[Jim Kerr]

Hey, there is a draft bill out....A DRAFT, that is there will be a lot of changes. I support some parts, not others.
Here are some notes.
http://raincoastguides.com/wordpres...tion-is-introduced-for-op-and-klickitat-only/

 

[Jim Kerr]

A note. I FULLY SUPPORT THE EAST SIDE GUYS AND THEIR PLAN! We just hope for a slightly different outcome here.

 

[Poopy McButtfart]

Thanks for all the work you do, Jim.

 

[ChaseBallard]

Thanks for your work on this, Jim. Bill tracker link: http://app.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=5302&Year=2017

Going to be a tough year for passage in Oly, and a bill that requires a lot of work in-committee makes that even tougher. But the need behind this is real and the reasoning is solid. Hope it gets straightened out and finds legs.

The sponsors, chairs and committee members feeling supported will be pivotal for that. If you feel something needs to be done to alleviate the overabundance of guiding pressure on the OP and Klick while also preserving legitimate commercial opportunity for qualified guides, relevant legislator contact info is below.

Sponsors:
Senator Kevin Van De Wege (D) 24th Legislative District, (360) 786 - 7646, [email protected]
Senator Curtis King (R) 14th Legislative District, (360) 786 - 7626, [email protected]

Committee chairs:
Senate Natural Resources: Sen. Kirk Pearson (R) Chair, (360) 786 - 7676, [email protected]
House Natural Resources: Rep. Brian Blake (D) Chair, (360) 786-7870, [email protected]

Committee members:
http://leg.wa.gov/Senate/Committees/NRP/Pages/MembersStaff.aspx
http://leg.wa.gov/House/Committees/AGNR/Pages/MembersStaff.aspx

 

[Matt Paluch]

Just reading quickly, but do have a question. If you have to prove that you've been guiding the north coast for 2 years after these rules are passed, how would it be possible to obtain this license if someone wants to start guiding there 3 years down the road? Proving that you've been a washington state resident for 4 years would keep the seasonal guides from out of state away. This additional rule would make it so only the established local residents there now would be allowed to guide there for the foreseeable future.

 

[Poopy McButtfart]

Proving that you've been a washington state resident for 4 years would keep the seasonal guides from out of state away.

I think that's part of the plan. Both locations have seen a severe upswing in seasonal out of state guides. I don't have any official numbers as I'm not sure anyone's counted, but it seems like half or more are coming from out of state to guide these rivers.

Through work, I've talked to a few guides who have never even fished the Klickitat or OP, and said their plan is to guide there this next season. There's been a lot of that, and I think the guides association wants to get it under control.

 

[rpbfishin]

Hey, there is a draft bill out....A DRAFT, that is there will be a lot of changes. I support some parts, not others.
Here are some notes.
http://raincoastguides.com/wordpres...tion-is-introduced-for-op-and-klickitat-only/

I am confused by the requirements. So no new guides? Because if one doesn't already have 2 years experience guiding on the north coast, one can't obtain a permit. If one can't obtain a permit, how does one gain the required experience to be eligible for it? Dont get me wrong, I am all for having less guides on the river, but the way this is written seems a bit exclusionary to all those who aren't already there.

 

[Gard Nale]

I know everybody loves to bitch and moan about too many people on the water but 2 fly shops have really exploded their guide efforts on the Klick over the past few years. Just 2 or 3 years ago you could stop mid-canyon and watch the floatilla go by in an hour or so. This last season it was an all day affair, probably in the 30-50 boat range. The vast majority of these were fly fishing guide boats, most of whom would row back up runs several times each. It made it next to impossible to get out and swing a fly. Everybody was polite(even if they lacked fishing etiquette) but the pressure was unreal. Very disheartening.

Thanks for the work you do on this Jim. I'll be spreading the word as best I can here in the Gorge area.

 

[Gard Nale]

I am confused by the requirements. So no new guides? Because if one doesn't already have 2 years experience guiding on the north coast, one can't obtain a permit. If one can't obtain a permit, how does one gain the required experience to be eligible for it? Dont get me wrong, I am all for having less guides on the river, but the way this is written seems a bit exclusionary to all those who aren't already there.

