The Congressional Sportsman explains it. They no doubt represent existing guides who are trying to raise barriers to entry, thus keeping their income high.
And this is why simple “it’s the bad government doing it” aren’t helpful. Hand and hand with the politician will be some businessman claiming it’s good for business.
Many areas of Michigan are very rural and poor. The locals have to hunt and fish to feed their families, because steady jobs don't exist. A lot of people work on the side under the table as guides. That's who the people that run charter boats and hunting lodges are trying to keep out.
This is 100% correct. Regulation protects incumbents from entry by new businesses and protects established businesses as they are the ones who lobby for these 'rules.'
Because government doesn't exist for the people, it exists for itself. "Everything the state says is a lie and everything it has it has stolen." -Friedrich Nietzsche
Often it is the entrenched industry that want higher standards in order to protect their entrenched position and often they become the 'standard setter' and of course they are 'grandfathered' in. Wall builders.
In Massachusetts mounting a TV to a wall requires a 200 hour apprenticeship. Exactly how the 1st person to legally hang a TV became licensed is still a mystery.
@@JohnDoe-qz1ql No, the real mystery is why you uncritically believe such claims upon reading them in TH-cam comments. Mounting your own TV doesn't require any such thing. Doing electrical installation *for hire* comes with certain legal requirement, which professional TV mounting services may fall under.
@@Ascania Right. Mounting a TV to a wall, _for pay_ requires a 200-hour apprenticeship. Yes, you can do your own, but hiring someone will cost more because of the educational requirements. This moves such jobs away from an independent handyman (handyperson?) to a full-service contractor. Someone advocated for this, and got their wish.
I started a contracting business in the late 1980's that specialized in the replacement of aluminum siding. I did a bang-up business in the 90's as many purchasers of older homes wanted the old, dented and oxidized siding replaced. I drew the ire of many big firms in my area, since I repeatedly under bid them and my lower overhead had nothing to do with why. Just like the others, I recycled the aluminum siding, but two thirds of the value of the recycled siding was deducted from the cost of the job. Often over $500. The big contractors then lobbied the city and county to shut down low overhead operators like me, by passing new laws that only applied to the smaller contractors, like higher licensing fees, stricter testing, which included things out of your area of expertise and special education classes in all areas of contracting, even if you were not working on those types of items. I shut down the end of 1999 because of these changes. I've also noticed that since these changes, costs have soared, and quality has declined.
Somewhere between eight and nine minutes into the video, Steve hit the nail on the head for the legislature's attempt at creating this requirement. I'll go one step further: Someone lobbied the legislature that this is needed, and that they have the people who could oversee the process for the state. This is someone trying to gain some benefits from someone else's hard work without having to do anything substantive themselves.
All legislation has a money trail. A few people [who stand to gain from the new regulation] will pay your elected officials to vote yea. Democracy at work.
@@Jack_Russell_Brown It's absolutely clear, isn't it? The website lobbied the municipality to "outsource" their fee collection -- an inherently governmental function, mind you -- and the website operators will then be the middleman in the transaction to get money for making it more difficult for you to pay.
“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.” ― Gideon J. Tucker. So if a captain of a hired fishing boat merely points out an area, is he now a guide? This bill is a greedy mess that nobody wants, except insiders.
Steve, My brother was a fly fishing guide on the Au Sable, Pere-Marquette, Pigeon and Pine rivers and he was always threatened and bad mouthed by the Guide services at the big fly shops. So it doesn't surprise me at all that the bigger guide services would lobby for these regulations. Then they could report their competition for any non compliance.
A few years ago in Texas, the Department Of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services (DARS) was paying to put former inmates thru barber school. But once completing the program, the graduates were not allowed to work because the occupational license division of the state doesn't license those with a criminal record. 😮
Some of the best times I’ve spent fishing were with my son and his college buddies, two of them were professional fishing guides who were fly fishing experts. For the cost of some gas and barbecue dinners, they took me on float trips fly fishing on restricted waters. The river is fly fishing only. These guys would jump out of our boats and pull us upstream to get another chance to cast into good slots on the river. They were absolutely incredible guides and we all had a great experience. These young guys were locals who had grown up fishing in the area. They had guided members of the Seahawks and the Mariners multiple times and had some great stories to share about professional athletes and the trips they took. I’m still in awe of how I got to float rivers for just gas and dinner and others had to pay hundreds of dollars for the same experience.
Whenever you see "State wants to license " you know that has lobbied for it, to make it harder for new practitioners to enter the market -- thus lowering competition and raising prices. Who knew that hunting and fishing GUIDES had a lobbyist group?! I really wish the government would just get the hell out of our hair. I wish lobbying was illegal -- it's just a nicer term for "bribery." Government sucks.
The government sticking it's nose into everything is more about control and taxing. You see that in California and other states like New York and Illinois. I actually hired a guide in Michigan when I pulled a permit for ELK hunting. Money well spent. He knew what he was doing.
My uncle was a huge elk hunter from MI and anytime he got a permit, he went with a guide he knew for many years. I can't remember him not filling his tag. And elk are quite tasty. You'll never want to go back to cow again.
As an avid hunter/fisherman, I actually support this. Long explanation short, impacts to wildlife need to be heavily monitored to protect the resource. Commoditized hunting fishing can have a large impact on game populations. Especially when you allow any Tom, Dick, or Hairy to sell hunts or fishing charters.
the first thing i thought of when you mentioned the reporting requirement was that this sounds like DNR bait. suddenly game wardens don't need to go trapesing all over the backcountry to find people to harass, they just need to read a few reports to figure out where these guides take everyone and go wait for them there
I have a friend here in Texas that was a crappie fisherman guide. He provided the boat, rods and reels and he cleaned the fish for you to take home. He had a state of the art fish finder where you could see the fish, your lure and watch the fish actually go for the lure. It wasn't cheap but you got your money's worth and it was a lot cheaper than you buying a boat, tackle and trying to do it yourself.
This is definite government overreach, not only is it incredibly obnoxious but it will likely decrease the number of guides as there will be just too many damn hoops to jump through.
Agreed. These bills are clear overreach. Some of the things in the bill makes sense, but as a whole it should be struck down. I could see a law requiring safety regulations a d requirements for guides.. that makes sense. Reporting data requirements can be useful for managing natural resources, and saving the state money... but requiring for guides only and not reporting for others seems useless and onerous.
@@JeffSearust And those "unlicensed guides" will run their expeditions as though they're taking a group of friends out for a good time fishing or hunting. They'll tell their clients some key phrases, such as "free, fun, and friendly" to get their outings past any game wardens' questions.
In Wisconsin, you have to be over 18 to charge for guiding services. My FIL got around that for my BIL by "renting out the boat." He required my BIL to be the boat operator. If my BIL told the boat renters where the best fishing spots were (for free), that was up to him. The DNR tried for several years to get him to admit he charged for his guiding services, but never could. He's now one of the best guides in the Northwoods. BTW, MANY fishermen hire guides to find the best fishing sites/techniques.
I’m from Idaho. My cousin has guided a former Governor and Secretary of the Interior. There is too much opportunity for a less than competent guide to get a hunter into trouble. Not so sure about hunters in Michigan, but there is still plenty of opportunity for trouble fishing on the lakes in Michigan with an unprepared guide or outfitter.
Charter boat captains already have commercial licenses! Have a "fishing guide" endorsement? More government bureaucracy! Trust me, there are better places to hire a hunting guide than Michigan! 😂 Public land is like a war zone! We hunted private land! You need to know someone and have permission! Deer in southern lower Michigan are grain fed. Farmers leave whole fields of corn up just for the deer!
