Northwest Fishing Reports

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary ... &bill=1917" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Requires the department of fish and wildlife to issue a western Washington steelhead guide stamp.
Allows the holder of a food fish guide license to only offer or perform services related to the taking of steelhead
in certain nonmarine bodies of water if the license holder also purchases a western Washington steelhead guide stamp.
Includes in the crime of acting as a game fish guide, food fish guide, or chartering without a license if a person offers
or performs guide services related to the taking of steelhead in certain nonmarine bodies of water without first obtaining a western Washington steelhead guide stamp.

So this hasn't come up on WaLakes yet, but it need to get out there. I just found out about it from one of my guide friends. I'm sure there are a lot of opinions out there about this and some see it as a great thing, especially if they are sporties tht have no intention of being a guide. The idea is that there would be a limited amount of stamps for each river system, and you have to have the stamp to guide on that river, thus limiting the amount of guides fishing any given stream. I'm pretty sure it's because the guides association out in Forks gets tired of Seattle guides coming out for the late steelheading and wants to monopolize it all for themselves.

I'm strongly opposed to this, and so should you. This is a money grab by the state, and a power grab by the guides out there. Guides should be against it because it's going to tremendously affect our bottom line. But let me tell you why you need to be against it.

It means that if and when you want to book a trip on a river, say the Bogey, or the Cowlitz, when the fishing is hot, odds are you're not going to be able to, unless you book months in advance. If 3 guides are working on the Bogey, the season runs for three months, I'd be booked up by October. That's three trips a day that are available to all of us that want to fish. It'd be the same for all the rivers. Not enough trips to go around. This means that they'd become a precious commodity. That means that the guides would raise their rates, and you couldn't do anything about it. And we'd have to. The Skykomish is only good for steel for a few months a year, and it closes in February. If I have a stamp for only a few rivers like they want, I'm not working all year. Which means I have to get my bottom line up in 7 or 8 months to the amount that I make in 12 now. That means I'm charging a heckuva lot more money per trip. And even if you did want to pay that much, us guides may not even be able to get you your trip because we'll be booked up 7 days a week when the fishing is going to be good.

The bill is in committee right now, but if we don't speak up it'll have a good chance of passing. I'm going to dig up the contact info of the folks on the committee and get it so that you can send them a letter voicing your concern.

Nate,
I see your points and im not the biggest steelhead guy in the world. Just started this year. But what I did notice is that cetain rivers when hot get absolutely rocked by boats to the point where finding fishable water is dang near impossible. I can see some guys points that live on the coastal systems. To your point about them wanting all the money to themselves it can go both ways. I can see why they are upset when your rivers over here close you go and take their clients, add more pressure to their rivers that they are always guiding just to get your money because there rivers are open. It can go both ways. Alot of the guys that guide forks have been doing so for years so when new guides come out and start pounding their water they have been profiting on for years of course its going to ruffle feathers. Just playing devils advocate because I personally believe both sides have a legit case.

fishingmachine wrote:Nate,
I see your points and im not the biggest steelhead guy in the world. Just started this year. But what I did notice is that cetain rivers when hot get absolutely rocked by boats to the point where finding fishable water is dang near impossible. I can see some guys points that live on the coastal systems. To your point about them wanting all the money to themselves it can go both ways. I can see why they are upset when your rivers over here close you go and take their clients, add more pressure to their rivers that they are always guiding just to get your money because there rivers are open. It can go both ways. Alot of the guys that guide forks have been doing so for years so when new guides come out and start pounding their water they have been profiting on for years of course its going to ruffle feathers. Just playing devils advocate because I personally believe both sides have a legit case.

Yea, I know their points well. It's true that the river get crowded when the runs are hot, but that's because they're the ONLY runs in the state. I'm going to have the stamp, so I'll be guiding out there. Unless it's a lottery, I'd be first in line. But the problem is, there are more than enough clients to go around. None of us guides like craigslist specials, so that's why I supported the new legislation requiring liability insurance, cpr first aid and coast guard requirements. The runs out there are over fished to be certain, but not by guides. They're over fished by the netting. And from late February to May, that's where the steelhead are. I wouldn't guide out there if the Sky was open, but it's the only viable option during that slow season. Our rivers have hot runs, and we have hot rivers with good runs. That's why the Bogey gets busy in early December, then we hit the Sky late, then the Nooch and Satsop.

