Ok, I'll bite.

Besides the safety violations, why should I care if guides don't have a charter license at Buoy 10? Is the point that only charter license holders are safe?

There at TONS of guides with clients fishing below the Astoria bridge which is much further down river than the Longview bridge. I had not heard this charter boat law. When I stay at the Red Lion in Astoria there are many small sleds that are obviously guide boats. It must either be legal in Oregon or there isn't much enforcement.

Jimh,

The reason is a huge one- protect over-fishing.
Think about this... every licensed guide fishing the Columbia below the Longview bridge or even the Sound for that matter!

There are less than 180 charter license in the state. Just so happens I am looking for just one!

Wrong or right it is the law. Just because someone does not agree with the law does not give them the right to break the law. I'm sure there's people out there that think that snagging should be legal also.

I personally do not want to take a guided/chartered trip with a guide or a charter that breaks the law. If you don't agree with it the best course of action would be to work towards getting the law changed.

I agree with having a cap on the number of charter boat license's, in fact I would even support having a cap on Guide license's.

I do not think that just anyone should be able to go out and buy a $150 a year guide license, then start taking people across the B10 bar or any other Navigable waters. These water can be very dangerous and I want to know that my guide/charter is qualified.

"These water can be very dangerous and I want to know that my guide/charter is qualified."

Granted, but it seems that charter boats capsize in the ocean, too. In addition, people capsize on smaller rivers as well. Going out in the ocean or on a fast flowing river are both dangerous. Restricting one body of water to charter only doesn't make sense to me.

so to fish any saltwater you need a charter license? does that include the sound?

If you dont like the law, work to change it. But don't rant about enforcing the law.

This law only applies to enrty on the Washington side. If you are an Oregon Guide you can launch in Oregon and DO NOT need a charters license to fish those waters. about 90 % of the Oregon guides only have the "6 pack inland Coastal waters License." Which allows them the Columbia River Upstream of 10.

It seems we don't have more imortant crimes to get, than a guide trying to make a buck.I believe He can pay 750$ and get his Oregon guides lic. and solve the whole deal.

USCG lic are good for more than one state.

Maybe we should just ignore these criminals in their unlicensed and uninspected boats who are doing nothing more than endangering the welfare of their clients for some quick cash at the expense of our resources and go back to whining about the sneeky-assed floss-line snaggers?

BTW: Here's an interesting legality...

RCW 77.70.050
Reciprocal agreements -- Annual operating permits -- Education and enforcement programs.

(1) The department may enter into reciprocal agreements with other states concerning the operation and inspection of charter boats from those states that operate on the waters of the state of Washington. Reciprocity shall be granted only if a state can establish to the satisfaction of the department that their laws and standards concerning charter boats meet or exceed the laws and rules of the state of Washington. A charter boat that operates on state waters under a reciprocal agreement pursuant to this section shall obtain an annual operating permit from the department for a fee for each year the charter boat does business on the waters of the state of Washington. The department shall deposit the fees from annual operating permits issued pursuant to this section in the industrial insurance trust funds.

(2) The department shall develop an education and enforcement program designed to eliminate the operation of charter boats that have not been inspected and certified as required by this chapter, and shall provide the public with information regarding the safety features and requirements necessary for the lawful operation of charter boats.

I would be willing to bet that some of the intent here is safety. Last year 4 people died on the bar near Buoy 10 just on a weekend that I was there. I am a very experienced skipper and water safety instructor with CPR and first aid training and I was in the soup out there and saw the dangers first hand. A less experienced skipper in a smaller boat could kill himself and his customers. Witness the experienced guide who killed half his passengers crossing the bar out of Tillamook this year. The water there is very dangerous and kills lots of people. Part of the charter licensing is a much more extensive training and certification program. That alone doesn't make a safe skipper but in this day and age of lawsuits and libilities gone wild I think government errs on the safe side.

