided to pack it in because of the Coast Guard's increased enforcement. That ain't right and all you folks defending the Coast Guard are wrong.
These guides aren't in the business to make a lot of money but it is a business and thier livelyhood. The time and money involved for them to go through this ridiculous excercise just pushes them over the edge financially.
Safety my @ss. In this day of higher taxes and service cutbacks from the government, for them to crack down on some guide on the St. Croix or Lake Vermillion is a joke and Anderson is right by saying that is more about budgets and protecting turf. Maybe if they were cracking down on ships dumping ballast water loaded with exotic species in the great lakes I would have more patience for something like this, but they aren't and I don't.
Some of these guides that are getting out of the business have been here for years and provide a great service. We all lose by Coast Guard's action on this issue. I intend to contact my elected representatives and inform them about the issue and the impact to these folks.
|
Briank
|
|
Thanks Earl.
Last week was the first time a prospective client asked me if I was licensed by the Coast Guard.
I have posts like this to thank. 
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
trophy19
|
|
Wow,
I thought this ony applied to commercially navigable rivers and Lake Superior in MN. If the requirement is imposed on BWCA canoe guides, what a crock of Washington. 
Really makes "Let's help small businesses with more incentive money...." statements that much less believable.
Pete
--------------------
As the good book says: " Lazy is the man that can't find his wife a second job."
|
Briank
|
|
Mr Anderson takes some "liberties" in making his one sided points. But that's his job. 
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Briank
|
|
Quote:
I intend to contact my elected representatives and inform them about the issue and the impact to these folks.
Almost forgot! Please post the info of your elected representatives here. Others may want to contact them.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Earl
|
|
Brian K,
Do you really believe you, your clients or anyone else for that matter needs the coast guard and their "six pack" to protect them on top of all the enforcement of boating saftey provided by the state DNR and county sherrif patrols on the waters in question? Boating saftey on guide boats in relatively small waters such as the upper mississippi and inland lakes is a non issue in my book and well covered by local jurisdictions. If this is the mission of the Coast Guard, then who needs it.
Its a useless burden on these people's busineses, and a waste of taxpayer dollars for a redundant layer enforcement.
Its good to see you are making hay off of it though. I just happen to think it is totally bogus.
|
Jon Jordan
|
|
Earl,
Couple questions for ya.
Lets say we toss out the 6-pack license requirement.
Do you think full time professional guides should be licensed as a business by the state? Similar to how full time (professional) babysitters are? (I chose babysitters as an example. They are good at what they do and do not require any formal training.)
Do you think they should be required to report their income and pay taxes on a quarterly basis like every other licensed business in the state is required to do?
Do you think they should be insured like any other business?
Should there be a peer review periodically? If they suck at what they do and everyone knows it, shouldn’t the state or thier peers do something to stop them?
-J.
|
Chubby
|
|
I am appalled by the fact that Mr Anderson considers himself a journalist when he has not even done the most basic of fact checking for his articles/posts. It is shoddy and negligent work on his part at best.
He should be ashamed of himself pushing the misguided veiwpoint that this is some sort of new law that is being pushed upon some poor unfortunate guides to cause them difficulties.
To all the wannabee guides who are whining about this, DEAL WITH IT!!
This has been the law for approx. 40 yrs, you have been getting a free ride until now. DEAL WITH IT!!
It will not be going away. DEAL WITH IT!!
If you are an unlicensed guide on Federal waters you are uninsured. You are at risk for losing everything that you own. DEAL WITH IT!!
You do not need to take a class, you can self study for the test. DEAL WITH IT!!
Your total cost for your license over ten years will be about $75.00 a year. DEAL WITH IT!!
If you feel that this expense will force you out of business then you are a lousy business person and you should go away. DEAL WITH IT!!
Every guide who has gotten his license looks at those of you who are complaining the loudest as immature cry babies. DEAL WITH IT!!