Agreed. It's such a dangerous world out there! We need gov't to tell us what to do and how to do it to stay safe. Freedom should always take a back seat to safety and big gov't.
@Richard Cranium Conceal carry is NOT difficult to get in California….at all! You just listen to too much rhetoric and news. Pretty much anyone employed NOT in retail can get one. Delivery drivers… Bankers… Even high-end retail. I sell asphalt repairs, and I measure parking lots around SouthernCalifornia. I told the Sheriff on my application: “Occasionally I start my day early (3-4am) and will close a parking lot or two ahead of my crew. It’s REALLY not that hard you kids and the news make it out to be. (FYI: there’s also not “needles lining the streets” and you don’t have to “step over homeless people to walk on a sidewalk”. I actually haven’t even seen a homeless person in weeks…and the only needles I’ve seen was on tv about a story in Arkansas) Don’t be so ready to believe everything you hear.
Welcome to Guilds. 2.0. Why the guide organizations want these regs. It eliminates competition. What licenses are all about. We are becoming more and more feudal every month. This guild thing has been growing industry by industry and serves the same purpose as guilds during the dark ages. To eliminate competition and fix higher prices for the consumer.
there is a very good argument for guides to have a clear understanding of the rules, and have proper equipment. the reporting requirement seems a bit redundant, assuming there are also general tag requirements. in my state, we have "fishing guides" and we have "charter boats" the difference being that many people who offer their services as "fishing guides" are pretty much a boat rental that provides a free driver. and may or may not observe any of the safety necessities involved with operating a boat. on the other end of the spectrum, unpredictable harvest quotas and season closures tend to hit charter operators harder charter operators also often have to handle licensing for their customers. the idea I had was to have both charter licenses, and guide licenses - both would involve full safety inspections, but it would clearly divide the groups, where a guide would leave the fisherman on his own for license and tags, and they would essentially have the pool of fish everybody else was hoping to catch a share of, while charter operators would pay a single license fee based on their total catch for the year - and they would be assigned a quota at the beginning of the fishing year, that they could use to plan their operations. - so they would know when they were approaching the end of their season. and it might be that a charter operator caught their quota and had to stop fishing before the season closed, or it might be that they saved their quota and were able to take people out after the official close of the season - because the season would be set assuming that they caught their entire quota.
I can think of many reasons why such laws get drafted. Since we have centuries of history regarding the effects of government regulations. So we have to ask do we assign malice or ignorance as the motivation.
I can’t imagine anyone would want to do all this extra work on a regular basis. The government back at work “if it ain’t broke, fix it till it is” Can’t imagine what could go wrong with this crap
Steve, in Alaska most big game requires hunters to be accompanied by a licensed guide if they are not residents of Alaska or with a 1st or 2nd place relative.
Lehto, you silly goose. You are a Michigander. I know lots of people that either worked as, or used, hunting and fishing guides in Michigan. A dear old friend is a walleye fishing guide out of Algonac, on the St. Clair River. When I lived in Fair Haven, I knew two neighbors who did charter boats for muskie fishing, which draws people from all over the world. There's got to be at least a dozen of them working Lake St. Clair. And even more when you add in the walleye, perch and smallmouth bass guides. I've gone fishing on Lake Huron numerous times with charter guides looking for salmon, lake trout, walleye and perch. My uncles were big time hunters that used guides to take elk and bears. So many do this under the table. I am sure this is just Michigan's way of making sure they are getting their cut of the action.
In New Brunswick, non-residents would have to have a guide to go hunting here. One of my Grandfather's brother was a hunting/fishing guide for many years. He had some pretty good stories from some of his clients. Some of them were probably true...at least in part...lol. Cheers from New Brunswick, Canada...eh.
Myself and 3 friends hire a duck hunting guide in casevile michiganon Saginaw Bay for 3 days in October. He supplies all meals, the boat, blind, decoys he is awesome at calling in ducks and geese. We do this because we only usually go duck hunting 2 weekend out of the season and to buy a boat and set up a blind purchase decoys etc is just not feasible to us and besides being pampered a little one weekend is nice.
Yeah there's plenty of grey areas and ways to get around this. "I'm just guiding my friend here. He's just paying for everything and renting my equipement from me."
@@Brookler The key phrase for the client to use when questioned by authorities is "free, fun, and friendly." "Pirate guides" in other states with onerous regulations use this method regularly.
I remember G. Gordon Liddy once talking about something similar he's said it was most likely the crimes needed to bar you included things like "mopery with intent to gawk and impure thoughts on a steamboat landing".
Just what we don't need in our country, MORE regulations, laws, guidelines, paper work, government employees, etc. If someone wants to hire a "guide" of any sort, they can do a background check on them without government involvement. Sounds pretty simple to me.
There is a lot of Fishing guides in the Ausable river area, and this will remove over half as they will be required to pas the cost to their customer base. Ausable river is in the top 10 fishing destinations in the US, as many who live in that area know there is Trout hatcheries thru out Michigan and the DNR have become their own issue.
There is also an aspect where the fish & wildlife will get annual surveys down by people who are out constantly. I suspect this is to save money by not having to send out survey teams to assess the state of fish in the lakes and streams plus the general idea of numbers of deer, turkey, etc. They would still have to do the surveys for nonhunting animals, but it doesn't give you some solid data for conservation reasons.
Whitehall,White lake has charters,spring lake, West Michigan., Grand Haven.West Olive Charters for Salmon We were discussing this over theweekend 👍 Dorothy Taylor Gordon says
I think politicians need to be licensed, and the requirements need to be very strict. For instance, they need to be able to pass an exam in economics comparable to a PhD qualifying exam.
What licensing tends to be is a tool to keep competitors out. Some states such as Illinois even have established businessman on these licensing boards. Regulation is fine, but licensing is what is driving up costs, while keeping salaries down.
I had ....HAD an uncle that hired a guide at a lodge. They both died. They were 12 miles off their target area with 1/3 the supplies needed even if they had reached their destination camp.
My condolences on your loss and this is exactly the type of scenario licensing requirements help prevent. I will never understand the f**king "wild west" mentality of these damn yeehaws who think these requirements are onerous.
For hunting,,They must be referring to Elk hunting mainly and maybe Bear hunting in Michigan. I have never heard of any other hunting guide around my area . For Elk hunting I do believe a guide is required to hunt them. And the fishing guide is for all the charter boats. Can you imagine all the paperwork for them? And I think this is the main reason for this whole thing,,,the Charter boats. Im sure there will be a huge fee for them also.
I know of a local "hunting guide*" for bears near me. Sure, he *doesn't* bait bears during the season, but he'll leave old used deep fryer oil in his "favorite hunting spot" the rest of the year. *his main job may or may not be local police officer.
Are the people who come up with the regulations on how to get licensed, regulated and licensed themselves on how to come up with them such as experience?
I can understand if the guide offers charter boat service, especially on the great lakes. Another area it make sense is on a stocked private hunting preserve. Politicians just don't understand the concept of narrowly tailored legislation.
The only thing that makes any sense is the safety of others with the first aid skills and kit. Though I believe that first aid should be a standard skill in life as it makes one aware for others needs. It is a human trait to care for people to an extent pending the person.
Commenting from the other side of the pond in Wisconsin. Michigan, like Wisconsin, has a HUGE charter boat fishing industry. Does this guide law consider charter operators as guides? If so, that would likely be enough to drive a large quantity of these charter boats out of business or cause them to pull up stakes and relocate to another state. The charter boats themselves don't earn tons of money, but the business they bring into the areas they operate is a big chunk of change. The hotels, restaurants, and other needs of those visiting would all be lost. So the politicians pushing this in my estimation are clueless. The state already takes in money for licenses all around, and wardens track fish catches already. What more do they want?
