Guide/Instructor Tipping

Br3tt wrote: FrankPS, thank you for the detailed response. My question may not have been as clear as it should have been. Can I find a guide on the AMGA website and see if they'll guide me independently (i.e., as not a part of their company)? Obviously this would necessitate obtaining the permits ourselves, but at this point (assuming the guide isn't employed by a guiding company) isn't it just two people going climbing (one of whom happens to be a guide)? In this way the independent guide gets to keep more of his/her $, and I pay less (because he/she keeps everything I give them). Might be easier to put it like this. Say FrankPS is an AMGA licensed guide. In scenario 1 he's working for Exum Guides, but we're friends so he decided to guide me on his own. In this case I'd presume he's breaking his employment agreement and wouldn't be allowed. In scenario #2, FrankPS is not employed by a guiding company, but is AMGA licensed guide. Can I contact FrankPS privately via the AMGA website and have him guide (once again, a win-win)?

I have no idea of the specifics, but I think part of what you aren't getting is that it may not be enough to be an AMGA licensed guide. The service (i.e. company) is also licensed, those licenses are limited, and the routes/trips are also regulated. I believe in Idaho, our Outfitters and Guides association probably includes climbing, but the big ticket item is rafting. The Salmon River is a great trip, enjoyed by loads of people every year, but that number is carefully controlled and spread out so that wilderness river trip will be there for the future. An individual can't just get their ticket and start hauling people anywhere they please, certainly not in the rafting context, but I think it's also true for climbing, based on location. Could I hire an individual guide to teach me to climb at my non-destination local rocks? Probably. Would I be thrilled with them holding "freelance" classes for forty people there every weekend? Maybe not. Helen

Br3tt wrote: FrankPS, thank you for the detailed response. My question may not have been as clear as it should have been. Can I find a guide on the AMGA website and see if they'll guide me independently (i.e., as not a part of their company)? Obviously this would necessitate obtaining the permits ourselves, but at this point (assuming the guide isn't employed by a guiding company) isn't it just two people going climbing (one of whom happens to be a guide)? In this way the independent guide gets to keep more of his/her $, and I pay less (because he/she keeps everything I give them). Might be easier to put it like this. Say FrankPS is an AMGA licensed guide. In scenario 1 he's working for Exum Guides, but we're friends so he decided to guide me on his own. In this case I'd presume he's breaking his employment agreement and wouldn't be allowed. In scenario #2, FrankPS is not employed by a guiding company, but is AMGA licensed guide. Can I contact FrankPS privately via the AMGA website and have him guide (once again, a win-win)?

Part 1: No. That proposal is wrought with complex problems. Guides that work for an outfit typically can't guide in the same areas as an independant guide. That'd be competing and would result in job loss. They wouldn't have access to their outfit's equipment or insurance structure. And why would they charge less?

Option 2: See last note above. Why would an independant guide charge less? Every guided day comes with over-head, even with an independant: equipment, insurance, travel, permitting, unpaid office time, etc.

A guided private day will cost you $300/ day anywhere in the lower 48 with a well qualified guide regardless of company or AMGA affiliation (AMGA is a start, also look for guides with long term local experience- that'll give you the best day). Expect to tip 20%, that's standard too. I've gotten tips over the last decade ranging from nothing (usually because of unawareness) to $150/ day. This really makes a difference on my day and quality of life.

I hired a guide a few years ago in the Valley because none of my friends there were physically able to climb. I was in the Valley
for less than 3 days and didn't want to negotiate which route to do with a random Camp 4 partner who may or may not have been reliable. Got a great guide from YMS and did 5 pitches of the Kor Beck on EBM. Cost $300, I tipped him $50-60. Totally worth it. He said I was the only client that he thought would have caught him if he fell.
Guiding is hard work, imho. Those guys and gals earn their pay. If you can afford to hire a guide, you can afford to tip them.