Give us all break and DEAL WITH IT!!
|
Briank
|
|
Everyone can and does have their own opinion Earl.
The only people making a stink about this are non licensed guides and maybe a few of their close friends. That's cool. They will be the ones who get this law changed so I don't have to be in a random drug test program, have a extensive physical, eye exam, hearing test, background check every five years and keep up on these laws.
The guides that took the time and money to follow the law only have one concern...that they aren't suspected of being the snitch that turned in law breakers. Kind of reminds me of the TIP program where poachers are stealing from the public and are turned in. Only this is backwards.
The argument that it costs too much is odd. I don't guide as often as many guides and it averages out to less than $4. per trip for all the fees. BTW what the Coast Guard collects is not a money maker. Most of the $1000. ($700ish) that Mr Anderson speaks of is the prep classes and there are some that self study. Prep classes are not mandatory.
I would much rather argue the point that a Class V PFD worn is much more safe than any Class I PFD that's hanging on a chair.
I'm not sure how one possible client asking about a license can be construed into "making hay". But again, everyone is entitled to their own opinion I guess.
The bottom line to me is the fact that anyone that should guide, can get a license in a very short time frame.
In the mean time, I'm hoping folks that don't like this law will hurry up and get it changed.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Briank
|
|
Chubby, I know it's not your intent, but your post cracked me up. 
Good points.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Chubby
|
|
I am appalled at Mr. Anderson's ignorance on this subject and had to send him the following a few minutes ago. I also plan on contacting the editor as well.
Mr. Anderson,
I find it appalling that you as a journalist have written several stories on this issue and have seemingly failed to to do the most basic of research/fact checking on this issue. There is simply no requirement for anyone to take a class for the USCG license test.
You also fail to mention that by operating outside of the law these guides have no insurance in effect to protect themselves or their clients.
To the tens of thousands of properly licensed professional this requirement is simply no big deal. You do both them and the USCG a great disservice with your poorly researched and one-sided brand of yellow journalism.
The job of the professional mariner carries with it great deal of responsibility as well as pride. The job of the professional journalist also carries with it a great deal of responsibility. It appears that you have forgotten this as well as the most basic of journalistic ethics.
You owe it to the public to research this issue properly and print an accurate and objective article rather then your uninformed one-sided viewpoint.
|
Earl
|
|
Jon j,
Your questions insinuate that by not having their coast guard license these other guides also don't have insurance or pay taxes. I don't know if this is true or not.
I have no problem requireing a guide to be licensed and paying a nominal fee for it. They should be insured as well.
I assume you actually are talking about daycare providers and not the 16 year old neighbor I pay to baby sit my kids. Of course proffesional daycare providers should be licensed and regulated (many are not and I would not take my kids there). The 16 year old baby sitter should not. There is a big difference in my book.
With all due respect to fishing guides, their responsiblity to their clientele does not approach that of a daycare provider. If the daycare provider doesn't do their job, a child who can't take care of himself is at risk. If the guide does a poor job, you don't catch fish. Boating safety enforcement is more than covered in every area I am on the water by the DNR and Sherrif dept. If you don't catch fish, I do not want the state or the coast guard to do anything about it.
I think all people earning an income and using services provided by government should pay taxes including fishing guides. And I really don't want those taxes to go to uneeded and redundant enforment measures. It seems they are only needed by a few fishing guides who want see enforcement in order to eliminate some of their competition.
|
Chubby
|
|
Earl,
If a guide is operating on any federal navigable water he needs to have the USCG license in order to be insurable. No license, no insurance, no loophole!
|
Rootski
|
|
I've watched this debate roar back and forth a few times now, and a couple of things occur to me. First, it's the law. Whether or not you or me or somebody else thinks it's stupid, it's still the law. You don't like this law? Then get it changed. In the meantime, it's the law. Secondly, $1000 sounds like a lot of money but I can't think of any small business that doesn't have that kind of expense to deal with. It's a cost of doing business. Nobody has zero overhead.