@ Brian Hall You need a Captains license and that takes training and testing. And one test takes about 2 1/2 hours to answer 10 questions. And you have to pay for all this and then pay the coast guard to get sworn in. And you have to have this license or you can be charged with a felony and lose your gun rights. SO all those charters have a Captains license. So if you think you can take the 4 test with about 400 questions and answer them correctly go for it. Captain Rick
Guides aren't that uncommon in the Southern states. There are a large number of businesses that offer hunting trips w/a guide. That said, I don't get the reporting requirements as - at least in states I've hunted - there are already very strict tagging rules, and on State land you often have to sign in/out with a self-clearing permit and even if you don't bag anything you have to report your activities/what you were hunting. So they already have full records of who was out on what days, hunting what, as well as what they actually bagged. Duplicating that is just unnecessary and pointless.
I was a licensed fly fishing guide on Utah's world famous Green River at Flaming Gorge for 11 years. The license requires that the guide have a current First Responder first aid certificate and a valid boat Captain License. We were required to carry a suitable first aid kit. These requirements were not governmental overreach in any way, shape, or form. The absence of these requirements would be gross negligence and a danger to our clients. A guide has the safety and lives of their clients in their hands. Being well versed in first aid and having a first aid kit is a no brainer. To believe that requiring first aid training and having a first aid kit with you is governmental overreach is utter nonsense. On the Green River we guided from drift boats. Small, unstable row boats, 16 to 18 feet long, specially designed for maneuverability on the river. The clients in our boats were technically Passengers for Hire, hence the requirement we be certified Captains. This is not unreasonable in the least. The guides on the Green River do not consider this to be a burden. We consider it to be a necessity. It gives us the same legal authority over our clients as the Captain of any ship. The failure of a client to follow our directives in a 17 foot row boat in a river could sink the boat in the blink of an eye. On rare occasions, clients who consistently failed to do as they were told and put the boat in danger were put ashore, and our decision to do so for the safety of the boat was backed by legal authority. We absolutely need that authority to ensure the safety of the boat and its occupants. Rivers are beautiful, but they don't give a fk if you live or die. The same is true of any wild environment. It's vital that the guide be competent and prepared for emergencies. Additionally, guides make money harvesting resources that belong to the people at large. The people at large finance the stewardship of these resources. Holding guides in some way accountable for their use of public resources for personal profit is fair play. To compare licensing hunting and fishing guides who operate outdoors in the wild, often far from institutional First Responder assistance, to licensing manicurists working in a salon is about as dumb as it gets. Apples to oranges turned up to 11. Of course, the devil is in the details, but in principal, licensing guides is good governance, not overreach. Cheers. .
"but Steve" 🤣 I cut my grass every two weeks which could be defined as a risk or hazard...The lobby heads could push Michigan legislators to require "guides" to train me in lawn mower use and safety, which would then lead to yearly registration and inspection sticker for my mower 😛
As somebody who was a licensed contractor for 23 years I can see where associated organizations would be in favor of stricter licensing and regulation requirements. Often it's sold as quality control, but more often the reality is they're in favor of it for restriction of trade and limitation of competition. Basically increased regulation and restriction is a minor irritation to an established business but it becomes a greater and greater barrier-to-entry for a new business. The benefit outweighs the cost for those businesses. It is so much so that even in fields where there is a grudging admission that there's room for unlicensed trades persons that they're required by law to label their advertisements with a stigma. For example in my home state of Arizona an unlicensed handyman is required to put "unlicensed" on every single advertisement, contract, business, card etcetera.
I find nothing untoward about this. It's fairly similar to the licensing requirements for hunting & fishing guides here in NY. Hunting harvests are required by *ALL* hunters here in NY. This simply keeps the reporting useful for better wildlife management for *ALL* outdoorsfolks - both resident & non-resident. If all that's included is what Steve has outlined, I hardly find this onerous. Reporting is done online and takes about 2 minutes. If *YOU* are making a living off resources *MY* license money funds, I fully expect you to be held to the same reporting requirements I am. If *YOU* are being hired by others, I fully expect you to be able to care for the people paying you. There's no such thing as a free lunch. You want to get paid for you time outdoors? That's a job. Not every part of a job is doing what you're hired to do. That's called overhead. Phone? Internet? Licenses? Reporting? Yeah .. that's the same as the rest of us who work for a living. ..and most often, those things don't have jack to do with what the skills we're paid for. Far too much ado about nothing.
Technically, Steve is wrong about Alaska. Part of the state extends into the Eastern hemisphere making it both the furthest Eastern and farthest Western US State.
Of course they are ruling for it. This bill will produce more revenue through filing fees for licenses, fees to maintain licenses, revenue through training programs, etc.
The reporting requirement is the only one that really seems onerous. Knowing first aid should be a given if you are leading someone where they haven't been in a commercial capacity. As for Michigan verses the Western states or Alaska, Michigan is bordered by three of the great lakes. Fishing on the lakes sounds like the place you might actually use a guide. If it were me, I would have wanted to add a requirement that the guide know the law related to hunting/fishing as well. Wouldn't want a guide to inadvertently be teaching someone how to do things that are illegal.
For soooo many professions it's the state or more often the private regulatory body that's to blame for demanding insane licensing requirements. There are many examples. Cosmeticians that need 2000 hours of schooling while technologists in some medical fields doing more invasive things are good to go after 120 hours; nobody doubts this is simply the entrenched people already doing the job trying to keep others out. I asked the person putting drugs into my eyes and poking my eyeball to measure pressure what kinda training it took--answer "uhhh...well, none--just watch other people do it for a few days". This is fresh in my mind because the last young man who did this appeared to be very bad at it--couldn't hit my eye with drops, couldn't get the pressure reading to work and spent forever trying, and even had to get help even turning the equipment on...once the topical anesthetic wore off one eyeball actually ached like he's pressed too hard.
A search of hunting guides in Michigan show close to 600. Guides get you access to land others can't hunt. You have a access to four of the Great Lakes. Many people want t fish these lakes but can't afford the boat required to safely navigate them or have the knowledge in where and how to fish the species they are after . There are a lot of hug ships on the bottoms of those lakes . You would want to have someone knowledgeable in navigating them and knowing what to look out for in changing weather . River and stream fishing requires knowledge of where to go for a species, how to fish it and access . A guided hunting or fishing trip isn't cheap. You usually don't get a trophy animal or fish, hunting state land or fishing the same whole as everyone else .
You are unlikely to take the wrong species or sex with a guide. So therefore, the state has an interest in making guides as accessible as possible. If you have fewer guides due to bad regulation, then you have less control over the would-be client.
As a marine scientist, tangentially familiar with how fish and wildlife services conduct their research, I see why they want all that paper work: They want to make sure that the populations are only harvested enough to be sustainable. Without the guides reporting that information, the state fish and wildlife agencies still need to know how many individuals are being removed from the living population. Right now they’re relying on guess-estimating. So by having the guides fill out the paper work, that saves massively on whatever resources the agencies are currently putting towards making that educated guess, all while doing their best to not step on the hunters’ toes while asking whatever questions they need answered.
I wouldn’t mind this being put through. However I’m not sure how extensive the process would take. I think making sure you’re hiring someone who is knowledgeable on the wildlife in their area is important. The invasive species and the native species that are endangered or at risk of going extinct. Could also mean more park rangers that know what flora and fauna are in their parks.
So if you pay for a licensed guide and your hunt/fishing trip is a bust then do you now have the capacity to go after their license? Since this is a "quality" issue.
There's bear hunting guides and big market in charter fishing in michigan. If you were taking your kids for their first hunt, would you be considered a hunting guide ?.
maybe they can pass legislation to better regulate who can be come cops and the standards they need to meet. IQ, personality, and law testing should be done.