Fernando Cal wrote: IMHO if you need a guide to move up a mountain, because you DONT have the skills to get up there, then you shouldn't be up there in the first place. Learn the needed skills first in a controlled environment, instead of having someone carry you up a hill. There are cases when a guide is needed for climbs, because like others have posted, you can't find someone to climb with, partner bails on you, you're not friendly enough, etc. Guides can serve as mentors as well and usually know the area pretty well where you are climbing, if you're an outsider or new to the area. I have never considered getting a guide, but I am in the path of becoming a guide.

Seems like before you venture to far down the guiding path you might want to get comfortable taking people with few skills into places where they need them. It's part of the work, and guests are not looking to be demeaned for hiring someone to help them with their goals.

Ryan Huetter wrote: Seems like before you venture to far down the guiding path you might want to get comfortable taking people with few skills into places where they need them. It's part of the work, and guests are not looking to be demeaned for hiring someone to help them with their goals.

Indeed. Guiding is not about just climbing, it's about teaching and providing an experience. As a guide you'll teach people to climb who don't even know how to tie a figure eight. A guide's job is not to send a route with his client, it's to accomplish whatever goals the client has. In many cases, the guide is teaching entry level skills.

FrankPS wrote: Neither scenario works. The guide is not going to get a permit just for one trip. It costs money, he has to submit documentation showing his certs and liability insurance, and it's just not worth it. It's much more involved than just walking up to the ranger station to get a wilderness permit for backpacking. It's not so much about his "employment agreement," but the overall risk to his future in the guiding business. If the guide is willing to risk being banned from any future permits, he might guide you "privately." (aka illegally) If an accident were to occur, and the investigation revealed your guide was unpermitted, he would be in deep doo-doo. If you two were truly friends and he didn't charge you, you can climb together. Just like you can climb with anyone else. Edit: Regarding permits, my limited knowledge says they are issued for a one-year period, not specific trips.

Frank,

Not to belittle the point, but is money changing hands really the only holdup? If you and I are good friends, and you take me climbing, and I buy you dinner + beers...isn't that the same thing? You and I don't have to show documentation + insurance to climb in Josh...is the exchange of money the thing that moves us into the realm of "guide/business" as opposed to just two people climbing?

I 100% understand why a licensed guide from company X cannot guide on his/her own...for a multitude of reasons. But an AMGA certified guide can't climb with clients and charge them money? I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I think that's what you're getting at with the "overall risk to his future in the guiding business."

The only explanation I can see, and maybe this is what you're getting at, is that the NPS says "if you charge people $$ to climb on our land you're a guide/employer, and we require that all guides/employers obtain X, Y, and Z." Otherwise I can't see how a private transaction between two individuals creates an issue.

Br3tt, Frank, et al.:

First, clarity on a few terms.

Certified: an individual guide is certified as having met a minimum set of skills.

Accredited: a guide service is accredited by meeting a number of good business practices, operating legally and ethically, and hiring guides who are certified or in training to become certified.

Licensed: individual guides are licensed via the IFMGA for purposes of reciprocal guiding in member nations. This largely applies to Europe but may play a role elsewhere. Only IFMGA guides are licensed. A guide certified in any one discipline (rock, alpine, or ski) need not be licensed; he or she can't work internationally (in general) unless certified in all 3 disciplines and therefore an IFMGA guide.

Permit: permits are issued by land managers (park service, forest service, BLM, occasionally state and local as well) to either businesses or individuals at their discretion. These companies and/or individuals may or may not be accredited/certified depending on what the land manager requires. This varies between as well as within agencies. However, nearly all land managers require a guide/company to hold liability insurance to get a permit. Permits may be issued as a one-time/short-duration permit, an annual permit, or recurring multi-year concession. These options all typically require the same amount of paperwork, though.

What does this mean for the working guide? It depends where you want to climb. For example, there are only two climbing guiding permit holders for the Tetons: Exum and Jackson Hole. If you want to hire a guide (legally), you have to go through one of them. Period. The park service has made this decision. As an individual guide, I could work as an employee of either service and make a regular wage. If I don't regularly work in the Tetons, I'd need to guest guide for either company in order to take clients there. This could take many forms, but it often means that the guide will make an employee wage but may be permitted to charge extra to supplement the wage. Alternately, the guide might get a commission since they are bringing thein own clients. Or, the guide may just get the standard wage for that guide service since since there's administrative overhead to hiring new employees that the guide service now has to deal with for a relatively low volume booking (contractors are generally prohibited under most permits).

