Guides/Sak

[Freedom]

The funniest shit about this thread is here we are picking on guides when all the politicians are sitting back laughing at us bending us over from every direction possible who gives a shit if someone makes a little money off a walleye . Dig deep into some our good ole ND politicians there the ones laughing bending us over

There's also another thread begging the government to bend people over before they're allowed to fish

 

[Kentucky Windage]

I would like to pose this question: since the guides buy fishing licenses, pay their guide license fees, and only take out people who purchase a fishing license prior to paying them to take them fishing:

Why can’t I buy multiple yearly fishing licenses so I can go out and harvest multiple limits a day and then sell those fish to other markets for retail?

 

[MicLee]

I would like to pose this question: since the guides buy fishing licenses, pay their guide license fees, and only take out people who purchase a fishing license prior to paying them to take them fishing:

Why can’t I buy multiple yearly fishing licenses so I can go out and harvest multiple limits a day and then sell those fish to other markets for retail?

That would be illegal as all hell.

The original question in this thread was about something legal.

I have no issue with it, as it is legal, but I do think it should be frowned upon. See me frowning?

 

[Petras]

I would like to pose this question: since the guides buy fishing licenses, pay their guide license fees, and only take out people who purchase a fishing license prior to paying them to take them fishing:

Why can’t I buy multiple yearly fishing licenses so I can go out and harvest multiple limits a day and then sell those fish to other markets for retail?

This would in fact be illegal and is specifically called out in the proclamation.... The selling portion of your hypthetical is anyways....

This would be the definition of what you claimed you were against in your first post when you said "Guides shouldn’t be able to financially benefit from a public resource."

The difference between your hypothetical and what guides actually do is that your hypthetical actually involves the sale of something that is a public resource for financial benefit. Guides are just providing access to said public resource, they aren't actually selling the resource...

 

[Kentucky Windage]

That would be illegal as all hell.

The original question in this thread was about something legal.

I have no issue with it, as it is legal, but I do think it should be frowned upon. See me frowning?

No, I was never taught how to read paintings….

 

[Kentucky Windage]

---

This would in fact be illegal and is specifically called out in the proclamation.... The selling portion of your hypthetical is anyways....

This would be the definition of what you claimed you were against in your first post when you said "Guides shouldn’t be able to financially benefit from a public resource."

The difference between your hypothetical and what guides actually do is that your hypthetical actually involves the sale of something that is a public resource for financial benefit. Guides are just providing access to said public resource, they aren't actually selling the resource...

This would in fact be illegal and is specifically called out in the proclamation.... The selling portion of your hypthetical is anyways....

This would be the definition of what you claimed you were against in your first post when you said "Guides shouldn’t be able to financially benefit from a public resource."

The difference between your hypothetical and what guides actually do is that your hypthetical actually involves the sale of something that is a public resource for financial benefit. Guides are just providing access to said public resource, they aren't actually selling the resource...

I never changed my mind in where I stand. I’m looking at the current legal scenario and asking why myself or any other person shouldn’t be able to do this, that or the other thing and come out with the same or similar financial result as recognized by the state as “revenue” at the end of the day. It’s all about the “Benjamin’s Baby” when it comes to the state. Do you see where I was going with this or should we translate the conversation to taxi drivers?

 

[Petras]

---

I never changed my mind in where I stand. I’m looking at the current legal scenario and asking why myself or any other person shouldn’t be able to do this, that or the other thing and come out with the same or similar financial result as recognized by the state as “revenue” at the end of the day. It’s all about the “Benjamin’s Baby” when it comes to the state. Do you see where I was going with this or should we translate the conversation to taxi drivers?

I absolutely see where you were going... The only thing the govermnment gives a shit about is money.... but your logic is flawed because you are comparing apples to oranges. Your hypothetical proposal involves the ACTUAL PHYSICAL SALE of a public resource(Fish). Guides aren't selling a public resource, they are just helping people access it. You can translate the conversation to whatever you choose, but regardless of translation your arguement will be flawed because you are talking about 2 completely different situations whose only resemblance to each other is that they both happen on the water.

I guess if you aren't able to see the difference between your hypothetical and what a guide does then the conversation needs to probably end because you probably won't ever be able to figure it out...

 

[lunkerslayer]

We are really hitting the bottom of the barrel in regards to debating over if a guides keep or gift their daily catch. Atleast we transitioned away from those fish are too big we need slot limits, as far as what guides do with their limits many gift their walleye either by givng to those who can't fish, putting on a big fish fry for patrons, or they eat them.

 

[guywhofishes]

 

[johnr]

A good friend is not a fisherman, his wife loves to fish. They have an astounding lake home in the Pick City area (multimillion dollar type of shanty), he has a few jet skis, a huge surf boat, but doesn't have a fishing boat, as he doesn't fish. His wife hires a guide up there a few times a summer to get her fishing fix in. Without guides she would only be fishing when it was offered by one of the neighbors.
No issue with guides, they are a necessity.

 

[guywhofishes]

A good friend is not a fisherman, his wife loves to fish. They have an astounding lake home in the Pick City area (multimillion dollar type of shanty), he has a few jet skis, a huge surf boat, but doesn't have a fishing boat, as he doesn't fish. His wife hires a guide up there a few times a summer to get her fishing fix in. Without guides she would only be fishing when it was offered by one of the neighbors.
No issue with guides, they are a necessity.

I'm sorry... but wut?? I don't understand.

Was he in an accident and suffered some sort of trauma?

Tragic.

 

[Kentucky Windage]

I absolutely see where you were going... The only thing the govermnment gives a shit about is money.... but your logic is flawed because you are comparing apples to oranges. Your hypothetical proposal involves the ACTUAL PHYSICAL SALE of a public resource(Fish). Guides aren't selling a public resource, they are just helping people access it. You can translate the conversation to whatever you choose, but regardless of translation your arguement will be flawed because you are talking about 2 completely different situations whose only resemblance to each other is that they both happen on the water.

I guess if you aren't able to see the difference between your hypothetical and what a guide does then the conversation needs to probably end because you probably won't ever be able to figure it out...

To me, they are selling a public resource (managed and developed by tax dollars) through advertising and guiding people to harvest it and then profit from it.

 

[deleted member]

Top 2 feeds on "what's new" for me have me thinking it must be mid February.

 

[Slappy]

Guides are savage resource exploiters... until you're on vacation in a far away place then it's acceptable to pay a guide to take you out for a day...

 

[Zogman]

Guides are savage resource exploiters... until you're on vacation in a far away place then it's acceptable to pay a guide to take you out for a day...

Or you just arrived at the Angle with your 16 ft Lund and 40 horse Johnson. And you had never seen so much water before. Aaah memories.

 

[luvcatchingbass]

As long a guide doesn't waste and stays in the letter of the law then I guess it doesn't matter to me. Is it much different than someone who has the luxury to go fishing pretty much whenever they want and just takes people as they want, not really beside the guide is getting reimbursed at a better rate than friends do usually. I think sometimes it would be great to be a guide of some sort then I remember that you also have to be willing to take the bad with the good just like anything else and if my livelihood depended on snagging a walleye in the mouth I would be screwed.

 

[3Roosters]

Once you get paid to take people fishing, it becomes a JOB. This alone would have deterred me from even attempting to be a Guide. No thanks. I fish, hunt,etc..to RELAX from the everyday work world.

 

[IFishND]

It would be pretty tough to be a guide. Putting up with the daily bs of it all.

 

[Kurtr]

I actually enjoyed guiding. I didn’t do it all the time but when I did I had fun. I really liked pheasant hunting for the fact my dog got out a lot of days