Why do LOCAL guides need to be regulated by a FEDERAL agency? Couldn't the rules be applied by the Minnesota DNR, DOT, or some other state agency? At least a state official would know where Winnie or Vermillion is on the map. It seems to me that there must be half a dozen different units of government all dictating safety rules on the water....life jackets, fire extinguishers, no wake zones, etc.
Good thing I suck at catching Walleyes, I don't think I could handle being a guide 
Rootski
--------------------
You are a fluke of the Universe. You have no right to be here, and whether you can hear it or not the Universe is laughing behind your back.
|
Jesse Krook
|
|
Post deleted by jjkrooked
--------------------
Everts Fishing Resort
|
Jesse Krook
|
|
Plain and simple break down of the C.G. License (IMO) :
1) You dont get onto an airplane that does not have a licensed pilot and insured.
2) you dont get into a taxi cab or limo that does not have a licensed driver and insured
3) (most) Do not drive a car with out a license and insurance
4) you do not get onto a cruise ship that does not have a licensed captain and insurance
5) you dont get into a guide's boat thats not licensed or insured
Do you see the pattern?
Absolutely no reason for ANYONE to be upset about this at all. It just seems to make sense to me.
The C.G. License might be a bit extensive on some of thier criteria but apparently they feel the need for it.
--------------------
Everts Fishing Resort
|
Greg R
|
|
Good points to be made by both sides. Too much government or being safe and having all the training and safety equipment for your clients while on the water. Like it or not I have been in class for the last 2 weeks with several other local guides getting all my required testing and classes done now. Why? It's the law. Like it or not. Greg Rudisill walleyeadventures.com see U on the water LEGALLY!
|
Briank
|
|
Congrats Greg!
Please post the graduating class photo on Ido when you're finished.
Are you taking your classes with Ted or Gary?
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Greg R
|
|
BK, Gary is instructing the class and does a GREAT job on all the topics. Gotta study now, the test is Sunday am. Greg
|
Briank
|
|
Free Inspections FYI<<
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
shale
|
|
My perception is that that the newly enforced Coast Guard OUPV license requirement in this area is driven from revenue and nothing else. If anyone can provide a true life example of why existing guides in our area require regulation, please post it.
======================
My Perceptons:
- The Coast Guard probably ran a project to look for new revenue streams and the license showed up as an opportunity for additional revenue.
- If uncertified guides were a high risk, the Coast Guard (or some other Govt. agency) would have made it a priority when their budgets were stable and when they had staff to manage/enforce it.
Boat Inspections:
- The inspections are purely a marketing tactic for the CG to help sell the new license revenue.
- If inspections were a worthwhile task, the Coast Guard would measure them to show a benefit. No metrics have been published.
- There seems to be little or no real value in the inspections. Real law enforcement doesn't recognize the inspections or the "Coast Guard Inspection" stickers.
The Certification:
- This should be a consumer decision. Let the consumer decide if he wants to hire a guide that is OUPV certified. If there is a real benefit to the certification, the consumer should pay a bit more for a certified guide.
Summary:
Like other things in the economy, the govt is getting involved and adding lots of overhead and waste to things they should let the consumer drive.
--------------------
Dude
|
Briank
|
|
Hey Scott,
Quote:
If anyone can provide a true life example of why existing guides in our area require regulation, please post it.
I would suggest because it was the law before the guides were guides?
Here's the link to the laws that Congress passed for the USCG to enforce. Way too much for me to sort through.
http://law.justia.com/us/cfr/title46.html
When I paid for my license, the amount actually paid to the Coast Guard was about $125. and included the certificate, the background check (which is now done by Homeland Security I believe) and a line by line check over of all my paperwork sent in (believe me, they check it over as I had a number of forms sent back). The rest of the fees were paid to clinics for the physical exams, hearing, eyes, drug testing ect and the OUPV course that was optional ($695). I'm not sure the $125. would be called a cash cow.
