Is anybody here an AMGA ski guide.....

[hutash]

The euro's seem to do it. There you are a mountain guide, meaning to can, ski, rock climb and alpine climb and can lead clients in all three. Is AMGA going to be much different?

[Tye 1on]

Great points raised here. I can say that many land management agencies are taking a very cautious approach to requiring guide certification. Less so on the company level accreditation, if that's the right term.

[raueda1]

Great points raised here. I can say that many (1) land management agencies are taking a very cautious approach to requiring guide certification. (2) Less so on the company level accreditation, if that's the right term.

Requiring 2 forces the companies to require 1 of their guides, and the guide certification bar is being continually raised beyond what seems reasonable IMO. Rock Guide status necessary to for top rope trip on grade 1 terrain? Ski guide needs to climb 5.10a trad to qualify for applying to the cert program? That's where we're headed.

[Tye 1on]

Requiring 2 forces the companies to require 1 of their guides, and the guide certification bar is being continually raised beyond what seems reasonable IMO. Rock Guide status necessary to for top rope trip on grade 1 terrain? Ski guide needs to climb 5.10a trad to qualify for applying to the cert program? That's where we're headed.

good point.

[neck beard]

the proposed aiare/aaa avalanche education guidelines will make it nearly impossible to take professional track avalanche courses required for AMGA unless you are working as ski patrol digging data pits or working as a ski guide.

Which makes sense. And already works well in Canada.

[kootenayskier]

"monopolistic profiteering and credential inflation and exclusionary practices". Pretty much sums up the current situation in Canada. Credentialed guides have already invested way too much, and are making far too little (relative to their investment) that they can't afford to not exploit these opportunities. Seems like the US system is headed the same direction, and maybe a good opportunity for those inclined to get in now, and to spend their career screwing the next generation.

[jamesp]

the standard is high, pay is low, but that's the unfortunate reality of many lifestyle jobs. Is having to put a few years in on ski patrol really such a bad thing? Rock climbing 10a shouldn't be a that big deal for someone fit & competent enough to be calling the shots in the mountains. IMHO.

[kootenayskier]

An East German hairdresser told me that she'd been trained in history and philosophy (as part of her hairdressing credentials) in order to provide the necessary standard of banter to clients. Given the typical guided clientele, I figure some qualification in dispensing stock tips and evaluating luxury commodities (wines, cigars, cars and real estate) would be more relevant than climbing 5.10. Some drama classes to work on the authoritative voice and striking heroic poses, the possibilities are endless.

[hutash]

...and a healthy appetite for cigarettes if you want to be like a European guide.

[summit]

Indeed... reminds of the European waitress who proudly said that she had to attend 2 years of waitressing school to be a qualified waitress. But I couldn't tell her service as measurably better than an above average American highschooler.

[PNWbrit]

Indeed... reminds of the European waitress who proudly said that she had to attend 2 years of waitressing school to be a qualified waitress. But I couldn't tell her service as measurably better than an above average American highschooler.

Stupid American tourists always fall for that shit..

Waitress school!

LMAO.

[neck beard]

Rock climbing 10a shouldn't be a that big deal for someone fit & competent enough to be calling the shots in the mountains. IMHO.

Rock climbing to any standard is irrelevant to the vast majority of guided backcountry consumers. Most people just want to ski, not ski mountaineer. Full mountain guides can serve those who want more than a little short roping or lowers.

[Sentinel]

Some really good discussion here. Food for thought; Earlier in the thread it was calculated out that guide courses and certifications totalled a minimum of $10000, which did not include all the trip costs and what not required to get the experience requirements to even apply to the guide program, so the cost is definitely higher than $10000. That being said, the educational cost to getting a teachers degree, or an engineering degree is around $10000 a year. So my question is, is the ratio of educational cost to pay comparable over the various professions? If so, AMGA guides are getting paid comparably. It would be interesting to calculate the same ratio to musicians, actors, and professional hockey/basketball/baseball players and see how they compare to the other professions.

[Tri-Ungulate]

Given the typical guided clientele, I figure some qualification in dispensing stock tips and evaluating luxury commodities (wines, cigars, cars and real estate) would be more relevant than climbing 5.10. Some drama classes to work on the authoritative voice and striking heroic poses, the possibilities are endless.

Just spend enough time in the Padded Room and call it good.

