Montana's Outfitter Assistant Law: Fair to the Public?

[Eric Albus]

good grief Joe... you know how few times since its inception the OA has been used? It is very few, and I can find out the exact number if need be. It is needed. Guides quit, get sick, injured, have emergencies, ect.. Outfitters need to have a vehicle to use to stay legal, and the OA is the best thing we have for cases where a guide can't fulfill their obligations. Is it perfect, no, but it does provide a way to have a legal guide.

gunbuffs...that may be the single dumbest thing anyone has ever typed.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Thank-you, Eric, your points explain the practical validity and the reality of the OA.

gunbuffs, I also agree with Eric's statement about your point(s). It's just that kind of rhetoric which gets otherwise worthwhile informative discussions blocked and shut down. Please consider the relevance your typed message, reread it, then submit if you think it's something of benefit to others on this forum. Thanks.

 

[bobbydean]

The last few replies to this thread are stupid. I am a pharmacist. If I were sick, should the law give the pharmacy technician be able to fill in. Hell no! Same scenario with guide. MINIMUM skills are still required!

I think that an emergency plan is great, provided the fill in has those same skills!

 

[onpoint]

"gunbuffs...that may be the single dumbest thing anyone has ever typed".

doubtful

 

[Straight Arrow]

If I were sick, should the law give the pharmacy technician be able to fill in

Huh???

I may be stoopeder than a farmisist ... but I still know backwoods furst ade ... and I have a right to an opinion on this forum.

University level education and certification for a pharmacist versus basic outdoors skills for a hunting guide is not a stupid analogy ... but I'm sure you could do better if you tried.

As stupid as we may seem, I think we understand your point though.

 

[Eric Albus]

lol...straight...that was pretty funny, onpoint, you also made me laugh...you are most likely correct in that assumption.

I too is stoopider than a farmercyst.

I also understand the analogy, but it does not even come close to comparing... anyone who can pass a hands on first aid course is "qualified" to become a licensed guide.

 

[Eric Albus]

joe, tell me, what "requirements" for being a guide did MOGA have "removed"? Cite me one.

 

[tjones]

Does a paying client that is expecting a guide get a break if he goes out with an OA
who just passed a "hands on first aid course"?

 

[katqanna]

The qualifications for a guide are more than just hands on first aid. Guide Application, like the applying guide's documentation being reviewed by the Board, and they may have to interview with the Board or provide additional information.

Here is the Outfitters Assistant temporary exemption from licensing MCA.

37-47-325. (Temporary) Outfitter's assistants -- exemption from licensing. (1) An outfitter may hire or retain an outfitter's assistant.
(2) An outfitter's assistant is not required to obtain a license under this chapter.
(3) The outfitter's assistant must carry proof of employment as provided in 37-47-404(4)(b) pending adoption of proof of employment by the board by rule.
(4) (a) An outfitter who employs or retains an outfitter's assistant is responsible for ensuring that the outfitter's assistant:
(i) safeguards the public health, safety, and welfare while providing services; and
(ii) is qualified and competent to perform the tasks of a guide.
(b) The board shall hold an outfitter who employs or retains an outfitter's assistant responsible under the provisions of 37-1-316, 37-47-341, and 37-47-402 for any acts or omissions by the outfitter's assistant in the ordinary course and scope of duties assigned by the outfitter.
(5) The outfitter's assistant may not be employed or retained by an outfitter for more than 15 days in a calendar year unless the outfitter's assistant is actively obtaining a guide's license pursuant to this part and the board determines that the license application is routine for purposes of 37-1-101.
(6) An outfitter may use more than one outfitter's assistant in a calendar year.
(7) An outfitter's assistant may be employed or retained by an outfitter on more than one occasion in a calendar year if:
(a) the outfitter's assistant is not employed or retained for more than 15 days as an outfitter's assistant in that calendar year; or
(b) the outfitter's assistant is actively obtaining a guide's license and the board determines that the license application is routine for purposes of 37-1-101.

 

[Eric Albus]

kat, only if there is a red flag thrown up on their application.... if you have a clean record, no game violations, no criminal record.... pass hands on first-aid and you will be licensed.

It would be far easier to call a guide school and get a young kid from back east to hire on as a "guide" than jump through the OA hoops. Personally were I on the other end of the equation I would rather have an outfitter use the OA and have a local or rancher licensed as a temporary guide than hire some green kid just out of guide camp.

 

[katqanna]

Eric, on the Guide application, one of the license requirements and qualifications, "Must be endorsed and recommended by an Outfitter with a valid current Montana license." Are you saying that there are Montana outfitters that are signing off on green kids just out of guide schools back East, that don't meet the application qualifications?

