What are your thoughts on this article on guides in the Brainerd Dispatch?

[JP Z]

Read this in the Sunday paper and it kind of stuck in my mind. So I figured I would get some other insite on it. I also posted it in the Brainerd Forum. But then it occured to me that it spans the entire state, not just the Brainerd Lakes.

THE OTHER SIDE OF GUIDING
By VINCE MEYER
Outdoors Editor
Fishing guides are important goodwill ambassadors. For many vacationers a guide is their first acquaintance with a local, so the exchange between guide and customer is important for reasons other than the business at hand.
Public relations aside, other aspects of guiding aren't as apparent. Some people loath the guiding business for several reasons.

For starters, guiding is the only "for profit" utilization of a natural resource that's not regulated by the government. To cut firewood in a state forest you need a permit. To trap minnows in public waters you need a permit. But anybody with a boat can be a fishing guide and sell the fish he catches to paying customers.

Want to be a fishing guide? Hang a sign in your truck window. There, you're a fishing guide.

In parts of Canada guides aren't allowed to fish with their customers. Not so in Minnesota. It's a safe bet that on many guided fishing trips around Brainerd it's the guide who does most of the catching.

How many fish do guides kill each year? People hire guides to help them catch fish. People who catch fish like to eat fish. If all the people who hire guides rented a boat and fished themselves, a lot fewer fish would be caught and killed.

"I felt like a mercenary soldier," said the guide, who asked to remain anonymous. "I couldn't justify killing all those fish for profit."
ANONYMOUS FISHING GUIDE

At least one former Nisswa guide once killed 2,600 walleyes in a year. Not all guides kill that many, but even if every local guide -- and they number around 50 -- killed half that many each year it still would total 65,000 walleyes killed. Now multiply that number by all the guides in Minnesota. Granted, guides don't spend every hour on the water fishing for walleyes. But no matter which species is caught and kept, there's no disputing that without guides a lot fewer fish would go under the knife.

Perhaps none of the above is of great concern. Fish are a renewable resource. Walleye populations in Minnesota lakes are doing well. In some lakes they're at all-time highs, thanks to stocking and an ever-growing catch-and-release ethic.

Yet at least one area guide has said goodbye to his last customer. The number of fish he killed each year nagged on his conscience.

"I felt like a mercenary soldier," said the guide, who asked to remain anonymous. "I couldn't justify killing all those fish for profit. An average guide kills more fish than 100 fishermen put together. Is that fair? Shouldn't the guide make a greater contribution to the resource than the average fisherman?"

He offered recommendations that he said would help regulate the industry, including:

* Require guides to buy a special license.

* Set a seasonal limit on how many fish a guide can kill. Issue tags and require the guide to tag each fish he keeps. When his tags are gone that guide cannot keep any more fish that year.

* Limit the number of guides per county based on the acres of fishable waters, say one guide per 10,000 acres. Limit each guide to a specific lake or group of lakes. And no guiding on lakes smaller than 1,000 acres.

* Require a guide's boat to display a decal or other identification that would allow the public to identify his boat.

Most guides, I suspect, wouldn't object to buying a special license or tagging the fish they keep, but most probably wouldn't want to be limited to a single group of lakes or make their boats identifiable as guide boats. If you were the guide that had exclusive access to a lake where the bite was hot you would get all the business while your competitors stood on shore. It would lead to a hierarchy among guides ("Who's next in seniority for Gull Lake?") and ill feelings that most guides wish to avoid.

Identifying guide boats also wouldn't fly. Imagine the crowds a guide would draw if everybody knew he was guiding? On Mille Lacs when a launch boat drops its anchor a half-dozen satellite boats suddenly are hovering within casting distance.

Yet the former guide said that if some combination of the above suggestions was enforced it would improve public perception of guides and their business.

"When a lake turns on," the former guide said, "the next day every guide in the county knows about it and hits that lake. By the time the average working man gets there the bite is gone, the schools destroyed. That doesn't engender good feelings. I've heard of numerous times when the tires of a guide's rig were slashed while he was parked at a public access."

To paint a portrait of guides as unconscionable fish slayers wouldn't be accurate. Many preach to their customers the virtues of catch-and-release. Some, such as Royal Karels, who's been guiding since 1948, guided in the "meat hog" days and now have swung almost 180 degrees the other way.