And there is no reason to give guides a monopoly on the rivers out there. Just because they've fished it for years, doesn't mean they should be the only option out there. I can't tell you how many times I've gone out with guys who were refreshingly surprised at my customer service and how hard I worked to get people on fish compared to the trips they've gone out with long time guides. Competition breeds excellence and customer satisfaction.

Is this just steelhead?

So far, yes. It's in committee, so they'll make changes. I'm sure they'll tack on salmon if they could, because they run at the same time steelhead are in, it's kind of a mute point.

This state is becoming more and more of a pain in our hind ends with these new regs. I'm not a guide but im backing you guys on this

The steelhead stamp bill died, but this one is on the gov's desk to be signed.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary ... &bill=5786" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gassyboy wrote:The steelhead stamp bill died, but this one is on the gov's desk to be signed.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary ... &bill=5786" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Yea, I'm a big supporter of this bill. I was amazed at how little you need to be a guide. I hope the bill dies.

The steelhead stamp bill had to get out of committee by Feb. 22 to stay alive this session and it did not.

About time something is done. Tired of seeing mishandled fish shoddy ethics and general prostitution of a public resource. Lots of guides that are well just way too amateur out there. A step in the right direction. guides ruin rivers and are not stewards in many cases. Do u blame them for not rolling out the red carpet for Seattle and Montana guides in forks? I mean seriously all u need is a boat. What a crock. Its nothing personal and there are plenty of good guides as well. But when the cost of admission is low you get low quality, weekend guides who really could give a darn about the resource or the experience they provide. Perhaps if the cost of admission for guides and clients went up the integrity would be there. You get what u pay for. Please don't get me started on the poor downright dangerous oar skills displayed this year. I meanyou should at least be safe.

kieth stone wrote:About time something is done. Tired of seeing mishandled fish shoddy ethics and general prostitution of a public resource. Lots of guides that are well just way too amateur out there. A step in the right direction. guides ruin rivers and are not stewards in many cases. Do u blame them for not rolling out the red carpet for Seattle and Montana guides in forks? I mean seriously all u need is a boat. What a crock. Its nothing personal and there are plenty of good guides as well. But when the cost of admission is low you get low quality, weekend guides who really could give a darn about the resource or the experience they provide. Perhaps if the cost of admission for guides and clients went up the integrity would be there. You get what u pay for. Please don't get me started on the poor downright dangerous oar skills displayed this year. I meanyou should at least be safe.

I agree with you on a lot of that. While the stamp bill is apparently dead, the new bill requiring business licenses, liability insurance and cpr and coast guard training is sitting on the governors desk waiting for a signature. Craigslist specials and live at home with parents guides can ruin the experience for everyone. They have no overhead, no insurance, and no training and turn a lot of people off of going on guided trips. That's why I was glad to hear that the requirement bill is going to pass. The stamp bill was bad business though. Believe me, I'd be first in line to get my stamps, and it wouldn't hurt my business. But it would severely limit the opportunity for folks to get a guided trip, raise prices and create monopolies on the rivers. It's just not the way to go about the thing. If they managed the fisheries better, they'd create more places to fish and we wouldn't all be playing bumper boats on the same river system every time the run got hot.

True enough Nate. I think there should be more requirements. That way those that are serious can invest and the pretenders can go away. Also there needs to be more enforcement on illegal guiding. Folks need to realize that making money on a public resource is a privilege not a right. Sooner or later i fear our fisheries will go the way of BC and Quebec.there is simply too much pressure. To make matters worse techniques in modern fishing like side drifting eat up far too much water and leave little sanctuary for the fish. Its a joke that we fish over sensitive native runs with bait. The dechutes in Oregon is an example of how great a high demand fishery can be with proper regulation.

kieth stone wrote:About time something is done. Tired of seeing mishandled fish shoddy ethics and general prostitution of a public resource. Lots of guides that are well just way too amateur out there. A step in the right direction. guides ruin rivers and are not stewards in many cases. Do u blame them for not rolling out the red carpet for Seattle and Montana guides in forks? I mean seriously all u need is a boat. What a crock. Its nothing personal and there are plenty of good guides as well. But when the cost of admission is low you get low quality, weekend guides who really could give a darn about the resource or the experience they provide. Perhaps if the cost of admission for guides and clients went up the integrity would be there. You get what u pay for. Please don't get me started on the poor downright dangerous oar skills displayed this year. I meanyou should at least be safe.