[PowLicious]

Their plans certainly don't state it the way I did, but that will absolutely be the real-world impact on some operations, starting with my own. See below.

I've pretty much drunk the koolaid too and agree with all that. It's complex. But I'm nevertheless concerned about how high the future standards will raise the qualifications bar. I think they're going too far and there will be unexpected consequences and serious backlash at some point. I didn't know about that Rock Guide cert would be prerequisite for Ski Guide, that's just incredible. That's saying that to even think about an AMGA ski Guide career that you need to have a climbing resume full of 5.10a trad climbs. That's a helluva lot more than what I'd ever associate with ski mountaineering but maybe I'm uninformed. Maybe half the people here are 10a trad climbers for all I know -- but I doubt it.

Anyway, what their whole scheme doesn't seem to take into account is that "guiding" covers a very wide range of terrain and guiding operations. For an operation that just runs expeditions up Denali it may be just fine. But consider the opposite end of the spectrum, like a small operation catering to beginners on day trips on single pitch terrain, aka top roping. this could be a college Outing Club, or any number of small and limited operations - I'm not talking about AAI or IMG (though they do beginner stuff too).

Now let's say the land management of [insert name of crag, mtn, park, etc] mandates AMGA accreditation of all guiding outfits (not uncommon in the northeast). As it stands, the beginner scenario above would require at least one SPI certified guide and client:staff ratio requirements can be maintained by uncertified trainees (who apply that experience to getting SPI cert). After 2017 this same scenario will require that the lead guide be a certified Rock Guide and the rest all be SPI. And there's no more room for anybody without SPI. Nobody can tell me that there's some necessity that the lead guide be Rock Guide in a single pitch, top rope, day scenario.
.

To clarify - for 2016 you need to take an Alpine Skills Course or Rock Guide Course before the first Ski Guide Course. I would guess this is to make sure you have proper knowledge of rope skills, anchor systems, and protection on snow, glacier and rock environments. The ASC doesn't require leading trad at 5.10, it requires at least 5 leads or shared leads at 5.6 and above. You would need these skills to say, climb the Grand or guide in technical terrain anyway. I don't think it's a bad thing. If you're guiding clients on steep terrain, even terrain that you yourself feel comfortable on but it's over exposure, has a bad run out, etc you'll need to be familiar and comfortable with the skills that include rope, alpine and rock work. If you know you're going towards more technical guiding or multiple certs, it's probably an asset to do a Rock Guide Course, if not the ASC is a 4 day course. I suppose it's more hoops to jump through - but it also sets the stage for having more well rounded ski guides.

[raueda1]

To clarify - for 2016 you need to take an Alpine Skills Course or Rock Guide Course before the first Ski Guide Course. I would guess this is to make sure you have proper knowledge of rope skills, anchor systems, and protection on snow, glacier and rock environments. The ASC doesn't require leading trad at 5.10, it requires at least 5 leads or shared leads at 5.6 and above. You would need these skills to say, climb the Grand or guide in technical terrain anyway. I don't think it's a bad thing. If you're guiding clients on steep terrain, even terrain that you yourself feel comfortable on but it's over exposure, has a bad run out, etc you'll need to be familiar and comfortable with the skills that include rope, alpine and rock work. If you know you're going towards more technical guiding or multiple certs, it's probably an asset to do a Rock Guide Course, if not the ASC is a 4 day course. I suppose it's more hoops to jump through - but it also sets the stage for having more well rounded ski guides.

Not so according to AMGA website. Among other things, the following are stated as PREREQUISITES to taking the Rock Guide course:

> Confidence leading traditional and sport routes up to 5.9, at the time of the course
> You have led 10 traditional climbs rated 5.10a or harder on various rock types (single or multi-pitch)
> You have led or shared lead on 50 multi-pitch routes (10 of which are Grade III or longer)

Seems a bit odd, there's a world of difference between 5.9 sport and 10a trad,

I'm all for competence but that's a helluva lot of climbing background for the kind of ski guiding that most people do. The SPI cert also covers rescues, anchor systems, rope skills etc. AMGA seemed to skip right past that, which seems more relevant and far more realistic to me. FWIW I'm told that there are only about 150 Rock Guides in the country (or maybe it was "Rock Instructors" not sure). Make of it all what you will.