IF I were in charge of the CG and wanted to create some cash, I would instruct the Enforcement Division to get their butt out on the water and start checking and writing tickets. With a potential of a $10,000 per day of guiding fine, that beats the heck out of a $125. per 5 year license fee.
Of course I'm speculating.
Quote:
Real law enforcement doesn't recognize the inspections or the "Coast Guard Inspection" stickers.
I define "real law enforcement" as someone who has a badge, a gun and can board my boat. A person that could under the right circumstances actually seize my boat. I'll go out on a limb here and say that the CG is real enforcement.
I was just talking with a friend about this the other day. While the sheriff can't write a ticket for over limits of fish, they can hold an angler until the DNR arrives. I wonder if this will end up the same way. Certainly enough coverage on line and through other media outlets. Heck, my mother asked me about it today!
As far as adding overhead, just doing the plain old fashion math should cross that off a persons list unless they guide just a few weekends per year. As I stated before, in my case it's about $4. per trip. In fact, my commercial insurance costs more per trip than what I have to do to obey the law.
To the folks that are guiding with State Farm or any of the other "regular" insurance companies...call your insurance company and ask them if you or your boat are covered while guiding or fishing a tourney. Please don't take my word for it. My insurance tripled with commercial insurance, but that's the price I have to pay.
For the record, I don't agree with a number of rules/laws they are enforcing. In our class it was easy for us and many of us did point out some seemingly useless points we needed to know to pass the tests most directed toward large waters. Our instructor reminded us a number of times of the reason we were there. To learn the rules to pass the test. Arguing with him was like arguing with a brick wall. He couldn't change the laws or even justify them.
It is what it is....until someone changes it.
Ps ask me about "set and drift" or the class I pfd's sometime.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Briank
|
|
Ps Trophy19...
Quote:
If the requirement is imposed on BWCA canoe guides, what a crock of Washington.
Canoes guides are not required to have an OUPV license.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
shale
|
|
Anyone,
I'm looking for any example where an area guide (miss, croix, vermillion, non-great lakes) was involved in an incident that could have been prevented with the Coast Guard OUPV license. Names don't need to be included.
If specific examples can't be provided, this license requirement appears to be a boondoggle.
--------------------
Dude
|
Briank
|
|
Quote:
If specific examples can't be provided, this license requirement appears to be a boondoggle.
boon⋅dog⋅gle
1. An unnecessary or wasteful project or activity.
2. A braided leather cord worn as a decoration especially by Boy Scouts.
3. A cord of braided leather, fabric, or plastic strips made by a child as a project to keep busy.
Just had to check the meaning. I'm guessing you mean #1.
Since it's the law, I'm not sure this fits....whether there were accidents involving guides or not.
What I don't understand is why very well respected leaders of the fishing community are so openly pushing back on this law?
What is a proven fact is with more safety instruction there are less accident and deaths nationwide. That alone one would think would be a driving force for the free inspections and taking the oupv course.
In my opinion of course.
But then again, I've been working to change the bullhead length law for 4 years now. I complain about that law too.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
SteveF
|
|
Does a USCG license make someone a better guide? I think not, The feds always think they have to protect us from ourselves.
If you hire a guide, ask to see his/her pfd's. Ask for references..... We don't need anymore law enforcement oversight on the St. Croix. Washington county, St croix county. both DNRS.....
Chubby-Deal with this
|
Briank
|
|
That is one of the problems Steve.
The license (which happens to be issued by the CG) has nothing to do with catching fish or guiding. The Rules of the Road will not tell a person what color or size a rap to use.
None of the above agency's look at safety of the clients of a commercial vessle. They look for safety equipment that all boaters need by law.
The CG checks the background, physical health and for drug use and that a person is capable of safely boating with paying customers, be it fishing or a water taxi.
I think people assume the above. The only way to know for sure is to ask to see the license.