I am behind this guy 100%

I for one am in support of limiting the amount of guide licenses that are sold on each river. Overcrowding is essentially the main reason I sold my sled. We fished the Cowlitz a few weeks back and there were around 25 boats out, and all day I think we only saw 4 private boats, ours being one. That is just downright ridiculous.

Same thing on the Snohomish system, my home water. Guide boats outnumber private boats at least 2 or 3 - 1 during the summer run and salmon seasons.

As for any particular guide monopolizing any particular geographic region I would argue that all guides would have an equal opportunity to select which rivers they want to guide on based on prioritization of effort. I.e. anyone could get the coast licenses, you would just have to prioritize them when choosing your home waters.

Time for some elbow room, I'll be out on the bay.

My $.02 (if it's worth that) is that it's supposed to be a free country and a guide should be able to guide wherever he/she wants to as long as the fishery is open of course. Private boats have no more rights to the resources then they do. Frankly for new river anglers like me I need to go with a guide to be remotely safe, you would not want me out there with my own boat. Experienced river boaters probably think nothing of it but from my perspective it takes a lot of skill and attention to stay safe navigating a river.
At $150-$200 it's an expensive day of fishing but compared against the cost to get set up to boat/fish a river yourself it isn't that bad and provides people like me an opportunity to get out and try these fisheries.
I also agree that guides need to meet some basic standards to be able to guide legally, it's a business and most businesses have regulatory requirements to meet to operate legally, guides shouldn't be exempt.

Matt wrote:I for one am in support of limiting the amount of guide licenses that are sold on each river. Overcrowding is essentially the main reason I sold my sled. We fished the Cowlitz a few weeks back and there were around 25 boats out, and all day I think we only saw 4 private boats, ours being one. That is just downright ridiculous.

Same thing on the Snohomish system, my home water. Guide boats outnumber private boats at least 2 or 3 - 1 during the summer run and salmon seasons.

As for any particular guide monopolizing any particular geographic region I would argue that all guides would have an equal opportunity to select which rivers they want to guide on based on prioritization of effort. I.e. anyone could get the coast licenses, you would just have to prioritize them when choosing your home waters.

Time for some elbow room, I'll be out on the bay.

The over crowding isn't a problem of the guides, it's simply the nature of the run timings and proximity to Seattle. There is a big demand for us guides, we have boats, we have expertise, and we catch fish. It's a big investment to get out there and catch fish in your own boat, and folks just don't have the itch to go more than a few times a year will go on a guided trip. I'm not a big fan of crowds either, but the fact is that the number of rivers with fish in them are shrinking, while the number of fishermen are growing.

Used to be they put hatchery fish in the two Pilchucks, the Newaukum, Sultan and a whole bunch of smaller systems. The Tolt, and Raging got their share of plants. That's just the rivers in the general area that are no longer planted. Yes, I know they're looking to promote wild fish survival and re-establishment, that's another topic, but what that means is that we just dropped the angling opportunity in our area from 7 rivers to 2.

So when our fish runs suffer, the fishermen aren't going away so they have to go somewhere. We all get clumped together running 100 boats down the hump when the kings are in, because that's where all the big kings are. The demand for guides is growing every year, and having a monopoly on given river systems is only bad for the consumer. Sure, the avid fishermen that has his own boat will probably start to resent us because we catch fish and have an increased presence on the river, but that's just the nature of the industry. Getting a boat is a big investment, and requires a commitment to fish that most average folks just don't have the time or funds to do, so when they get out, they're coming with us. A sled or a drift boat is a specialized machine, expensive and not good for much except fishing. You're not going to drop 40 Gs on a boat that you're only going to use 3 or 4 times a year, you're going to hire a guide to take you out.