"I don't just throw a fish in the livewell without discussing it with the customer," Karels said. "If people say they want a meal I ask, 'How many will it take?' "

Karels said his customers release 90 percent of the bass they catch. Even walleyes are being released at a much higher rate. But he recognizes and accepts that customers will always keep some fish.

"I can't tell the guy from Iowa who comes up here with his grandkid that they can't have some fish for lunch," Karels said. "We all have to compensate for that. But the convention groups that used to come in and catch a bunch of fish and then leave them in the resort freezer because they were going on to San Diego, well, we've managed to get away from that."

As for being required to buy a special guide's license, Karels said, "I wouldn't object to that, but I'm not sure how you would do it. I also would support catch-and-release only lakes for bass in this area."

Karels said he isn't concerned about walleyes because DNR stocking maintains the population. But he's noticed changes in how people harvest walleyes.

"Used to be you never kept a walleye until it was a solid 2 pounds or so," Karels said. "Now people keep 13- and 14- inchers. We never would have kept anything that small in the old days. Our walleye fishing has become like the trout program; stock 'em in, take 'em out."

Butch Blasing of Walleyedan's Guide Service said he encourages his customers to release all walleyes over 20 inches.

"When a walleye reaches that size," Blasing said, "the hard part of its life is over. Now it's reaching prime breeding size and should be saved."

Guides know their livelihood depends on quality fishing. To maintain that quality in the face of modern fishing pressure is a challenge on par with finding fish for the paying customer.

------------------
Tight Lines,
JP Z

[Valv]

I strongly disagree with all aspects.
Sounds like another attempt for PETA friends to boycott more of our sports, activities, and businesses.
Calling guides "Mercenaries" is absurd in my opinion. How would you call a rancher that raises beef cattle ? Barbarian ???? How about a pig farmer ? Attila ???
The number of fish harvested from private individuals exceeds levels known to anybody.
I would concentrate A LOT more into educating people not to take more than what they need.
I think this is a typical Media stunt to get attention and responses from masses, not an actual fact.

I end it here before I get too hot.....

------------------
Val Vignati

www.kvesurplus.com
[email protected]

[sunnyj]

I think I would cancel my subscription to the Brainerd Dispatch after reading that.

[Cliff Wagenbach]

I agree with Valve!
The "unnamed" guide must have a very guilty conscience!
I believe most fishing guides do more good then harm in that they help educate and encourage their clients to release fish that are vital for reproduction. And also encourage them to keep only what they need for a meal.
As far as the guide lic., all real fishing guides would be more then willing to buy one.
It would eliminate a lot of wanna-be fly-by night guides.
Cliff

------------------
Cliff's Guide Service
CliffsGuideService-LakeVermilion.com
Lake Vermilion
Phone: (218) 753-2005

[Gofishleech]

I hope I am not responding to this b***s*** to quickly but what joke. I have to remember this is one guys opinion of fishing guides,, an absolutely horrible opinion. An outdoor writer??? They should be regulated to what they can publish.

And the guide that suggest a list of recommendations that he said would help regulate the industry,,,,,,,,, Man what a joke,,,put a sticker on my boat so I can identified!!!!!!!!!
(I would pay for a special license but the rest of the list is rediculess.)

I could go on and on but I am upset by this article at the moment so I will stop.

Gofishleech

[This message has been edited by Gofishleech (edited 05-10-2004).]

[JP Z]

For me I am a fan of alot of the ideas.

Making guides buy a license makes a lot of sense to me. Also maybe yearly fees.

I understand it's a job and all, and if you're not good you're not going to make a lot of money. But in truth I could put a sign in my window and BANG I'm a guide. As long as I don't charge much for a while I could then have people pay for me to go fishing. I think a license/fee would really help in removing some of them.

But in truth the idea that guides do take a lot of fish is very true. There were two former Nisswa guides who ended up taking 2,400 and 2,200 walleye one year. That adds up, especially when they are fishing smaller lakes.

------------------
Tight Lines,
JP Z

[IFallsRon]

Using an anonymous source is chickenbleep journalism and a cheap way to sell newspapers. For all we know, it's all fabrication.

But don't be surprised when the state tries to regulate guides. It's always looking for a way to get money for nothing.

[JP Z]

The anonymous source is actually a former guide, that I am sure of. Basically when you start saying a bunch of things about this and if you use your own name. You're buddies may take offense. Not good PR.

Some of the points are valid.....tagging fish maybe??? The license makes a GREAT deal of sense.