It's going to be an interesting year from Lake Texoma, to the Columbia River to Lake Vermillion in 2010.
BTW I don't know all the guides on the St. Croix, but the ones I know are outstanding fishing guides...licensed or not.
--------------------
Briank's Trophy Catfishing and Sturgeon Adventures
Photo's From the 2009 Season<<
|
Suzuki
|
|
--------------------
Mike
|
shale
|
|
Stillwater Gazette Headlines 12/03/09
======================================
http://www.stillwatergazette.com/articles/2009/12/03/headlines/832le3christmastrees.txt
This is another example of the government getting involved in a frivolous project with no clear benefit or measurable target for improvement.
Your tax paid stimulus money at work adding burden to entrepreneurs and increasing cost for customers.
--------------------
Dude
|
Earl
|
|
Hey Chubby - Here is some more "Yellow Journalism". Enjoy.
http://www.twincities.com/sports/ci_14034689?nclick_check=1
|
pdl
|
|
Coast guard slipped up this season big time on Lake St. Croix, failing to fix/replace flashing lites at Bayport and
Afton state park area. A green buoy was in the wrong place for quite a while at Catfish bar in spring. Would like to see them perform at least at minimum tehcnical level before they begin throwing new laws at us. Washington reps are you paying attention?
--------------------
"Quando omni flunkus moritati"
|
BigPikeMike
|
|
What I don't understand is why very well respected leaders of the fishing community are so openly pushing back on this law?
It's pretty simple Brian, it's a ridiculous change in enforcement that has caused hardship for many, not just the fishing community we happen to be a part of.
I for one, would like to know why? Other than the standard "it's the law" & "a safety issue". There was some impetus for the CG resurrecting this dinosaur and they OWE us an explanation, although I suspect Shale's comments are about right on. Whoever made this decision should stand up and justify it to all, seriously.
To those have already have yours, good for you. but do not for one second sit behind the computer and tell us that it's not at this point, a reason for you to toot your own horn to try to point out the inadequacies of the other "unlicensed hacks" and try to drum up more business. Honestly it makes you folks look like the culprit to many here. Brian K, we all know you work for IDO and every post you air has your guide info. So it behooves you to continue this thread. And I do have to ask this, please forgive me but remind us how long you operated "sans license" and where by the way did that thread pointing that out disappear to? funny it just went away.
JJ, I don't know you personally but I'm sure we cross paths weekly on the river. Let me ask you this regarding your post about "plain and simple breakdown". The license requirements for getting a drivers license in MN or WI for example are 1/1000th of the cost and complexity of this license. There is FAR more responsibility operating a 2000lb vehicle on our roadways, fraught with many other moving 2000-10,000 high speed vehicles, not to mention snow, cell phones, distracted drivers, deer etc etc. So we have 16 to 80 year olds driving, oh sure they have a license but do you consider them all safe? I doubt it. Having the license simply makes you compliant, no more no less.
As far as insurance goes: I DO buy guide insurance, but because I think it's a prudent thing to do, not because I am being mandated to. You can buy insurance & not be licensed. I do have a WI non-res guide license, 100.00/year. This is for my Fly Fish Guiding and the occasional foray into WI waters. I have an LLC in the state of MN, operate my business like any other small business owner.
I love the cost breakdowns. "it only cost's 4.00 per trip". BUT the fact of the matter is it's money out of pocket, I cannot pay the CG 4.00 per trip and expect them to accept that. It's legitimate money, yes it's overhead as all business' have. I for one did not have it in my business plan and do not feel as though I can justify a raise in my rates to cover this expense, roughly 10% of my gross for the number of trips I do on the river. An additional 10% tax is how it can and should be viewed. Don't forget all the other cost's too (equipment, maintenance, lunches etc etc) not to mention the value of my time on the water.