I am not against requiring hunting and fishing guides to be licensed but make the requirements sensibile and not onerous to obtain or you will have unlicensed guides working under the table for cash. The requirement to get a license seem somewhat sensible but the paperwork requirement seems overkill. That said i doubt many folks are hiring hunting guides in Michigan or anywhere in the Midwest. Fishing guides would be more likely and i know there are a fair number in MInnesota.
Went to a meet and greet for county prosecutor candidate forum, one of the lawyers stated he was licensed in Michigan so I asked if I could see his license, he handed me his union card from an association that looked like it came from the same printer as a union neighbor, we passed both around the room and everyone was shocked there is NO ACTUAL License issued by the state of Michigan, for some reason he didn't win the election and had to move back to Chicago 😮
@@darrylbarker505 I am sorry that confuses you, but as always there is more.. he was a political plant and was exposed by his inability to handle objections about his reasons he wanted the public servant job.
@@darrylbarker505 also licensing is a means of concentrating control of specific interested parties so those interested parties can squash competition, this was explained to me by a judge who was not an attorney, it really is a shame we let those commercial interests lobbyists to ban real people from the bench!!!
The next step is to require all of these that want to go fishing and hunting, in Michigan, hire a "Professional Guide". Plus have a background check to purchase hunting and fishing supplies. Just a side move to restrict hunting and fishing within the state. So, I would need a guides license to take my child fishing at the pond at the park?
Wouldn’t a day or seasonal be enough? That’s how we do it here And if you’re caught catching something out of season, you will be heavily fined for a fish to deter
.. get into other states that don't have the lack of population and the abundant natural resources of Idaho and you'll start seeing a *lot* of fraud/poaching/out-of-season/undersized/overquota takes! Hell, here in NY, our 2023 regulations for Lake Ontario & Tributaries rainbow trout got jacked .. in tributaries, it's just *one* fish per day, 25"+. Not long ago, it was a daily limit of 3 @ 12"+. Before that, it was 5 @ 9" or better. In Lake Ontario, it's 2 @ 21"+. Want to guess how many tributary guides are keeping overlimit or undersized rainbows? Lots.
Guild-like behavior, enforced by government. Steve, I love your use of our language... Demonym and recidivism! Go ahead and try to find those two words used elsewhere in five minute proximity.
Sounds like another tax to me. Just because they call it a "tag, stamp, etc" it's just another way to get money. And who determines the test for these guides? Fishing alone is expansive.
In Alaska guides have onerous licensing requirements. Did it prevent people getting ripped off. Not at all. It actually does the opposite. It gives guides exclusive areas to hunt and therefore allows them to rip off their customers. It's funny to hear a group of guides talk about ripping off their customers, it's as a bad as listening to auctioneers or antique dealers talk of scamming their customers. When covid hit guides across Alaska sucked their balls into their abdomens when they realized the implications. See, most guides get a 50% up front payment six or ten months ahead of time. The guides live off those up front payments. One would think they live off the other half, after the fact, but that goes to pay the debts they racked up months ago. So covid meant they would have to pay back the money they already spent. They were very releived when they got that stimulus money for lost business. Fianlly they could get those pesky customers off their backs and get those lawsuits over with. Guide licenses are like most such licenses, a license to steal.
I’ve done plenty of guided fishing charters in the Great Lakes especially lake Eire, no guided hunting though. Wonder if people would go to Ohio if the mich Eire charters cost significantly more?
@ Michael s Charter fishing on the great lakes requires a Captains license and doesn't require a guides license. So NO they are not being guided. Great lakes are Federal waters different rules.
As someone who has hired a guide for bear hunting in Michigan I will tell you it is hard to find a good guide. I imagine for fishing it is much the same way. I would appreciate being able to check out a guides information they sent to the state on how many were caught or bears were bagged. I know people who went bear hunting and found out later their guide had never bagged a bear. Just some jerk who was making money for nothing. A good guide would have spent months baiting and finding good spots before the season ever started. So I guess I would have appreciated knowing who was capable enough to be licensed verses some guy flying by the seat of his pants. Okay so my bear hunting story. A few of us were setting around a guys basement drinking lots of beer. Someone said we should go bear hunting with bow and arrow. We all agreed because we were drunk. Well like two weeks later he called and said he had us booked for a hunt. I had forgotten all about it and ask what the heck he was talking about. Bear hunting of course. So fast forward a couple of months. The guide is taking me out at like 4am to my tree stand. As we are getting near he tells me how lucky I am and points out a bear track as big as my head. Holy crap Bearman. Anyway he shows me my tree stand and says he will be back around lunch time to get me. So here I am in the pitch dark waiting for a huge bear to come by with a pointed stick to fling at it. Holy crap what am I doing here? All I saw was a small 80 pounder. The guide said I could have taken it but I wouldn't shoot one that small. Never did it again after that trip.
I stopped for a guy that hit a deer ahead of me in Michigan. I saw the deer run away, he was pulling a boat and more concerned about stopping safely than he was about the deer. I actually passed him when he hit the gravel b/c it was at the top of a hill and so sudden I would've hit his boat if I hadn't. Anyway... I pointed off to where the deer went when yanking his flimsy bumper straight. That makes me a guide right?
The Congressional Sportsman explains it. They no doubt represent existing guides who are trying to raise barriers to entry, thus keeping their income high.
Yep. Reminds me of Kentucky, where you have to have a special license to drive people to the hospital.
Exactly what happens in the dog fancy, always coming up with new health tests like the test for deafness which is horrific.
And this is why simple “it’s the bad government doing it” aren’t helpful. Hand and hand with the politician will be some businessman claiming it’s good for business.
Many areas of Michigan are very rural and poor. The locals have to hunt and fish to feed their families, because steady jobs don't exist. A lot of people work on the side under the table as guides. That's who the people that run charter boats and hunting lodges are trying to keep out.
This is 100% correct. Regulation protects incumbents from entry by new businesses and protects established businesses as they are the ones who lobby for these 'rules.'
This is a clear case of politicians with too much time on their hands... Why don't they enforce the laws that actually matter instead?
Because government doesn't exist for the people, it exists for itself.
"Everything the state says is a lie and everything it has it has stolen."
-Friedrich Nietzsche
The government that governs best governs least
Often it is the entrenched industry that want higher standards in order to protect their entrenched position and often they become the 'standard setter' and of course they are 'grandfathered' in. Wall builders.
Well put. 🏆
Yep they pull the very ladder that they climbed up behind them so no one else can get into the industry and compete.
You know what other mechanism helps people avoid bad guides? Online reviews.
In Massachusetts mounting a TV to a wall requires a 200 hour apprenticeship. Exactly how the 1st person to legally hang a TV became licensed is still a mystery.
The mystery isn't who was first, but how hanging a TV needs a license.
@@JohnDoe-qz1ql No, the real mystery is why you uncritically believe such claims upon reading them in TH-cam comments. Mounting your own TV doesn't require any such thing. Doing electrical installation *for hire* comes with certain legal requirement, which professional TV mounting services may fall under.
@@Ascania Take a quick look around... Nothing is surprising anymore.
@@Ascania Right. Mounting a TV to a wall, _for pay_ requires a 200-hour apprenticeship. Yes, you can do your own, but hiring someone will cost more because of the educational requirements. This moves such jobs away from an independent handyman (handyperson?) to a full-service contractor. Someone advocated for this, and got their wish.