------------------
Tight Lines,
JP Z

[Gofishleech]

quote - (But in truth I could put a sign in my window and BANG I'm a guide.)

In your own mind it might make you a guide but!!!!!!!!!!!!
Im not saying you do not qualify to be a guide but you are making your point of how easy it is to be a guide,,,,,,, I strongly disagree. I know many guides and yes there are a few that simply call them selfs guides and have the time and resorces to take people fishing but that does not make a fishing guide.

I whish I was more literate,, I have so much more to say on this subject but can,t get myself to submit it!!
I hope opener comes fast,,the week is already going slow.

[This message has been edited by Gofishleech (edited 05-10-2004).]

[JP Z]

I understand what you mean. I know a LOT of very qualified guides and many I consider friends. I'm just saying that there are a bunch of Fly-By-Night guys working out of a Van down by the river. I'm sure the majority of the guides I know would be more than willing to apply for a license. Because it would keep out a bunch of yahoos.

------------------
Tight Lines,
JP Z

[Guest]

As a former Brainerd area guide (not by choice but because I had to move...grrrrrrrr), I read that article and all I could say was WOW.

I do agree that there should be some regulation, maybe even require guides to go through a course and testing program, but identifying your rig!?!?! Placing quotas on guides per acre?!?!?!

Is this guy on crack?

To me, other Brainerd guides and others can attest to this as well, in the Brainerd area, there is some very bad blood between guides and the local sportsmen/women, and it looks like the writer is holding some of these feelings. Some just, some not.

When I guided, NO ONE kept ANY bass, pike or any walleye over 3lbs. I made this clear before we even booked the trip. I had a few instances though where I made exceptions on the walleye, but that was very few and far between. I took a lot of dump for that from the other guides about that policy, not from all, but from some.

I do agree that any one-who-thinks-I-am-silly with a boat can call themselves a guide, there are plenty of those types out there, and unfortunetly those are the ones who tend to undercut everyone else just to get trips, or the ones who maybe take 1 trip a year just to get a tax write-off. Those are the ones who give legit guides a bad name.

I also feel that good guides tend to police their own ranks. If you are a horrible guide and have horrible ethics, in many areas of the state, you will not last long and the legit guides will see to that.

This thread could get interesting to say the least.

[walleyehawk]

Man, talk about biting the hand that feeds you. I would bet the circulation and advertising department are not happy about this article!

As for his unnamed source, I don't beleive everything I read in the papers any longer. Look at the Blair guy at the New York Times that was writing fiction. And now other newspapers are having the same problem, including the USA today.

Yes, anyone can guide, but anyone can do alot of occupations. What is the harm? And no guide with any brains is going to fish out his source of income.

In the Twin Cities, we deal with the anti-sportsman rag the Star Tribune on a daily basis. I get it for the ads on Sunday only.

And remember, just as anyone can guide, any city slicker can be an "outdoor writer", as apparently the citizens of Brainerd are finding out.

[fiskyknut]

More than just some state permit/license should be a requirement. An OUPV and commercial insurance on vessel for hire should be a minimum, and is on some watersheds. I'm not saying an OUPV would make you an instant guide, you better know what you're doing on the waters you work as well, not that you need a lifetime of experience on the watershed but I would think you better have a bit more than a handful trips under of your belt. I think there are alot of self-proclaimed 'guides' that are in it for nothing more than a boat payment and gas and bait money. Anyone interested in a day on the water should check some references, check on their insurance, and see what experience said guide has on the waters to be fished. I myself would not want to pay a dime to get in a boat with some guy from 3 hours away that has fished the lake/river in question a few times in the past season or 2. It happens!

fiskyknut

[WCT]

Are newspaper reporters licensed?

Ol'Sneller

[Guest]

Just by making guide insurance and the USCG lic a requirement, along with a guide lic, you would eliminate virtually all wanna-be's.

Unfortunetly, you would eliminate quite a few legit guides as well.

It's been said that if you are truly committed to being a professional this would not be an issue, but not all guides, in fact very few, make a living as it is and adding additional fees and such would hurt them badly.

Some regulation is needed, but you cannot make it so pricey that if squeezes out everyone but those who have money to burn.

I guess you need to ask yourself what is professional and what is not. I've seen and know guides who have 50k rigs and talk the talk but I would not even have them pay ME to go fishing with them. On the other hand, some of the best guides I know are fishing out of bargain basement rigs.

It's how they treat and teach their clients and their personality and ethics is what separates a professional from a poser in my book.