Jon J, your quotes were good and I see some reason in you on this issue. regarding your last point of peer reviews, look at it this way. it's a very rare situation where someone can suck horribly at their job and do it for any length of time without the consumer in this case(the peers) deciding your fate for you. Not everyone who's a terrific angler can be a great guide. It takes way more than just the ability to fish.
This does not just effect us small group of guides. I've had a number of clients call and ask whether or not this will change our plans for fishing next summer or if they have to go somewhere else. It's bad for local economy, takes money out of the pockets and food off the table for everyone involved in the revenue stream. it concerns far more than just guides and "friends of guides".
Safety my [censored]. Why can't you guys see the harbor through the fog here?
So in light of the fact I broke my silence, I've decided I needed to take it one step further. I created an on-line petition in the form of a blog, to gain signatures and momentum against this action (which by the way already seems to be happening).
See www.savetheguides.blogspot.com
moderators, brian K please some courtesy and leave this weblink up. it's not an ad for anyone business.
BigPikeMike Thomas
|
Jesse Krook
|
|
Quote:
JJ, I don't know you personally but I'm sure we cross paths weekly on the river. Let me ask you this regarding your post about "plain and simple breakdown". The license requirements for getting a drivers license in MN or WI for example are 1/1000th of the cost and complexity of this license. There is FAR more responsibility operating a 2000lb vehicle on our roadways, fraught with many other moving 2000-10,000 high speed vehicles, not to mention snow, cell phones, distracted drivers, deer etc etc. So we have 16 to 80 year olds driving, oh sure they have a license but do you consider them all safe? I doubt it. Having the license simply makes you compliant, no more no less.
If those 16-80 year olds were for hire I would expect them to abide by the laws and be licensed and pay the fees to be for hire.
Mike it appears that you have been a member here at IDO for quite some time along with many others that are in complete shock and disbelief that the Coast Guard is just now enforcing the law. It's very funny to me that you members that have been here for many years act like this is something new when many posts and threads were made about this "not new law" years ago, some took heed to the warning and obtained the required license rite away such as James, Dustin, BK, Jarred F., Turk and a few others while the rest of you guides just sat back and ignored it. So thinking that you could ignore the law maybe the CG chose to ignore it as well until recent events and accidents that provoked them to enforce it. A persons life is so much more than the cost of the license. Do you know CPR? Do you know how to properly rescue and save someone that has or is drowning? I think that you guides that are upset about this should raise as much of a stink as you can, call your congress men and women, send some letters to the governer, get a lawyer envolved cause you know what the end result will be? My guess is that the state will see much needed profit in this and you are looking at doubling your cost of what it is now and more than likely have to be licensed by the state to guide on any and all waters. The bottom line here is that this law is NOT new and for those of you that have been here for 5+ years know that. So all of the sudden your going to be upset about something that has been a law and talked about for many years? No one is to blame except yourselves for ignoring the warning that was clearly posted here years ago. If you dont want to get the license but continue guiding I am fine with that and really dont care as I wont be the one hiring you nor paying your fines and on that note I believe the license is 1/1000 cheaper than the fine. If you were not a guide what would your take be on this? try looking at it from the other side of the fence, if you were going to take your family out for a guide trip wouldnt you want that guide to be licensed by the CG , compliant with all local and federal laws and the boat to be safety approved? I know I would. For the amount of money a guide gets I would expect alot including them to be licensed, know CPR and how to rescue someone that at any given time could be thrown from the boat due to waves, dead heads, or what have you. It just baffles me that so many are so one sided on this and dont care to look at it from outside of the box. If I were to guide I would be proud to say I am an approved Captain licensed by the United States Coast Guard not just some fly by night guide who happened to stumble upon a honey hole and decided to become a guide, thats worth a $1000 bucks alone.
Now I agree 100% and have stated this here or in another thread that I do believe that the requirements and fees may be and probably are a bit extensive but it is what it is. What can you do about it? What's a solution? How are you going to go about getting it changed? running a muck on some web-sites isnt going to get the job done. The reallity of the situation looks just and a simple solution is available plain and simple it's the law and until the guides that are against this law rally enough troops and get the law changed your just going to have to abide by the law.
