Guiding on Public Land
Ryan Barnes for SPLIT REED
Public land is one of the most sacred things we as hunters hold dear. It’s land that we get to hunt whenever we legally can, and we’re only restricted by the rules and regulations that the state and federal lawmakers have instituted. Outside of those boundaries, public land is exactly that- public.
People travel from state to state to hunt public land. While others may “freelance” and try to hunt private property, many hunters are able to enjoy knowing that no matter where they go, they’ll at least have a place to go on public land.
However, in a few states, (my home state of Utah is one of them) it has been brought up that guiding on public land should be outlawed. This law is already in effect in the state of Idaho, and in a few miscellaneous counties in other states across the country where you may only guide hunts on private property. No guiding may take place on public land.
So the question is posed, should guiding on public land be allowed?
That probably all depends on who you ask. If you ask the long-time waterfowl guide who has been making a living guiding for ducks in the Arkansas timber, of course, he will say that guiding on public ground should never be banned. On the flip side of the coin, if you talk to a hunter who is having a hard time finding public land to hunt due to the excess number of guides that are running clients, his answer will be drastically different.
While there may not be any simple, cut-and-dry answer, it would do well for us to look at both sides of the argument. However, before we dive in, keep in mind, that guiding on public land and guiding on private land don’t differ in the sense of commerce. Someone flying from Alabama to Washington to shoot wigeon and cacklers doesn’t care if that happens on public or private. So the argument of “guiding on public land brings in more revenue for the state”, No it doesn’t. That revenue would be coming into the state either way. It would come into the state just the same as it would be guided on private ground. We just needed to get that one out of the way before we go any further.
Now, the benefits of guiding on public ground.
First and foremost, you have the ability to help more clients and you’re not hamstrung by private landowners. That’s a huge plus in certain states where over 80% of the wetlands and obviously the farmland are on private ground. It gives guides the ability to run a successful business, without having to worry about buying out leases. This takes me to my second point, leases.
Guiding on public ground alleviates the stress of the guides buying up all the private leases (for the most part). It gives the everyday waterfowl hunter a chance to get in on some private land that they otherwise would miss out on because a guide would need to throw some astronomical money around to buy as many leases as they can. Look at what’s going on in Idaho. You can’t guide on public, so the private land leases are becoming some of the most expensive hunting items you can buy. With some leases selling upwards of $20,000 for hunting rights to an 8-acre field. It’s getting ridiculous.
Guiding on public land has benefits. The aforementioned are just a few. Now for the negatives.
With guides on public grounds, you have more competition for hunting spots. And if we’re being honest, you’re usually not going to beat a guide. Most guides, if they’re any good, will do any and all things necessary to ensure that they get the best spots possible. That means the other hunters are left to compete in second or third-tier spots.
Allowing guides on public grounds also can create issues with hunting ethics. You can Google any story about a waterfowl hunting guide doing something horrible, from slashing tires to stealing decoys, and it’s probably happened recently, and more than once. Guides are in the business of money, not necessarily hunting. That’s sometimes a helpful reminder. While hunting is a passion for any and all guides, that doesn’t change the fact that they’re out there for a paycheck, and on public ground, if someone is getting in the way of them making money, it can turn ugly.
I often think of it like bums on the street fighting over a dollar. A very crass way to put it, but bear with me. Two homeless men, doing whatever they can to get that dollar can result in some ugly tactics. With hunters and guides, just place them in the same role and replace the dollar with a successful hunt. I’m sure you understand the metaphor. Either way, standing between a guide, and the ability for them to put their clients on birds and have a successful hunt and a healthy tip- that could get ugly if they’re someone of low moral standing.
This one is a bit more philosophical, but there is the ethical dilemma of someone monetizing the use of a non-taxable property by hunting public land. Public land is often seen as “the people’s land”. It’s where anyone can go to try to legally kill ducks and geese. Some might call it immoral for others to try and make money off of that by charging someone money to hunt. I understand the business side of it, and the whole “goods and services” element, but let’s put on our hippie hat for just a moment, and think about the ethics and morals of someone taking public ground, and a depletable resource, and monetizing it for their personal gain. For most, including more and more law-makers across the country, it doesn’t sit right with them.
If you were to ask me my personal opinion, I think guiding on public land is just one more thing that rapes and pillages something that we as everyday duck hunters can’t afford to have raped and pillaged. Let the guides move to the land that’s private. That will weed out the shady, illegal, fly-by-night guides, as well as make hunting public ground a more enjoyable experience in what I would guess damn near every state.
But don’t take my opinion, think for yourself. Then voice your opinion. Make the change happen if you want it, or book a hunt if you don’t.
Click on Ryan to find him on Instagram