[kwkfsh]

Tom, in your previous post you stated the following.

"Just by making guide insurance and the USCG lic a requirement, along with a guide lic, you would eliminate virtually all wanna-be's.
Unfortunetly, you would eliminate quite a few legit guides as well.

It's been said that if you are truly committed to being a professional this would not be an issue, but not all guides, in fact very few, make a living as it is and adding additional fees and such would hurt them badly.

Some regulation is needed, but you cannot make it so pricey that if squeezes out everyone but those who have money to burn."

This is the exactly where the problem lies. People think that since it is expensive they can thereby justify not carrying the proper insurance or license. Where does it stop? does this mean that a guide is not going to have lifejackets on board because they are expensive? (Many guides do not carry the required type 1 PFD's for this exact reason.) Or will someone provide substandard rods and reels because the good ones cost alot of money.

The USCG license is already a requirement on the majority of the waters where the money is. When you get right down to it a guide who does not carry the proper license, insurance, or PFD's is not legit!

If the guides in Minnesota where to get in compliance with the laws it would eliminate the wannabes and would in effect give the legitimate guides more work at a higher daily rate. This would allow the guides who wanted to pursue this the ability to earn a decent living.

[Guest]

I've talked to some full time guides. It isn't just $250 in their pocket, 4 times a week, or maybe more days. With that said, $1000/week from March til October That is about $28K at BEST.

Well, drop in the expensive rods (about 10 each per season, as clients break them): $1000.

A few reels: $300

Boat payment during that timeframe: $3,000

Boat depreciation during that timeframe: $3,000.

General tackle: $2000 (jigs, cranks, line, plastics, etc)

Does this seem high? I've only touched the surface of it.........No it isn't high, because these guys HAVE TO HAVE EVERYTHING!!!! They can't shortchange on gear or tackle, because someone else might have something that works, that they don't have.

If they don't have this, plus the pure people talent...........they don't stay in business.

There are a handfull of guides out there that are still in business and have a "name" for themselves, that I wouldn't give time of day. Sometimes I want to really lay it on them, because they are a joke! They lie to their clients, give them poor fishing, or work like heck to outfish their clients to they look better for fish pictures for advertising the next sucker........They even make their clients hold the same fish with different people for advertising...........you know who you are and you are probably reading this now!!!

These guides that are doing this are not full time..........Being that this isn't their only source of income. Many have part time jobs/ if not full time. Interest in tackle companies, boat companies, pro tournaments, etc.

Cut them some slack.

No one has $40K to go and start up a business that cost them $20K a year to operate, then drop on taxes, you are only talking about a $10k profit a year..........To be without family and weekends? No thanks, not for me! Then you want to tack on more taxes, fees, license cost that only go to just the flippin state, so they can blow it on some underwater basket weaving seminar that made its way into DNR funding, because it has to do with water!!!!

Look, my numbers may not be most accurate, but it is close!!!!

Talk to these guys, they do if for the love, not the money!!!

[Guest]

And if you read my post, you would have seen that I said that people are stupid if they do not carry insurance.

PFD'S?? What the heck? If I met a guide at a landing and he diddnt have any of these, I'd walk away right there, would probably call the sherrif as well! I guess I dont understand what you said about guides not carrying the required PFD's because they are too expensive. Since when did 4 lifejackets and a throwable break someones bank?

You can also find very good rods and reels that will not cost an arm and a leg. Just because a guide does not use GLoomis or St Croix does that not make him legit?

I beg to differ about the USCG lic's being required on lakes where the money is. There are plenty of waters in the Brainerd area, Mille Lacs included where you do not need a captains Lic. So your assumptions are way off base there.

[Animal]

I don' think Mr. Meyer did his homework very well. On Saturday, the MN opener, he should go to St. Louis River, LOW, Rainy, Kab, Vermillion, ETC. and count the boats and the people. I would venture to guess that of the half million people fishing the opener maybe 1000 will be guided. I believe that the opener is probably the Christmas day of guiding. At best, guided fishing accounts for less than 1% of the total hours of fishing pressure on Minnesota waters and I would bet accounts for even less than 1% of the total catch.

The guide business is hardly a cash cow. 100 days a year at $300 a day would get a guide $30,000 gross, and then there is the expense of boat, gear, gas, bait, insurance, 15% FICA and income taxes, etc. Most guides live in rural Minnesota, which isn't a Mecca for good jobs, and need to have a second job or other income.