P.S. When you get enough people rallied together and take it to congress let me know as I will support the guides but as I stated before think about the end result and what the out come of raising a stink will be, the state is always looking for new ideas to make a buck or 2 and I bet they like it even more when they dont have to pay somebody to think of a way for them
|
BigPikeMike
|
|
Well. Your right, I have been here for a while and I'm sure in looking over my history you also discovered I keep a pretty low profile and quite frankly don't pay a whole lot of attention to the issues often raised here. Lets say I didn't know the law was in effect, the only way (outside of chatrooms like this) to find out would be to call the CG. I asked a WI C.O. a couple years back if I needed any other coverage and he said no, my WI license was good to go. SO this information was not as readily available to the general public or other enforcement agencies as you think, but because you participate in this forum, you were informed on the issue.
Let me restate this. I'm not against the idea of having a license, not in the least bit. but rather a license that is appropriate for inland waterways and not geared towards coastal fisheries. it's equivalent of a commercial pilots license to drive a moped.
As for me personally, since you've asked.
My business is legit. I have an LLC with the state of MN. This separates my business entity from my personal entity.
I take an advanced first responders training (wilderness first responders) because it's smart and because it makes my insurance cheaper. never had a client ask, but I feel better knowing it's there.
I have SPECIFIC insurance for my guide business, this year my clients will also have to sign a liability waiver, which is also smart and although not binding, adds to my level of protection.
I buy a WI non-res guide license, which I need for the majority of my work on the trout streams. it cost's me an additional 100.00 per year. It also allows me to guide on inland waters from my boat.
I'm self employed, so I have no company sponsored health insurance, 401k or other perks that non "employed" folks have. I chose this route and accept the fact that for the opportunity to live the way I like, it will cost me a little more and I'll make a little less. now if the CG wants to TWIC me, random drug test me and follow my every move, I no longer consider myself self employed and would like a paycheck each month, at that point I consider myself an employee of the federal govt.
Debate is healthy and I don't in the least bit consider this or any other posts a personal attack, nor will i attack anyone's character here. This IS how change happens and while we can't and don't always agree on the issue, it's important to keep the debate alive so that more people can be informed and make up their own minds.
real good then.
|
BigPikeMike
|
|
And just for the record.
I know of NO Guides who are getting rich doing what we do. JJ stated "for the money guides get I'd expect.....". Reminder: I get to guide about 2/3 of the 12 month year.
I charge 330.00 for a full day, 8-10 hours.
My best estimate is it cost's me 75.00 (launch fees, bait, lunches etc etc)just to drop the boat in the water for a day. that comes out of my pocket and cuts my rates down to 255.00 per day. on a 10 hour day, I'm making 25 bucks an hour. Not exactly getting rich on my work. I augment my income by working as a remodeling contractor in the off season. Another whole set of license, insurance etc etc.
I charge what I charge because I have years & years of experience, the right equipment, what I consider to be the right approach to my work. i love it and am truly humbled that people pay me good money to take them fishing. Lets ask this, you have 20 plus years experience at your line of work, would you work for 25/hour and then just sit back while your asked to either charge more or make less? Does your employer just randomly yank money from your pocket. I don't think so.
I do see the view from your side, I'm not blind to the concerns of my clients or the general public. but the "dream job" is just a job and not a cash cow by any means.
BigPikeMike
|
PierBridge
|
|
Quote:
The only people making a stink about this are non licensed guides and maybe a few of their close friends.
That couldn't be father from the truth or reality.
No disrespect intended but it sounds like Dennis Anderson may not be the only one using propaganda here..
I hope they make it a bit more of a reasonable endeavor to get licensed versus the absurd, archaic criteria they have in place right now.
|
Coast Guard vs. Guides - Part II