@@TheRealScooterGuy I mean it's not to far off from what we're getting now haha they will get you for whatever reason they see fit
I started a contracting business in the late 1980's that specialized in the replacement of aluminum siding. I did a bang-up business in the 90's as many purchasers of older homes wanted the old, dented and oxidized siding replaced. I drew the ire of many big firms in my area, since I repeatedly under bid them and my lower overhead had nothing to do with why. Just like the others, I recycled the aluminum siding, but two thirds of the value of the recycled siding was deducted from the cost of the job. Often over $500. The big contractors then lobbied the city and county to shut down low overhead operators like me, by passing new laws that only applied to the smaller contractors, like higher licensing fees, stricter testing, which included things out of your area of expertise and special education classes in all areas of contracting, even if you were not working on those types of items. I shut down the end of 1999 because of these changes. I've also noticed that since these changes, costs have soared, and quality has declined.
Somewhere between eight and nine minutes into the video, Steve hit the nail on the head for the legislature's attempt at creating this requirement. I'll go one step further: Someone lobbied the legislature that this is needed, and that they have the people who could oversee the process for the state. This is someone trying to gain some benefits from someone else's hard work without having to do anything substantive themselves.
All legislation has a money trail. A few people [who stand to gain from the new regulation] will pay your elected officials to vote yea. Democracy at work.
Simply put, more confirmation that "govern - ment" is grifters' paradise.
@@Jack_Russell_Brown It's absolutely clear, isn't it? The website lobbied the municipality to "outsource" their fee collection -- an inherently governmental function, mind you -- and the website operators will then be the middleman in the transaction to get money for making it more difficult for you to pay.
“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.” ― Gideon J. Tucker. So if a captain of a hired fishing boat merely points out an area, is he now a guide? This bill is a greedy mess that nobody wants, except insiders.
Steve, My brother was a fly fishing guide on the Au Sable, Pere-Marquette, Pigeon and Pine rivers and he was always threatened and bad mouthed by the Guide services at the big fly shops. So it doesn't surprise me at all that the bigger guide services would lobby for these regulations. Then they could report their competition for any non compliance.
A few years ago in Texas, the Department Of Assistive and Rehabilitative Services (DARS) was paying to put former inmates thru barber school. But once completing the program, the graduates were not allowed to work because the occupational license division of the state doesn't license those with a criminal record. 😮
Go training, they can use it in prison.
Some of the best times I’ve spent fishing were with my son and his college buddies, two of them were professional fishing guides who were fly fishing experts. For the cost of some gas and barbecue dinners, they took me on float trips fly fishing on restricted waters. The river is fly fishing only. These guys would jump out of our boats and pull us upstream to get another chance to cast into good slots on the river. They were absolutely incredible guides and we all had a great experience. These young guys were locals who had grown up fishing in the area. They had guided members of the Seahawks and the Mariners multiple times and had some great stories to share about professional athletes and the trips they took. I’m still in awe of how I got to float rivers for just gas and dinner and others had to pay hundreds of dollars for the same experience.
Whenever you see "State wants to license " you know that has lobbied for it, to make it harder for new practitioners to enter the market -- thus lowering competition and raising prices. Who knew that hunting and fishing GUIDES had a lobbyist group?!
I really wish the government would just get the hell out of our hair. I wish lobbying was illegal -- it's just a nicer term for "bribery." Government sucks.
The government sticking it's nose into everything is more about control and taxing. You see that in California and other states like New York and Illinois.
I actually hired a guide in Michigan when I pulled a permit for ELK hunting. Money well spent. He knew what he was doing.
My uncle was a huge elk hunter from MI and anytime he got a permit, he went with a guide he knew for many years. I can't remember him not filling his tag. And elk are quite tasty. You'll never want to go back to cow again.
As an avid hunter/fisherman, I actually support this. Long explanation short, impacts to wildlife need to be heavily monitored to protect the resource. Commoditized hunting fishing can have a large impact on game populations. Especially when you allow any Tom, Dick, or Hairy to sell hunts or fishing charters.
Next they will require you to have a guide to hunt or fish
Brings to mind a Monty Python sketch where the "government" is sitting around thinking of new things they can tax to increase income for themselves.
Ekke Ekke Ekke Ekke Ptang Zoo Boing!
the first thing i thought of when you mentioned the reporting requirement was that this sounds like DNR bait. suddenly game wardens don't need to go trapesing all over the backcountry to find people to harass, they just need to read a few reports to figure out where these guides take everyone and go wait for them there
I have a friend here in Texas that was a crappie fisherman guide. He provided the boat, rods and reels and he cleaned the fish for you to take home. He had a state of the art fish finder where you could see the fish, your lure and watch the fish actually go for the lure. It wasn't cheap but you got your money's worth and it was a lot cheaper than you buying a boat, tackle and trying to do it yourself.
Wouldn't surprise me if the state find or arrested someone that brought his buddy fishing with him on his boat for not having a guide license
This is definite government overreach, not only is it incredibly obnoxious but it will likely decrease the number of guides as there will be just too many damn hoops to jump through.
Agreed.
These bills are clear overreach.
Some of the things in the bill makes sense, but as a whole it should be struck down.
I could see a law requiring safety regulations a d requirements for guides.. that makes sense.
Reporting data requirements can be useful for managing natural resources, and saving the state money... but requiring for guides only and not reporting for others seems useless and onerous.
Actually it won't reduce the number of guides, it will merely increase the number of unlicensed guides.
@@JeffSearust And those "unlicensed guides" will run their expeditions as though they're taking a group of friends out for a good time fishing or hunting. They'll tell their clients some key phrases, such as "free, fun, and friendly" to get their outings past any game wardens' questions.
Clearly the legislators that drafted these rules have been bribed by existing guides (probably with free hunting and fishing trips).
In Wisconsin, you have to be over 18 to charge for guiding services. My FIL got around that for my BIL by "renting out the boat." He required my BIL to be the boat operator. If my BIL told the boat renters where the best fishing spots were (for free), that was up to him. The DNR tried for several years to get him to admit he charged for his guiding services, but never could. He's now one of the best guides in the Northwoods. BTW, MANY fishermen hire guides to find the best fishing sites/techniques.
Just what a beginner hunter needs is a guide who is certified in report filing.
I’m from Idaho. My cousin has guided a former Governor and Secretary of the Interior. There is too much opportunity for a less than competent guide to get a hunter into trouble. Not so sure about hunters in Michigan, but there is still plenty of opportunity for trouble fishing on the lakes in Michigan with an unprepared guide or outfitter.
Charter boat captains already have commercial licenses!
Have a "fishing guide" endorsement?
More government bureaucracy!
Trust me, there are better places to hire a hunting guide than Michigan!
😂
Public land is like a war zone!
We hunted private land! You need to know someone and have permission!
Deer in southern lower Michigan are grain fed. Farmers leave whole fields of corn up just for the deer!
Agreed. It's such a dangerous world out there! We need gov't to tell us what to do and how to do it to stay safe. Freedom should always take a back seat to safety and big gov't.
Yep.
@Richard Cranium
Conceal carry is NOT difficult to get in California….at all!
You just listen to too much rhetoric and news.
Pretty much anyone employed NOT in retail can get one.
Delivery drivers…
Bankers…
Even high-end retail.
I sell asphalt repairs, and I measure parking lots around SouthernCalifornia.
I told the Sheriff on my application:
“Occasionally I start my day early (3-4am) and will close a parking lot or two ahead of my crew.
It’s REALLY not that hard you kids and the news make it out to be.
(FYI: there’s also not “needles lining the streets” and you don’t have to “step over homeless people to walk on a sidewalk”.
I actually haven’t even seen a homeless person in weeks…and the only needles I’ve seen was on tv about a story in Arkansas)
Don’t be so ready to believe everything you hear.
@@sendthis9480 So the sheriff decides if you may exercise your constitutional rights in Cali? Odd.