If you want to hire an individual guide, the cost may be somewhat less due to smaller overhead, but there's always overhead. Often if the rate is lower it's because the guide basically doesn't pay themselves for marketing and administration, they serve small groups and need to maintain less extensive facilities and equipment inventories, or both.

Another attractive option is the Certified Guides Cooperative. The CGC works a bit like a brokerage service for guides, providing insurance to member guides as well as access to permits at various locations that are still obtainable (i.e., not the Tetons).

If you go to the AMGA hire a guide page, you'll likely get a combination of all of these, with the specifics depending on where you actually want to go. For example, if you wanted to climb with me in the Wasatch, we'd go through my company. If you wanted to climb in Moab or on Mount Baker, I'd use the CGC. If you wanted to climb the Grand Teton, I'd make some calls and see about guest guiding for Exum or JHMG. If you wanted to climb Notch Peak, you'd have to pay the permit fee ($100 min. usually) plus my administrative cost for getting a one-time permit since I don't have anyone else in my network of companies who holds one. Does that make sense?

This is in contrast with much of Europe where any guide permitted to work in the country can simply show their license and go to work. (This is obviously a gross over-simplification, but the permit system in the U.S. is quite complex and challenging).

chris magness wrote: Part 1: No. That proposal is wrought with complex problems. Guides that work for an outfit typically can't guide in the same areas as an independant guide. That'd be competing and would result in job loss. They wouldn't have access to their outfit's equipment or insurance structure. And why would they charge less? Option 2: See last note above. Why would an independant guide charge less? Every guided day comes with over-head, even with an independant: equipment, insurance, travel, permitting, unpaid office time, etc. A guided private day will cost you $300/ day anywhere in the lower 48 with a well qualified guide regardless of company or AMGA affiliation (AMGA is a start, also look for guides with long term local experience- that'll give you the best day). Expect to tip 20%, that's standard too. I've gotten tips over the last decade ranging from nothing (usually because of unawareness) to $150/ day. This really makes a difference on my day and quality of life.

I agree on point #1. It was more of a rhetorical question. I know that working outside the bounds of your employment is a big no-no.

Re point #2, why do you need insurance? Is it simply the exchange of $$ that creates a guide/customer relationship? Because I climb with people all the time, many of whom are far better climbers than I am, and they never talk about their over-head, insurance, permits, etc. It's just assumed that we'll both snag permits (on our own dime).

I may not be communicating as clearly as I could, but when I say "guide" I don't expect someone who has insurance and permits. I literally mean finding someone from the AMGA website, saying "hey, i'll pay you $250/day to take me up X." The only risk I can think of, from the guides standpoint, is that the exchange of $$ makes them (the guide) liable for injuries you sustain. I understand that, but I also think a well drafted waiver could mitigate those concerns.

There have to be guides who "guide" on the side, no?

I know in certain parks (Yosemite) you need to be licensed to guide. And I assume once you pay $$ to someone they are considered a guide (and thus need to be licensed). But the attorney in me wonders why two people can't work out a private arrangement in a park/forest that doesn't have such strict regulations (inyo/mono).