• Must have not less than one season of experience of hunting or fishing for the type of game for which the applicant will guide or have worked for the outfitter that signs the license for a period of
at least six weeks and in the area to be guided in, or have successfully completed a school licensed by a state, approved by the board, and that trains persons to be a guide or professional guide.
• Must have knowledge of hunting and fishing techniques to provide the particular services contracted to the client by the endorsing outfitter.
• Must have knowledge of equipment and terrain and hazards to competently provide a safe experience for those persons guided.

 

[devon deer]

I wonder if the outfitter pays the OA the same rate as a fully qualified guide?

I am a fly fishing guide in the UK, to get my license i am required to have up to date first aid, qualified in child protection, and also checked by my government on a regular basis for criminal charges.
But when i employ the services of a guide i would prefer they had lots of field experience, and can guide me safely rather than they possess an up to date first aid qualification, lets face it, we can all deal with minor scrapes, broken limbs are common sense, but get a head injury/heart attack/stroke in the wilderness and you are screwed.

Funny thing, in the UK you have to jump through lots of hoops to be a qualified fly fishing guide/instructor, but anyone can be a hunting guide, doesn't make any sense to me that one.

Cheers

Richard

 

[tjones]

I would be pissed if I showed up on an expensive elk hunt and got some green kid from back east that has never even killed an elk.

Seems the industry has pretty low standards.

 

[mtmuley]

Funny you mention the green guide thing. I've worked with several guys that became "guides" during the hunting season, and they were just that. Guys from the East that had never even killed an elk. I know one individual that guided for years before actually hunting and killing one, if he even has yet. Yeah, it happens. mtmuley

 

[Straight Arrow]

I know one individual that guided for years before actually hunting and killing one, if he even has yet. Yeah, it happens. mtmuley

Similarly, an acquaintance acknowledged that he came from back east to Montana to attend a guide school and went to work as an elk hunting guide prior to any elk hunting experience or backwoods experience. He admitted sheepishly that on his first horseback hunt as a guide he became disoriented. Fortunately, he had enough horse sense that he merely slackened the reins and his horse led the party back to the trailhead.

 

[Pierre]

There was a Master Guide category that was totally scrapped. Outfitters made the call, not guides.
I think you miss the point Eric, I originally said there are times when chit happens and you need a replacement quickly. The point is not what is quicker, or easier, or cheaper for you. The point is what is best for the public, fair, and have they been notified! You seem to give no consideration to what the client needs or wants or was promised or paid for!. I have the list of OA's used in the past. It jumps out at me that the reasons used are chickenchit. It also jumps out that some folks use this thing repeatedly citing only staff shortages....it points to a big loophole. You folks always seem to categorize the "health, safety, and welfare of the public" which is the charge of Boo, as unimportant or last place at best.
Case in point: NO QUESTIONS about the OA's legal standing....is the person a criminal? Is he/she under court orders not to handle a gun, not to be near children, felonies, a habitual offender etc?? I have watched MANY very shakey individuals be licensed by Boo. No remorse, no responsibility, no problem.
Why is it you need to legislate to have the breaks for yourselves. Most of us in business have to be proactive and have a qualified replacement.

 

[Pierre]

In the case of OA'S, you folks passed this bill with a sunset to try it. Try it does not mean if you folks like it....it also includes has it been analyzed to make sure there is no abuse. You folks should damn well be interested in that end as well. If it is so successful, lets make sure with an audit of the program, BEFORE bringing legislation to remove the sunset.
Another point, this thread has given you a taste of what many think. Do you really want concerned citizens getting on hunt talk and other blogs warning their friends and relatives NOT to book an outfitter in Montana?? It is THAT important to many of us.

 

[shoots-straight]

I think that for outfiitters like Eric, (non wilderness, private lands), it's not a big deal to hire your nephew or other 8th grader to take your clients out to the blind and sit with them for the day. Wilderness outfitting is totally different and should not be treated the same. It's not fair to the paying client looking for that total wilderness experience and professionalism, and I believe gives outfitters that hire top notch guides a bad rap.

I understand this isn't brain surgery either, but people do need training for the deep wilderness thing vs ranch type hunting. Maybe a compromise can take place.

 

[onpoint]

it's not a big deal to hire your nephew or other 8th grader to take your clients out to the blind and sit with them for the day.

coffee came out my nose.......

 

[Eric Albus]

kat, the applicants for guide license have to sign their name that all the info they give is accurate. So it is assumed that they do have the experience. Difficult to prove. I have hired 8-10 kids out of "guide camps" Some worked out fine(3 became full time employees on our ranch) some did not work out so good. They were all green, their hunting skill were adequate for what they were hired for....their people skill were where they needed more work, the hunting end of it is not that difficult, especially here in NE Mt..



shoot,you bring up a very valid point.... what we do in the east is nothing like leading a pack string into the backcountry. We have cell coverage everywhere, and at no time have any of my guides felt themselves or their clients in jeopardy. In less than an hour we can be in a town with a hospital.


joe, this thread has given me a taste of what folks who view outfitting dimly think.