[adrenalated]

Not so according to AMGA website. Among other things, the following are stated as PREREQUISITES to taking the Rock Guide course: Seems a bit odd, there's a world of difference between 5.9 sport and 10a trad,

Reading comprehension. He stated that the Alpine Skills Course (ASC) does not require leading 10a trad. Which is correct:

Prerequisites:
Current AMGA member
Completion of a CPR and WFR Course (minimum 80 hours)
Successful completion of a Level I Avalanche Course
Two years personal climbing experience on a variety of terrain that includes snow, rock and alpine
Confidence leading 5.6 in rock shoes, at the time of the course
Confidence on 3rd and 4th class terrain, in mountain boots, at the time of the course
Competence in overnight backcountry camping
Experience up to 10,000' in elevation
Familiar with basic knots, including: figure 8, bowline, clove hitch, munter hitch, mule hitch, pruski, flat overhand, double fisherman's and klemheist
Confidence placing traditional rock protection
Familiar with multiple types of belaying techniques, including plates and assisted braking devices
Familiar with ascending methods
Familiar with mechanical advantage systems
Familiar with LNT practices
Documentation of lead or shared lead on 5 rock climbs rated 5.6 or harder
Documentation of 5 ascents that include snow climbing
Documentation of 3 overnight backcountry trips

[raueda1]

Rock climbing to any standard is irrelevant to the vast majority of guided backcountry consumers. Most people just want to ski, not ski mountaineer. Full mountain guides can serve those who want more than a little short roping or lowers.

Yeah, this^^^. A couple years ago I won a gift certificate for AAI's 'Extreme Ski Course.' I still haven't done it (long story) but I've talked to them about it at length. By their description it's about as wild as skiing gets but falls well short of serious mountaineering or climbing -- basically just rapping into couloirs or over a cliff. It's for skiers, not climbers so there's no multipitch anything, maybe a little bit of baby roped climbing with crampons and ice axe. Makes me wonder where this would fall in AMGAs New Order.

[raueda1]

Reading comprehension. He stated that the Alpine Skills Course (ASC) does not require leading 10a trad. Which is correct:

Prerequisites:
Current AMGA member
Completion of a CPR and WFR Course (minimum 80 hours)
Successful completion of a Level I Avalanche Course
Two years personal climbing experience on a variety of terrain that includes snow, rock and alpine
Confidence leading 5.6 in rock shoes, at the time of the course
Confidence on 3rd and 4th class terrain, in mountain boots, at the time of the course
Competence in overnight backcountry camping
Experience up to 10,000' in elevation
Familiar with basic knots, including: figure 8, bowline, clove hitch, munter hitch, mule hitch, pruski, flat overhand, double fisherman's and klemheist
Confidence placing traditional rock protection
Familiar with multiple types of belaying techniques, including plates and assisted braking devices
Familiar with ascending methods
Familiar with mechanical advantage systems
Familiar with LNT practices
Documentation of lead or shared lead on 5 rock climbs rated 5.6 or harder
Documentation of 5 ascents that include snow climbing
Documentation of 3 overnight backcountry trips

I missed the OR, my bad. Truth be told the prereqs for the ASC look a lot more relevent to ski guiding than those for Rock Guide.

[galibier_numero_un]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest barrier to having a successful career as a mountain guide in North America is not so much the certification challenges (which are very real, and I'm not debating it), but rather the absence of respect and salary commensurate with this being a true profession.

Contrast this to Yurp, where guides, chefs, etc. can look to guiding as a lifetime career. This reminds me of all of the US jazz musicians who had to go across the 'Pond to make a living. I couldn't find any links comparing North American-based vs. Europe based salaries, but the following interview with Mark Allen is a good read (I think) for the young, perspective guide: http://www.outdoorresearch.com/blog/...mountain-guide

Over here, it seems as if we're willing to pay more for the hairdresser who won't turn our hair green when streaking it, than someone who will watch our ar$e and help keep us safe in the big mountains - WTF

It's difficult to find links comparing pay grades of guides around the world (other than anecdotal comments in numerous threads/blogs on this issue), but maybe someone can comment. The salary situation here seems to be marginally better than that of ski instructors, which to me, is a crime.