Derek DeBruin wrote:Br3tt, Frank, et al.: First, clarity on a few terms. Certified: an individual guide is certified as having met a minimum set of skills. Accredited: a guide service is accredited by meeting a number of good business practices, operating legally and ethically, and hiring guides who are certified or in training to become certified. Licensed: individual guides are licensed via the IFMGA for purposes of reciprocal guiding in member nations. This largely applies to Europe but may play a role elsewhere. Only IFMGA guides are licensed. A guide certified in any one discipline (rock, alpine, or ski) need not be licensed; he or she can't work internationally (in general) unless certified in all 3 disciplines and therefore an IFMGA guide. Permit: permits are issued by land managers (park service, forest service, BLM, occasionally state and local as well) to either businesses or individuals at their discretion. These companies and/or individuals may or may not be accredited/certified depending on what the land manager requires. This varies between as well as within agencies. However, nearly all land managers require a guide/company to hold liability insurance to get a permit. Permits may be issued as a one-time/short-duration permit, an annual permit, or recurring multi-year concession. These options all typically require the same amount of paperwork, though. What does this mean for the working guide? It depends where you want to climb. For example, there are only two climbing guiding permit holders for the Tetons: Exum and Jackson Hole. If you want to hire a guide (legally), you have to go through one of them. Period. The park service has made this decision. As an individual guide, I could work as an employee of either service and make a regular wage. If I don't regularly work in the Tetons, I'd need to guest guide for either company in order to take clients there. This could take many forms, but it often means that the guide will make an employee wage but may be permitted to charge extra to supplement the wage. Alternately, the guide might get a commission since they are bringing thein own clients. Or, the guide may just get the standard wage for that guide service since since there's administrative overhead to hiring new employees that the guide service now has to deal with for a relatively low volume booking (contractors are generally prohibited under most permits). If you want to hire an individual guide, the cost may be somewhat less due to smaller overhead, but there's always overhead. Often if the rate is lower it's because the guide basically doesn't pay themselves for marketing and administration, they serve small groups and need to maintain less extensive facilities and equipment inventories, or both. Another attractive option is the Certified Guides Cooperative. The CGC works a bit like a brokerage service for guides, providing insurance to member guides as well as access to permits at various locations that are still obtainable (i.e., not the Tetons). If you go to the AMGA hire a guide page, you'll likely get a combination of all of these, with the specifics depending on where you actually want to go. For example, if you wanted to climb with me in the Wasatch, we'd go through my company. If you wanted to climb in Moab or on Mount Baker, I'd use the CGC. If you wanted to climb the Grand Teton, I'd make some calls and see about guest guiding for Exum or JHMG. If you wanted to climb Notch Peak, you'd have to pay the permit fee ($100 min. usually) plus my administrative cost for getting a one-time permit since I don't have anyone else in my network of companies who holds one. Does that make sense? This is in contrast with much of Europe where any guide permitted to work in the country can simply show their license and go to work. (This is obviously a gross over-simplification, but the permit system in the U.S. is quite complex and challenging).

Derek,

This answered every question I had. Thank you!

Br3tt wrote:The only explanation I can see, and maybe this is what you're getting at, is that the NPS says "if you charge people $$ to climb on our land you're a guide/employer, and we require that all guides/employers obtain X, Y, and Z." Otherwise I can't see how a private transaction between two individuals creates an issue.

That's pretty much it exactly--if you take money for the day, you are using publicly provided taxpayer funded lands to make a personal profit, and therefore need to pay something back into the system for the privilege (since everyone else pays their taxes for the land without making a profit). This often puts guiding in the same category as mining, logging, and ski resorts, but that's the way the regulation is written at the moment.

If you buy someone dinner and beer, this is largely considered a gray area, but most of the land managers stipulate this is remuneration and would technically be considered guiding; I cant imagine that ever being enforced, though.

Derek DeBruin wrote: That's pretty much it exactly--if you take money for the day, you are using publicly provided taxpayer funded lands to make a personal profit, and therefore need to pay something back into the system for the privilege (since everyone else pays their taxes for the land without making a profit).

The interplay between an individual making personal profit on land that taxpayers fund makes complete sense and is something that hadn't even entered my mind before. It's a very good point and one that I can't really argue against.

Br3tt, to address some of your other points, recreational permits (such as those often needed for climbing in the Sierras) are a whole different beast from commercial permits. Guiding on a recreational permit is definitely not cool.