But the problem is there are too many "there" already. And by there I mean coming in during prime season. The best way I can see it is to stop the growth, let attritian get us to a decent number, and then figure out how to add new people when the time is right.

 

[DeadandBloated]

Help me out on this. Devils advocate. When and where does this all stop or begin? With a Yuuuuge wall built by the people of Forks to keep the undesirable guides 0ut?

Fish and Wildlife department wants ALL the out of state fees they can garner. Just like my college pushed us aside for the out of state tuition kids that paid a premium to sit next to the farm kids in classes.
The Aberdeen Wendy's just opened so it needs business. All of Aberdeen, Forks, Port Angles need the money, anyhow, anyway.

Is this about saving the fish or about money? About money for local guides who make their own breakfast and stay in their own homes or about the local economies hoping for that trickle down Seattle money on the drive through? Spokane wants that money from the Montana guide driving through to Forks. So does Ellensburg.

The OP steelhead pie has too many customers already. The main ingredient is missing. Not dough, but fish.

The steelhead rivers on the coast can no longer have an invisible Statue of Liberty at Amanda Park saying.."giving me your hungry..etc...). This is ALL about greed. For locals elbow room. "Keep the Montana guides out, keep the Seattle guides out..." eventually the rivers be guided only by natives with 1/4 native blood. Then 1/2..then fullbloods. Fish be damned! The "we got here 4 years before you..and 2 years before you" stuff...please. It is all about who will pay off the tops and fill the desks of the region 6 wildlife guys with their feet up in the air.

When does the prejudice and greed stop and the fish saving begin??

Money prevails and it will be $2000 a day trips, guided by out of country guides who helicopter in from an offshore yacht.

Crank up the Cobain tours, the Twilight tours, and the extinct Steelhead river tours. It's coming soon because no one gives a shit about the fish.

 

[brownheron]

But the problem is there are too many "there" already. And by there I mean coming in during prime season. The best way I can see it is to stop the growth, let attritian get us to a decent number, and then figure out how to add new people when the time is right.

Yes, many of us feel there are already too many for the resource. The bill means no new guides for the next 5 year pilot period. What comes after would be informed by much better data on the rod days and catch rates. Given that data we could make better decisions on whether to expand or further contract the fishery.

 

[DeadandBloated]

* I fully sympathize with local guides on the dilemma. The loggers lost all their jobs as well.
Infact, many ex-loggers are guides.
When the resource is on the skids, it all needs to be shut down. No exception.

If the state will not make a sweeping halt, then I guess you start with what is being presented, but it has loopholes and is self-serving to those drawing up the lines.

I think we are to the point that guiding has to stop, the exploitation has to stop..rivers on the OP need some relief from everyone.

 

[Freestone]

...Proving that you've been a washington state resident for 4 years would keep the seasonal guides from out of state away. This additional rule would make it so only the established local residents there now would be allowed to guide there for the foreseeable future.

Matt, Bill SB 5302 has no reference to "resident" or "resident guide license" nor does it establish a residency requirement. This Bill doesn't appear to restrict out-of-state guides any more than it restricts in-state guides. It simply says:

"To qualify for the destination fishery guide tag, an applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the department that he or she has held a Washington state fish guide license for the prior four years and has generated fishing guide income from work within the pilot project area for at least the prior two years."

As you know, the guide lic. application is for both residents and non-residents and it's just a check of a box to declare which one you are. Further, it requires only that "resident" guides be able to declare "I have been a resident of Washington State for the previous 90 days and am not licensed as a resident in any other state."

If a 4 year residency requirement was really the intention of this legislation, it looks like there is more work to be done.

 

[Guest]

I think that you should have to be a Washington resident to be a guide in Washington, any other requirement will just be a hinderence to ensure only certain people can make a profit off of a public resource.

 

[junkie]

Need a a similar bill to keep all the out of state and OP guides off the Methow.

 

[Freestone]

Need a a similar bill to keep all the out of state and OP guides off the Methow.

Maybe the Bill should restrict one's guiding to their official County of residence.