Welcome to Guilds. 2.0. Why the guide organizations want these regs. It eliminates competition. What licenses are all about. We are becoming more and more feudal every month. This guild thing has been growing industry by industry and serves the same purpose as guilds during the dark ages. To eliminate competition and fix higher prices for the consumer.
Ben laying on top dark blue books next to top right side of yellow caution sign.
there is a very good argument for guides to have a clear understanding of the rules, and have proper equipment. the reporting requirement seems a bit redundant, assuming there are also general tag requirements.
in my state, we have "fishing guides" and we have "charter boats" the difference being that many people who offer their services as "fishing guides" are pretty much a boat rental that provides a free driver. and may or may not observe any of the safety necessities involved with operating a boat. on the other end of the spectrum, unpredictable harvest quotas and season closures tend to hit charter operators harder charter operators also often have to handle licensing for their customers. the idea I had was to have both charter licenses, and guide licenses - both would involve full safety inspections, but it would clearly divide the groups, where a guide would leave the fisherman on his own for license and tags, and they would essentially have the pool of fish everybody else was hoping to catch a share of, while charter operators would pay a single license fee based on their total catch for the year - and they would be assigned a quota at the beginning of the fishing year, that they could use to plan their operations. - so they would know when they were approaching the end of their season. and it might be that a charter operator caught their quota and had to stop fishing before the season closed, or it might be that they saved their quota and were able to take people out after the official close of the season - because the season would be set assuming that they caught their entire quota.
I can think of many reasons why such laws get drafted. Since we have centuries of history regarding the effects of government regulations.
So we have to ask do we assign malice or ignorance as the motivation.
Its always malice. Ignorance isn't a credible defense.
@@carrieullrich5059 And greed.
I can’t imagine anyone would want to do all this extra work on a regular basis. The government back at work “if it ain’t broke, fix it till it is”
Can’t imagine what could go wrong with this crap
Steve, in Alaska most big game requires hunters to be accompanied by a licensed guide if they are not residents of Alaska or with a 1st or 2nd place relative.
Lehto, you silly goose. You are a Michigander.
I know lots of people that either worked as, or used, hunting and fishing guides in Michigan. A dear old friend is a walleye fishing guide out of Algonac, on the St. Clair River. When I lived in Fair Haven, I knew two neighbors who did charter boats for muskie fishing, which draws people from all over the world. There's got to be at least a dozen of them working Lake St. Clair. And even more when you add in the walleye, perch and smallmouth bass guides.
I've gone fishing on Lake Huron numerous times with charter guides looking for salmon, lake trout, walleye and perch. My uncles were big time hunters that used guides to take elk and bears. So many do this under the table. I am sure this is just Michigan's way of making sure they are getting their cut of the action.
Legislative thinking apparently is always "control must always be visible, absolute and onerous".
I think we need stricter licensing requirements on politicians NOT fishing and hunting guides
Hi Steve,
speaking of lic. I just got my Driver Lic. That I was being stopped from getting for 36 years so that you could steal.
In New Brunswick, non-residents would have to have a guide to go hunting here. One of my Grandfather's brother was a hunting/fishing guide for many years. He had some pretty good stories from some of his clients. Some of them were probably true...at least in part...lol.
Cheers from New Brunswick, Canada...eh.
Ben, on OED above Low Flying Owl sign.
"Oxford English Missionary" ?...😉
@@Bobs-Wrigles5555 derp! 🤪
@@brucelytle1144 Well, He IS laying down on his back(I think)😁😁
Myself and 3 friends hire a duck hunting guide in casevile michiganon Saginaw Bay for 3 days in October. He supplies all meals, the boat, blind, decoys he is awesome at calling in ducks and geese. We do this because we only usually go duck hunting 2 weekend out of the season and to buy a boat and set up a blind purchase decoys etc is just not feasible to us and besides being pampered a little one weekend is nice.
I smell the Insurance Industry.
Avoid the guide by taking a "new" friend with you.
Yeah there's plenty of grey areas and ways to get around this. "I'm just guiding my friend here. He's just paying for everything and renting my equipement from me."
@@Brookler The key phrase for the client to use when questioned by authorities is "free, fun, and friendly." "Pirate guides" in other states with onerous regulations use this method regularly.
I remember G. Gordon Liddy once talking about something similar he's said it was most likely the crimes needed to bar you included things like "mopery with intent to gawk and impure thoughts on a steamboat landing".
Just what we don't need in our country, MORE regulations, laws, guidelines, paper work, government employees, etc. If someone wants to hire a "guide" of any sort, they can do a background check on them without government involvement. Sounds pretty simple to me.
Was Sacagawea licensed? She was the ultimate guide.
She avoided Michigan.
@@hoffpbass Was Michigan even Michigan back then?
@@clbcl5
I don’t know about Michigan…but Alice Cooper taught us about The MileWauKea.
There is a lot of Fishing guides in the Ausable river area, and this will remove over half as they will be required to pas the cost to their customer base.
Ausable river is in the top 10 fishing destinations in the US, as many who live in that area know there is Trout hatcheries thru out Michigan and the DNR have become their own issue.
A lot of guys
Professionals that don’t have time to scout so pay a guy to take them to hot spots
Uncle did this in Wisconsin
Always filled his tags
Steve
Thanks. GREAT SHOWS
great JOB
keep it UP PLEASE & THANK YOU ALL
There is also an aspect where the fish & wildlife will get annual surveys down by people who are out constantly. I suspect this is to save money by not having to send out survey teams to assess the state of fish in the lakes and streams plus the general idea of numbers of deer, turkey, etc. They would still have to do the surveys for nonhunting animals, but it doesn't give you some solid data for conservation reasons.
Whitehall,White lake has charters,spring lake, West Michigan., Grand Haven.West Olive
Charters for Salmon
We were discussing this over theweekend 👍 Dorothy Taylor Gordon says
I think politicians need to be licensed, and the requirements need to be very strict. For instance, they need to be able to pass an exam in economics comparable to a PhD qualifying exam.
There are several guides in LA, and NC.
Good morning everyone
Wow! Sounds like they're checking with New York.
What licensing tends to be is a tool to keep competitors out. Some states such as Illinois even have established businessman on these licensing boards. Regulation is fine, but licensing is what is driving up costs, while keeping salaries down.
Yep, next step is to institute a cap on the number of guide licenses issued.
I had ....HAD an uncle that hired a guide at a lodge. They both died. They were 12 miles off their target area with 1/3 the supplies needed even if they had reached their destination camp.
So they died on the trip??
My condolences on your loss and this is exactly the type of scenario licensing requirements help prevent. I will never understand the f**king "wild west" mentality of these damn yeehaws who think these requirements are onerous.
For hunting,,They must be referring to Elk hunting mainly and maybe Bear hunting in Michigan. I have never heard of any other hunting guide around my area .
For Elk hunting I do believe a guide is required to hunt them.
And the fishing guide is for all the charter boats. Can you imagine all the paperwork for them? And I think this is the main reason for this whole thing,,,the Charter boats. Im sure there will be a huge fee for them also.
Hmmm? Is a Charter boat a fishing guide??? IDK?
I miss living in a free country all ready. Our grandparents never needed a fishing license.
I know of a local "hunting guide*" for bears near me. Sure, he *doesn't* bait bears during the season, but he'll leave old used deep fryer oil in his "favorite hunting spot" the rest of the year.
*his main job may or may not be local police officer.
Are the people who come up with the regulations on how to get licensed, regulated and licensed themselves on how to come up with them such as experience?
So what’s the difference between a fishing guide and fishing charter?
I don’t know if too many hunting guides in Michigan.