Insurance is needed for general liability, much as in any business. The reality is that waivers vary in enforceability from state to state and may depend on a prior case law that doesn't always work out in the favor of the guide/service. If your more experienced partner doesn't require you to sign a waiver, it's because they don't think they have legal duty and therefore couldn't be sued and found guilty of negligence. If I'm certified, a court probably thinks I've got duty and can be negligent.

Finally, regarding the remark (don't remember who made it) about people who need guides shouldn't be on the mountain, I certainly don't see it that way. Everyone has to learn somehow, and I'd rather they do it with a professional who can provide instruction and rescue if required as opposed to someone else who may or may not do those things very well.

My personal ethic on guiding is that we are equal partners in the objective with unequal skills. I teach what my guests need to know at a minimum, but prefer to teach them all they want to know. I also need my guests to have the motivation and discipline necessary for their desired objectives. I consider it my ethical imperative to redirect clients from objectives for which they are not ready.

Br3tt wrote: The interplay between an individual making personal profit on land that taxpayers fund makes complete sense and is something that hadn't even entered my mind before. It's a very good point and one that I can't really argue against.

Indeed. It's why I'm not opposed to a permit system. I think it is needed, particularly for large installations or significantly extractive industry. I just wish we had a simple and consistent system for permits for the typically smaller and less impactful operation that is guiding.

Derek DeBruin wrote: Indeed. It's why I'm not opposed to a permit system. I think it is needed, particularly for large installations or significantly extractive industry. I just wish we had a simple and consistent system for permits for the typically smaller and less impactful operation that is guiding.

I struggle with the permit system. I don't have the luxury of being able to plan trips out months or weeks in advance, but I'm as respectful of the outdoors as anyone you'll meet. Not only do I follow LNT principles but I'm not shy of calling out people who don't.

I find that, far too many times, I want to climb/backpack/camp in an area that requires permits that are sold out months in advance. I wish they would come up with a "middle ground" whereby one could get preferential treatment with respect to obtaining permits by doing certain things. The easy one is pay $$, but then you're cutting out a large segment of the population who can't afford a (hypothetical) "preferred-permit" status. I think this could be offset by membership to certain organizations (Sierra Club, Access Fund) or volunteer hours at a national park/forest (X numbers of verified hours volunteering entitles you to preferential treatment in terms of obtaining permits).

so you want bti find a way to cut the line? best way is to do it CTC. If you dont stay overnight you don't need a permit.

Br3tt wrote: I struggle with the permit system. I don't have the luxury of being able to plan trips out months or weeks in advance, but I'm as respectful of the outdoors as anyone you'll meet. Not only do I follow LNT principles but I'm not shy of calling out people who don't. I find that, far too many times, I want to climb/backpack/camp in an area that requires permits that are sold out months in advance.

In the Sierra, 60% of the wilderness permits are reservable for any given day, up to six months in advance (for trailheads with quotas). The other 40% are issued on a walk-in basis, available up to a day before your trailhead departure. The only exception to this that I'm aware of is the main Mt. Whitney trail.

I don't know how the permit system works in other areas of the country, but the 40% left for walk-in permits addresses your concerns about not planning your trips months in advance.

Edit: These permits are for overnight trips for backpacking and climbing, but are different from permits required for guiding.

According to my records, in my 7+ years of guiding my average tip is 16%. My best cash tip (percentage-wise) was 45% - though this doesn't count a few really nice dinners that have been unforgettable. I have been stiffed many times as well.

I think 15-20% should be considered standard.

Guiding, much like with climbing partnerships, is fundamentally a relationship (and one that involves quite a bit more trust, rapport, and investment than that between, say, a waiter and a customer in a restaurant). I remember the great clients and will go way above and beyond for them. Conversely, I remember the difficult ones (and the ones who stiff) and have, on occasion, politely declined climbing with them a second time.

Br3tt wrote: I may not be communicating as clearly as I could, but when I say "guide" I don't expect someone who has insurance and permits. I literally mean finding someone from the AMGA website, saying "hey, i'll pay you $250/day to take me up X." The only risk I can think of, from the guides standpoint, is that the exchange of $$ makes them (the guide) liable for injuries you sustain. I understand that, but I also think a well drafted waiver could mitigate those concerns.