 

[jeff bandy]

All other opinions aside. I think limiting the number of guides is a good thing.

As for who gets to guide? I can't think of a better method of doing it.

Local guides keep the monies local. (good for the local economy).

Having a selected group of guides should make policing future rules more enforceable. (who's going to risk their license just for a single good tip).

Who's going to have the most to gain from a healthy run? (their jobs will depend on it).

Out of area guides may or may not care.(they live somewhere else and only go there to supplement their income.)

I do have a worry thou. Will not this group have a larger voice in what rules do get passed? What if they push for guide only days? Rod days? What assurance do we, the layfisher have that these to won't come to pass?

Jim, I fully support this idea. I just worry that a group can get out of hand in its own self preservation. There probably will come a time (if it hasn't already) when these fisheries need to just shutdown entirely. How can we expect someone who's entirely reliant on them to willingly give up their source of income, especially with so few optional jobs available?

 

[DeadandBloated]

All other opinions aside. I think limiting the number of guides is a good thing.

As for who gets to guide? I can't think of a better method of doing it.

Local guides keep the monies local. (good for the local economy).

Having a selected group of guides should make policing future rules more enforceable. (who's going to risk their license just for a single good tip).

Who's going to have the most to gain from a healthy run? (their jobs will depend on it).

Out of area guides may or may not care.(they live somewhere else and only go there to supplement their income.)

I do have a worry thou. Will not this group have a larger voice in what rules do get passed? What if they push for guide only days? Rod days? What assurance do we, the layfisher have that these to won't come to pass?

Jim, I fully support this idea. I just worry that a group can get out of hand in its own self preservation. There probably will come a time (if it hasn't already) when these fisheries need to just shutdown entirely. How can we expect someone who's entirely reliant on them to willingly give up their source of income, especially with so few optional jobs available?

Problem is, out of state guides are bringing many out of state clients with them and their out of state fees and housing and food needs during trip. They are creating supplemental income for the state and local industry the local guides are not. They are setting up these trips while floating their fisherman that took persuasion while on a lazy float in the summer in Montana on both of their "home waters"..
The state sees this and knows they do not want to kill that golden egg. The local economies want as much as they can get from anywhere, as does the Fish and Wildlife.

What a mess.

 

[Poopy McButtfart]

Problem is, out of state guides are bringing many out of state clients with them and their out of state fees and housing and food needs during trip. They are creating supplemental income for the state and local industry the local guides are not. They are setting up these trips while floating their fisherman that took persuasion while on a lazy float in the summer in Montana on both of their "home waters"..
The state sees this and knows they do not want to kill that golden egg. The local economies want as much as they can get from anywhere, as does the Fish and wildlife.

The point of all this is that there's so many of them now, that there may be 0 out of state anybody there in a short time if they fish the place to death.

 

[DeadandBloated]

The point of all this is that there's so many of them now, that there may be 0 out of state anybody there in a short time if they fish the place to death.

Yes, but I am afraid that the out of state guides and their higher fees and their out of state clients that pay more fees to fish, the local fisherman and guides may get the boot. THAT, is the spooky thing.

Like in college, when the enrollment is closed and you are a local-in state student wanting in..they say "sorry"..but, somehow there is some opening for out of state tuition payers to be squeezed in. That is my fear.

I am all for reducing guides on the OP. For sure.

I wonder who gets to guide the largest percentage/number of out of state fisherman? Out of state guides who bring their own, or local guys here waiting for that long distance call?
Do local guides do 90% of their business from guys sleeping in their own beds and driving up the day of or one night? Or do out of state guides get the guys who fly out, drive up and stay and fish for multi-days?

Beyond the clients, out of state guides often do not cook and need hotels. $ for local economy the local guide does not produce.

Seems that the local economies and fish and game all want the out of state guides over local if push came to shove.

What if steelhead hits a point to a lottery like big game? Local guy is going to lose out to a high end dude from Utah or MT or Dubai. Unless, ofcourse, you are the one chosen guide to take the royalty out for the kill.

If not a blanket closure, watch out people. This could get messy !