OK grandpa

I am at a lost here! Maybe I am just outdated, so walk me along if you will.
You said;

Maybe you are right, but what else do they do? And if that was the case, how can they just "sell" their licenses to who ever pays the price?

Not trying to hammer on you, I am just trying to figure out what the laws are now for these "special charters" licenses.

Besides being responsible for "carrying more special" gear for the amount of people that some carry, what special training are they required to take? All guides are required to take and have CPR and First Aid training, so does anyone really know what is so special?

Cowlitzfisherman

Let me go one step further here, I have been the owner of a Charter License, I used to run a 6 pack out of Ray's Boathouse - long story, another time. However, the point I want to make is that I believe Fisheries looks at Charter Boat fishing as part of the Commercial allocation because of the old split between Dept. of Fisheries and Dept. of Game. Since salmon are a "food fish", charter licenses have been used to limit the entry into the "commercial fishing industry". This really does look like a carryover from the time when the Depts. were seperate.

Now, I will tell you that the only way I made any money as a charter boat owner was when I sold my 6 pack license. Since the State is not issuing any more, those that own one get to sell at a premium price.

The law is clear, CR downstream of Longview Bridge requires a charter license. I may disagree but that is the law. CFM, once again, if you disagree with the law please try to change it but don't deride those who support it.

CFM - I think that it is a significant leap of logic (if not faith) to say that I "got to screw the guy that you sold YOUR license to". How did I screw anybody? I sold my license at the market value, no more, no less. Now, you may vehemently disagree with the market forces that set the price but I take personal offense at your contention that I screwed someone. It would be like you going to the local gas station and making an accusation of bad morals, ethics, and business practice to the owner because of the obscene price of gas today. Again, you and I may agree that the market forces that set the price are immoral, unethical, and the result of price gouging. However, if you exercise your right to accuse, understand that the accused may take offense.

In regards to the charter requirements that coincide with the WDFW charter licenses, I can speak from personal experience that I had to hire a Coast Guard Certified Captain to run my boat. I investigated what it would take to get that license in my name and discovered (this was 1991) that I could do it if I worked no other jobs. It is (was?) a rigorous process that involved 100's of hours of operation under the supervision of a CG licensed Captain. Does that CG certificate mean something and can we as users of the resource put value on it? That may be the debate especially when compared to the requirement(s) that a river guide attains. My point is the law is clear, downstream of the Longview bridge requires a charter license and by extension requires the Coast Guard certification. If you feel the law is wrong I salute your efforts to change it. Once again however, I would remind you that the way you deliver your message is important too. And when you question the ethics, morals, and business practices of someone you do not know it becomes difficult to gain their support.

the guides had to know the law i know that some guides were ticketed at cathlement for same thing during springer season. and a guy was ticketed in the forks area for guiding without a license

Aunty...Controversy seems to have left this board to some extent....What is Ramon up to? Maybe he'll come back and tells us what he thinks. WT has been supiciously quiet while they scrutinize the hatcheries they are trying to close. I wonder what WT thinks about guides??? and not fly fishing guides on the private ranches. Real guides.

Eddie: Selling a charter license is no crime. Allowing them to be sold as a commodity is probably ill advised but the idea of keeping a lid on the numbers is a good idea in my book. The idea that Washington has one law and Oregon contradicts it on the same piece of water is goofy. The Oregon side of the Columbia stretches a long ways across at the famous fishing grounds below the Astoria bridge and having that side heavily populated with "guides" while the smaller Washington side prevents the same is nuts. Especially since those Oregon "guides" get to fish on the Washington side under all the other reciprocal rules.

CFM: The coast guard certification process is a rigorous one. I have a friend who has a charter license that he rarely uses and he spent months of heavy studying and testing to get the CG certificate. I say this is the only way to fly for those boats venturing out in dangerous waters with paying customers aboard. Like I said before, there are many families mourning their lost relatives due to accidental drownings at sea in our area. Anything to help the safety of those paying customers is right by me and is not just bureaucratic BS.