The liability is a huge risk. That alone will deter some people. Waivers are great and all, but rarely end up absolving recreation providers of liability, more often the parts that hold up are simply stating the steps that must be gone through before taking a provider to court, and where it will be.

Other risks include: legal repercussions from the land manager if they discover unauthorized guiding happening, damaged professional relationships with the guides that do have the permitting in place, and discipline from the AMGA for breaking the code of ethics and conduct. Just to name a few.

Br3tt wrote: I agree on point #1. It was more of a rhetorical question. I know that working outside the bounds of your employment is a big no-no. Re point #2, why do you need insurance? Is it simply the exchange of $$ that creates a guide/customer relationship? Because I climb with people all the time, many of whom are far better climbers than I am, and they never talk about their over-head, insurance, permits, etc. It's just assumed that we'll both snag permits (on our own dime). I may not be communicating as clearly as I could, but when I say "guide" I don't expect someone who has insurance and permits. I literally mean finding someone from the AMGA website, saying "hey, i'll pay you $250/day to take me up X." The only risk I can think of, from the guides standpoint, is that the exchange of $$ makes them (the guide) liable for injuries you sustain. I understand that, but I also think a well drafted waiver could mitigate those concerns. There have to be guides who "guide" on the side, no? I know in certain parks (Yosemite) you need to be licensed to guide. And I assume once you pay $$ to someone they are considered a guide (and thus need to be licensed). But the attorney in me wonders why two people can't work out a private arrangement in a park/forest that doesn't have such strict regulations (inyo/mono).

I won't guide without insurance, it's irresponsabile. If you, my client, become injured in any sort of serious way, the costs could be staggering. Even though we make every effort to mitigate hazard and make informed decisions, accidents still happen: we simply can't control everything. The mountains aren't picky, they'll take lives and limbs. And if something happens to that degree, waiver or not, you or your family will hold the guide accountable. Liability insurance should be one of your main considerations when hiring a guide. Furthermore, when I work for a guide outfit, I'm covered by workman's comp, a luxury most indepenant guides don't have as it's cost prohibitive on an individual basis. Workman's comp gives me a little warm and fuzzy feeling when I'm being belayed by a first time climber who is unlikely to catch a leader fall, or when I'm climbing below a party on a polular multi-pitch ice route.

People do guide on the side, I'm not one of them: I like sleeping at night. No one that pirate guides feels good about it, it's often not worth the risk. If you've entered this sort of relationship, know the constraints and lack of professionalism involved. You're likely out with a lesser qualified guide with limited experience, without liability insurance, and without a permit structure. If this is a more qualified guide, he's risking repercussion from any company or assocation affiliation, fines from land managers (JK addressed this issue well).

As a guide, I've encoutered both AMGA certified guides and uncertified guides that aren't worth a damn. This is because of complacency or inability to teach or both. I'd encourage you to hire a well established guide, an individual or an outfit, with liability insurance and a permit structure.

Why all the effort to save a few bucks? Your well being could be compromised. The quality of your experience diminished. If you're going to hire a guide, hire someone who is going to give you the greatest return on your investment, a guide who is going to protect you on and off the climb (read: has liability insurance and permitting), and has a wealth of knowledge -both technical systems and local beta- to share with you.

And yes, if money is exchanging hands, you have hired a guide. The agreement is a verbal one. Permitting for a guide in many instances is different than a recreational permit: it's what allows a guide to work in a particular concession and in many cases helps to mitigate impact of commercial use. Certification or accreditation often aren't requirements for permitting, liability insurance and agreement to local regulations are.

In short, this is a free market. You can work out "an agreement" with anyone, anywhere. Any little hiccup whatsoever, the guide is seriously fucked, all for little monetary reward. It's a loose-loose situation.

Waivers in the modern world don't really mean anything. Even if you do have proper waivers you still get sued and still have to pay the cost of fighting it in court. Also like in many cases even if you have a waiver you screw up you still face a cost if you screw something up and noone is perfect.