I can understand if the guide offers charter boat service, especially on the great lakes. Another area it make sense is on a stocked private hunting preserve. Politicians just don't understand the concept of narrowly tailored legislation.
The only thing that makes any sense is the safety of others with the first aid skills and kit.
Though I believe that first aid should be a standard skill in life as it makes one aware for others needs. It is a human trait to care for people to an extent pending the person.
Commenting from the other side of the pond in Wisconsin. Michigan, like Wisconsin, has a HUGE charter boat fishing industry. Does this guide law consider charter operators as guides? If so, that would likely be enough to drive a large quantity of these charter boats out of business or cause them to pull up stakes and relocate to another state.
The charter boats themselves don't earn tons of money, but the business they bring into the areas they operate is a big chunk of change. The hotels, restaurants, and other needs of those visiting would all be lost. So the politicians pushing this in my estimation are clueless. The state already takes in money for licenses all around, and wardens track fish catches already. What more do they want?
Could be charter fishing too. Tons of charters on the great lakes
@ Brian Hall You need a Captains license and that takes training and testing. And one test takes about 2 1/2 hours to answer 10 questions. And you have to pay for all this and then pay the coast guard to get sworn in. And you have to have this license or you can be charged with a felony and lose your gun rights.
SO all those charters have a Captains license. So if you think you can take the 4 test with about 400 questions and answer them correctly go for it.
Captain Rick
@@rickw6521
Next time try making a relevant comment.
Guides aren't that uncommon in the Southern states. There are a large number of businesses that offer hunting trips w/a guide. That said, I don't get the reporting requirements as - at least in states I've hunted - there are already very strict tagging rules, and on State land you often have to sign in/out with a self-clearing permit and even if you don't bag anything you have to report your activities/what you were hunting. So they already have full records of who was out on what days, hunting what, as well as what they actually bagged. Duplicating that is just unnecessary and pointless.
I was a licensed fly fishing guide on Utah's world famous Green River at Flaming Gorge for 11 years. The license requires that the guide have a current First Responder first aid certificate and a valid boat Captain License. We were required to carry a suitable first aid kit.
These requirements were not governmental overreach in any way, shape, or form. The absence of these requirements would be gross negligence and a danger to our clients.
A guide has the safety and lives of their clients in their hands. Being well versed in first aid and having a first aid kit is a no brainer. To believe that requiring first aid training and having a first aid kit with you is governmental overreach is utter nonsense.
On the Green River we guided from drift boats. Small, unstable row boats, 16 to 18 feet long, specially designed for maneuverability on the river. The clients in our boats were technically Passengers for Hire, hence the requirement we be certified Captains. This is not unreasonable in the least.
The guides on the Green River do not consider this to be a burden. We consider it to be a necessity. It gives us the same legal authority over our clients as the Captain of any ship. The failure of a client to follow our directives in a 17 foot row boat in a river could sink the boat in the blink of an eye. On rare occasions, clients who consistently failed to do as they were told and put the boat in danger were put ashore, and our decision to do so for the safety of the boat was backed by legal authority. We absolutely need that authority to ensure the safety of the boat and its occupants.
Rivers are beautiful, but they don't give a fk if you live or die. The same is true of any wild environment. It's vital that the guide be competent and prepared for emergencies.
Additionally, guides make money harvesting resources that belong to the people at large. The people at large finance the stewardship of these resources. Holding guides in some way accountable for their use of public resources for personal profit is fair play.
To compare licensing hunting and fishing guides who operate outdoors in the wild, often far from institutional First Responder assistance, to licensing manicurists working in a salon is about as dumb as it gets. Apples to oranges turned up to 11.
Of course, the devil is in the details, but in principal, licensing guides is good governance, not overreach.
Cheers.
.
"but Steve" 🤣 I cut my grass every two weeks which could be defined as a risk or hazard...The lobby heads could push Michigan legislators to require "guides" to train me in lawn mower use and safety, which would then lead to yearly registration and inspection sticker for my mower 😛
i tried fishing a few years ago and was terrible at it. but i like being by the water etc so i got a drone. and gus's kicks ass.
It's all in the wrist... how were you throwing the dynamite?
As somebody who was a licensed contractor for 23 years I can see where associated organizations would be in favor of stricter licensing and regulation requirements. Often it's sold as quality control, but more often the reality is they're in favor of it for restriction of trade and limitation of competition. Basically increased regulation and restriction is a minor irritation to an established business but it becomes a greater and greater barrier-to-entry for a new business. The benefit outweighs the cost for those businesses. It is so much so that even in fields where there is a grudging admission that there's room for unlicensed trades persons that they're required by law to label their advertisements with a stigma. For example in my home state of Arizona an unlicensed handyman is required to put "unlicensed" on every single advertisement, contract, business, card etcetera.
Now it comes out, the legislature just wants to know the best hunting and fishing spots!!!
I find nothing untoward about this. It's fairly similar to the licensing requirements for hunting & fishing guides here in NY. Hunting harvests are required by *ALL* hunters here in NY. This simply keeps the reporting useful for better wildlife management for *ALL* outdoorsfolks - both resident & non-resident. If all that's included is what Steve has outlined, I hardly find this onerous. Reporting is done online and takes about 2 minutes.
If *YOU* are making a living off resources *MY* license money funds, I fully expect you to be held to the same reporting requirements I am. If *YOU* are being hired by others, I fully expect you to be able to care for the people paying you. There's no such thing as a free lunch. You want to get paid for you time outdoors? That's a job. Not every part of a job is doing what you're hired to do. That's called overhead. Phone? Internet? Licenses? Reporting? Yeah .. that's the same as the rest of us who work for a living. ..and most often, those things don't have jack to do with what the skills we're paid for.
Far too much ado about nothing.
It's unconstitutional
Its just a way to squeeze more revenue out of Michigan residents.
Technically, Steve is wrong about Alaska. Part of the state extends into the Eastern hemisphere making it both the furthest Eastern and farthest Western US State.
Of course they are ruling for it. This bill will produce more revenue through filing fees for licenses, fees to maintain licenses, revenue through training programs, etc.
The reporting requirement is the only one that really seems onerous. Knowing first aid should be a given if you are leading someone where they haven't been in a commercial capacity. As for Michigan verses the Western states or Alaska, Michigan is bordered by three of the great lakes. Fishing on the lakes sounds like the place you might actually use a guide. If it were me, I would have wanted to add a requirement that the guide know the law related to hunting/fishing as well. Wouldn't want a guide to inadvertently be teaching someone how to do things that are illegal.
Pay to get your license and pay more (Fines) when you screw up the paper work.
For soooo many professions it's the state or more often the private regulatory body that's to blame for demanding insane licensing requirements. There are many examples. Cosmeticians that need 2000 hours of schooling while technologists in some medical fields doing more invasive things are good to go after 120 hours; nobody doubts this is simply the entrenched people already doing the job trying to keep others out.
I asked the person putting drugs into my eyes and poking my eyeball to measure pressure what kinda training it took--answer "uhhh...well, none--just watch other people do it for a few days". This is fresh in my mind because the last young man who did this appeared to be very bad at it--couldn't hit my eye with drops, couldn't get the pressure reading to work and spent forever trying, and even had to get help even turning the equipment on...once the topical anesthetic wore off one eyeball actually ached like he's pressed too hard.
A search of hunting guides in Michigan show close to 600. Guides get you access to land others can't hunt. You have a access to four of the Great Lakes. Many people want t fish these lakes but can't afford the boat required to safely navigate them or have the knowledge in where and how to fish the species they are after . There are a lot of hug ships on the bottoms of those lakes . You would want to have someone knowledgeable in navigating them and knowing what to look out for in changing weather . River and stream fishing requires knowledge of where to go for a species, how to fish it and access . A guided hunting or fishing trip isn't cheap. You usually don't get a trophy animal or fish, hunting state land or fishing the same whole as everyone else .