The problem with the stamp idea is that the legislators are leaving it up to the bureaucrats to decide how many for each river, how many stamps one guide can have and what qualifications that guide needs to have to get one. That's too many unknowns and if for some reason you could only get a stamp for the Cowlitz and the Sky, there will be months out of the year that you can't work. There will be less guides at a higher cost, and it'd severely impact our businesses.

This isn't about protecting a resource, it isn't about keeping the fishing strong, it's about limiting access to an elite few and giving a monopoly to them. I know people don't like fighting the crowds, but this isn't the way to fix it. This is drastic overhaul of a flawed system, it's making a mountain of a molehill. If they're worried about native fish escapement on the OP they'd first address the 6 day a week netting. In one day those nets kill more natives than the entire flotilla of guides kill in two seasons. The stamp bill wants to cripple an entire industry so that a select few can get a little bit of elbow room.

jd39 wrote:My $.02 (if it's worth that) is that it's supposed to be a free country and a guide should be able to guide wherever he/she wants to as long as the fishery is open of course. Private boats have no more rights to the resources then they do. Frankly for new river anglers like me I need to go with a guide to be remotely safe, you would not want me out there with my own boat. Experienced river boaters probably think nothing of it but from my perspective it takes a lot of skill and attention to stay safe navigating a river.
At $150-$200 it's an expensive day of fishing but compared against the cost to get set up to boat/fish a river yourself it isn't that bad and provides people like me an opportunity to get out and try these fisheries.
I also agree that guides need to meet some basic standards to be able to guide legally, it's a business and most businesses have regulatory requirements to meet to operate legally, guides shouldn't be exempt.

Absolutely. We're here to keep you safe and get you on fish. I take folks out that have their own boats to learn the systems for the first time a lot. Keeps them safe, and catches them fish.

That's what the other bill does, it makes sure that as guiding professionals we're doing everything on the up and up. That in itself will keep the number of guides on a system down, and those us that are full time don't really want the weekend warriors out there offering 99 dollar trips. And you don't want it either, because there's no quality control.

Man Nate, there you go throwing logic and reasoning around. Gonna get resentment from the BandAids Fix Everything crowd for that.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you, too.

The problem isn't in the number of guides on a given river. The problem is the mismanagement of the resource from the top, making the number of rivers with catchable fish shrink every year. I never fished the Pilchuck River when I was a kid, just the smaller streams near Lake Stevens, but I remember seeing the amount of fish swimming up to do their thing each year. 40 years has seen a lot of change in the resource, and not for the better. I understand the need for wild fish to be protected, but something is sorely wrong when one group of people aren't allowed part of a resource, and others are given free reign to take as much as they want, or can sell for profit.

If something isn't being properly managed, you don't punish what or who is being managed. Thats just simple logic. Something that is sorely lacking these days.

Guides make up the bulk of traffic on many systems. Anyone not seeing that had their head in the sand. Do i blame them, no. However the time has come for a change, and higher credentials are one way of doing this, be it not the only way.

gonnahookit wrote:Man Nate, there you go throwing logic and reasoning around. Gonna get resentment from the BandAids Fix Everything crowd for that.

And I wholeheartedly agree with you, too.

The problem isn't in the number of guides on a given river. The problem is the mismanagement of the resource from the top, making the number of rivers with catchable fish shrink every year. I never fished the Pilchuck River when I was a kid, just the smaller streams near Lake Stevens, but I remember seeing the amount of fish swimming up to do their thing each year. 40 years has seen a lot of change in the resource, and not for the better. I understand the need for wild fish to be protected, but something is sorely wrong when one group of people aren't allowed part of a resource, and others are given free reign to take as much as they want, or can sell for profit.

If something isn't being properly managed, you don't punish what or who is being managed. Thats just simple logic. Something that is sorely lacking these days.

Guiding is another form of commercial fishing. Therefore needs to be regulated accordingly.