Either Meyer has already covered every worthy news story that is impacting fishing and hunting, or he has a personal affront toward someone earning a living in a rural area. The last thing fishing guides and/or the DNR need is regulation where none is needed.

[smartguy]

One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that the article appeared underneath another article (written by the same person) that slanted guides in a positive light. I think it was the writer's attempt at a point/counterpoint arguement.

[kwkfsh]

Tom,
I was asking where does it stop? You had stated that if you required the proper licenses and insurance it would put legitimate guides out of business.

Quote- "Just by making guide insurance and the USCG lic a requirement, along with a guide lic, you would eliminate virtually all wanna-be's.
Unfortunetly, you would eliminate quite a few legit guides as well."

If someone does not have the proper license and insurance the are not legitimate no matter how long they have been doing it. Are they allowed to pick and choose what regulations they are going to follow based on what it costs them. Type 1 PFD's are required on all commercial vessels and vessels for hire. Very few guides use them. Is this because they cost to much or is it because they do not care.

In regards to ethics.

Quote-"It's how they treat and teach their clients and their personality and ethics is what separates a professional from a poser in my book."

It is the same with ethics, you cannot pick and choose which will work to your advantage. A person is either ethical or they are not. A guide who is operating without the proper license, insurance, and/or Type 1 PFD's is not ethical.

As far as I can tell there is not a single guide who is operating on Gull Lake that has the required USCG license at the present time.

[Valv]

Kwkfsh, you are trying to bring up an old issue you raised a while ago about USCG licenses for inland lakes, just live it alone, we already found out it's not needed, even if you don't agree.
My reference to rancher is no about posession of the actual animal, it's to give an idea of what a stupid article this was, even if ranchers (and I mean BIG ranchers in Montana and Wyoming where they run 1,000s of heads of cattle, not tle local 35) use mostly public (or BLM) leased land to graze them.
I agree to some issues that could be slightly corrected, but the whole article was a direct attack and insult to many small businesses that try to make a living, even with a profession many envy.

I can start too being a guide tomorrow, but to bring food home I better know how to find fish for my customers, or my "career" will last a couple of weeks.

I wouldn't mind maybe seeing a Guide Association group, where there can be some issues discussed between guides, but anytime you bring politics in a business, there is always war.

Bottom line is article was very wrong and a direct attack like that should have some apology written by editor.

PS. If I was "the Donald" I would have definitely said.. "you're fired!!! "

------------------
Val Vignati

www.kvesurplus.com
[email protected]

[Slugo]

It seems to me there should be some form of licensing for guides. the reason I feel this wasy is that there is a safty factor involved here. ie does this guide have the proper safty equptment, is the boat in sound mechanical order, does he have a clue what to do if somthing goes wrong ect...I've been with some good guides over the years and some I've about wanted to toss off there own boat. but most of the time they have been a great help and very informitive on the local fishing techniques.

[pikehunter]

Having spent a few years in the newspaper industry, I find the discussion regarding this article to be very interesting.
Let's not forget that it's not this writer's job to write things that the majority agrees with. I'd even go as far to say that his job is to write informative stories that cultivate the free flow of opinion - a job he's done well, considering the amount of threads written in response.
Why is it that a writer should be fired when a story or a source doesn't fall in good draces with the reader? Let's not forget that this is a country founded on freedom of speech and the ability to establish a marketplace of ideas.
After all, each of us who expresses our views freely on this site is simply contributing to another form of media and we are privelaged to be able to do so. It's ironic that we can sit here and voice our opinions about this topic, but nobody is telling us not to write anymore.
If you don't agree with the writer feel free to disagree... better yet, write a letter to the editor, voicing your disagreement with the opinion! But let's remember that one man's opinion is just that, no matter what medium carries it.

[Giant_Jackpot]

I don’t understand why people seem to be upset that the guides are killing a certain amount of fish. Are they not just taking the limit that the DNR says they can take? Is the customer not entitled to take a limit that is set with the license he buys? Don’t get mad at the guide for taking a legal limit. If you think the limits are too high then let the DNR know how you feel. Sound to me like some people are jealous that they cannot get a limit every time they go out…………

This reminds me of the Robo-Duck decoy debate. People argue that the mechanical decoys are too efficient and should be banned. What different does it make if the decoy is too efficient? If the hunter shoots his legal limit what’s the big deal? Why do they set limits if they don’t want people to obtain them?