You are unlikely to take the wrong species or sex with a guide. So therefore, the state has an interest in making guides as accessible as possible. If you have fewer guides due to bad regulation, then you have less control over the would-be client.
As a marine scientist, tangentially familiar with how fish and wildlife services conduct their research, I see why they want all that paper work:
They want to make sure that the populations are only harvested enough to be sustainable.
Without the guides reporting that information, the state fish and wildlife agencies still need to know how many individuals are being removed from the living population. Right now they’re relying on guess-estimating.
So by having the guides fill out the paper work, that saves massively on whatever resources the agencies are currently putting towards making that educated guess, all while doing their best to not step on the hunters’ toes while asking whatever questions they need answered.
I wouldn’t mind this being put through. However I’m not sure how extensive the process would take. I think making sure you’re hiring someone who is knowledgeable on the wildlife in their area is important. The invasive species and the native species that are endangered or at risk of going extinct. Could also mean more park rangers that know what flora and fauna are in their parks.
So if you pay for a licensed guide and your hunt/fishing trip is a bust then do you now have the capacity to go after their license? Since this is a "quality" issue.
There's bear hunting guides and big market in charter fishing in michigan. If you were taking your kids for their first hunt, would you be considered a hunting guide ?.
In the state of michigan I prefer to have an in-state fishing or hunting buddy rather than a guide. Says Idaho man.
maybe they can pass legislation to better regulate who can be come cops and the standards they need to meet. IQ, personality, and law testing should be done.
I"m surprised that this wasn't in California. My state just LOVES paperwork!
I am not against requiring hunting and fishing guides to be licensed but make the requirements sensibile and not onerous to obtain or you will have unlicensed guides working under the table for cash. The requirement to get a license seem somewhat sensible but the paperwork requirement seems overkill. That said i doubt many folks are hiring hunting guides in Michigan or anywhere in the Midwest. Fishing guides would be more likely and i know there are a fair number in MInnesota.
Went to a meet and greet for county prosecutor candidate forum, one of the lawyers stated he was licensed in Michigan so I asked if I could see his license, he handed me his union card from an association that looked like it came from the same printer as a union neighbor, we passed both around the room and everyone was shocked there is NO ACTUAL License issued by the state of Michigan, for some reason he didn't win the election and had to move back to Chicago 😮
@@darrylbarker505 yes based on his comment that he was licensed by the state to practice law in Michigan, but instead he produced a union card.
@@darrylbarker505 I am sorry that confuses you, but as always there is more.. he was a political plant and was exposed by his inability to handle objections about his reasons he wanted the public servant job.
@@darrylbarker505 also licensing is a means of concentrating control of specific interested parties so those interested parties can squash competition, this was explained to me by a judge who was not an attorney, it really is a shame we let those commercial interests lobbyists to ban real people from the bench!!!
The next step is to require all of these that want to go fishing and hunting, in Michigan, hire a "Professional Guide". Plus have a background check to purchase hunting and fishing supplies. Just a side move to restrict hunting and fishing within the state. So, I would need a guides license to take my child fishing at the pond at the park?
Wouldn’t a day or seasonal be enough? That’s how we do it here
And if you’re caught catching something out of season, you will be heavily fined for a fish to deter
For every new regulation there is always a corporate concern steering the path.
“Regulatory Capture” is the term you’re probably thinking of.
I'm a retired Idaho Conservation Officer. The hunting outfitting industry is fraught with fraud. It needs regulating. Not so much with fishing.
.. get into other states that don't have the lack of population and the abundant natural resources of Idaho and you'll start seeing a *lot* of fraud/poaching/out-of-season/undersized/overquota takes!
Hell, here in NY, our 2023 regulations for Lake Ontario & Tributaries rainbow trout got jacked .. in tributaries, it's just *one* fish per day, 25"+. Not long ago, it was a daily limit of 3 @ 12"+. Before that, it was 5 @ 9" or better. In Lake Ontario, it's 2 @ 21"+. Want to guess how many tributary guides are keeping overlimit or undersized rainbows? Lots.
It would raise the quality of the service. When people can lose their license, they treat customers better and they are less likely to rip them off.
Guild-like behavior, enforced by government.
Steve, I love your use of our language... Demonym and recidivism! Go ahead and try to find those two words used elsewhere in five minute proximity.
I wonder how this compares with Maine river guides
Professionals are usually in favour of licencing to prevent competition.
Sounds like another tax to me.
Just because they call it a "tag, stamp, etc" it's just another way to get money.
And who determines the test for these guides? Fishing alone is expansive.
In Alaska guides have onerous licensing requirements. Did it prevent people getting ripped off. Not at all. It actually does the opposite. It gives guides exclusive areas to hunt and therefore allows them to rip off their customers. It's funny to hear a group of guides talk about ripping off their customers, it's as a bad as listening to auctioneers or antique dealers talk of scamming their customers. When covid hit guides across Alaska sucked their balls into their abdomens when they realized the implications. See, most guides get a 50% up front payment six or ten months ahead of time. The guides live off those up front payments. One would think they live off the other half, after the fact, but that goes to pay the debts they racked up months ago. So covid meant they would have to pay back the money they already spent. They were very releived when they got that stimulus money for lost business. Fianlly they could get those pesky customers off their backs and get those lawsuits over with.
Guide licenses are like most such licenses, a license to steal.
I’ve done plenty of guided fishing charters in the Great Lakes especially lake Eire, no guided hunting though. Wonder if people would go to Ohio if the mich Eire charters cost significantly more?
Get your bear and elk applications in before June 1st.
Is a charter fishing trip "guided"?
@ Michael s Charter fishing on the great lakes requires a Captains license and doesn't require a guides license. So NO they are not being guided. Great lakes are Federal waters different rules.
What's next? A license to breathe!
"I'm not a Fishing Guide... I'm a Fishing Buddy... "
As someone who has hired a guide for bear hunting in Michigan I will tell you it is hard to find a good guide. I imagine for fishing it is much the same way. I would appreciate being able to check out a guides information they sent to the state on how many were caught or bears were bagged. I know people who went bear hunting and found out later their guide had never bagged a bear. Just some jerk who was making money for nothing. A good guide would have spent months baiting and finding good spots before the season ever started. So I guess I would have appreciated knowing who was capable enough to be licensed verses some guy flying by the seat of his pants.
Okay so my bear hunting story. A few of us were setting around a guys basement drinking lots of beer. Someone said we should go bear hunting with bow and arrow. We all agreed because we were drunk. Well like two weeks later he called and said he had us booked for a hunt. I had forgotten all about it and ask what the heck he was talking about. Bear hunting of course. So fast forward a couple of months. The guide is taking me out at like 4am to my tree stand. As we are getting near he tells me how lucky I am and points out a bear track as big as my head. Holy crap Bearman. Anyway he shows me my tree stand and says he will be back around lunch time to get me. So here I am in the pitch dark waiting for a huge bear to come by with a pointed stick to fling at it. Holy crap what am I doing here? All I saw was a small 80 pounder. The guide said I could have taken it but I wouldn't shoot one that small. Never did it again after that trip.
I stopped for a guy that hit a deer ahead of me in Michigan. I saw the deer run away, he was pulling a boat and more concerned about stopping safely than he was about the deer. I actually passed him when he hit the gravel b/c it was at the top of a hill and so sudden I would've hit his boat if I hadn't.
Anyway... I pointed off to where the deer went when yanking his flimsy bumper straight. That makes me a guide right?