The repeating theme I found was is like that of this post by JPVallone on Mountain Project: http://www.mountainproject.com/v/the...e/107249702__2 where he says (in 2011 US dollars):

"It allows me to make in 2 months guiding in Europe what it would take me 6-8 months working in the states. Right now it's about 300 Euros a day as an average minimum wage to work in the alps. With todays exchange that is around 450$ or so, I usually charge 350-400 depending on my groups and objectives. There is an abundance of work if you put yourself in the mix and take the appropriate roads to qualify yourself for it."
.
.
.
"PS as for IFMGA/UIAGM route, no regrets for me, Best education I ever had and as expensive as it may seem, Expect to shell out 30k over 4 years to complete the path, It is a shit ton cheaper then College and I consider it just as good as a college degree. I do have a BA and I don't do anything with it."

Cheers,
Thom

[LeeLau]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the biggest barrier to having a successful career as a mountain guide in North America is not so much the certification challenges (which are very real, and I'm not debating it), but rather the absence of respect and salary commensurate with this being a true profession.

Cheers,
Thom

Pretty much

[neck beard]

Reading comprehension. He stated that the Alpine Skills Course (ASC) does not require leading 10a trad. Which is correct:

Prerequisites:

Confidence leading 5.6 in rock shoes, at the time of the course

How is this beneficial to a ski guide? All they are doing is filtering out otherwise very good ski guide candidates who don't even own rock shoes.

It would be more relevant if they required orienteering as a prerequisite.

[_Aaron_]

How is this beneficial to a ski guide?

Because contrary to popular belief ski guiding isn't just mellow pow skiing. With one course they are attempting to create well rounded ski guides that can guide in all types of non-glaciated ski terrain and in all conditions. Keep in mind that in firm (spring for example ) conditions a person can take a slide for life on a pretty moderate slope.

On a side note, if you're working in the mountains leading 5.6 and moderate ice shouldn't be that big of a stretch.

[neck beard]

Because contrary to popular belief ski guiding isn't just mellow pow skiing. With one course they are attempting to create well rounded ski guides that can guide in all types of non-glaciated ski terrain and in all conditions. Keep in mind that in firm (spring for example ) conditions a person can take a slide for life on a pretty moderate slope.

On a side note, if you're working in the mountains leading 5.6 and moderate ice shouldn't be that big of a stretch.

I work in the mountains and I do not agree. Rock climbing is not a prerequisite ski guiding skill, it is a prerequisite mountain guiding or ski mountaineering skill. And contrary to ego and image, most ski guiding is indeed on appropriate "mellow" terrain. Ski mountaineering and alpine guiding is different. Interesting that the "go big or go home" big terrain mindset is creeping into the ski guiding world.

And a well rounded ski guide should be able to guide on glaciated terrain, but need not be able to rock climb. They should have taught and practiced technical rope skills such as lowering, short rappels, small distance short roping, crevasse rescue, protecting against melt-freeze slides. None of these technical skills require climbing 5.6 trad in rock shoes as a base skill.

ps, I am on your side, we just have a different opinion. Also, a climber will find basic ski guiding rope technical skill easier to learn during tuition. I don't dispute that.

[_Aaron_]

I work in the mountains and I do not agree. Rock climbing is not a prerequisite ski guiding skill, it is a prerequisite mountain guiding or ski mountaineering skill. And contrary to ego and image, most ski guiding is indeed on appropriate "mellow" terrain. Ski mountaineering and alpine guiding is different. Interesting that the "go big or go home" big terrain mindset is creeping into the ski guiding world.

I said most of the guiding is in mellow terrain, just not all of it. I think we are barking up different trees here. You're arguing as if the SGC is a stand alone course.im arguing that since the SGC is not supposed to be a stand alone course for ski guides that it's a base for the ski guide certification which does cover the range of skiing and ski mountaineering. Because of this, leading 5.6 rock is a totally appropriate requirement. If the course was intended as a stand alone course/cert for ski guiding in non-technical and non-glaciated terrain then I would agree, 5.6 in rock shoes is dumb.

I would say the "go big or go home" mentality has crept more into clients minds than guides. Guiding mellow pow is easy and (relatively) stress free (with a much more immediate and tangible reward) where as big or steep descents involve much more and difficult work as well as increased stress and risk. Given the choice, I'll take the former every time.

And a well rounded ski guide should be able to guide on glaciated terrain, but need not be able to rock climb. They should have taught and practiced technical rope skills such as lowering, short rappels, small distance short roping, crevasse rescue, protecting against melt-freeze slides. None of these technical skills require climbing 5.6 trad in rock shoes as a base skill.

I agree here too about glaciated terrain. I think the reason behind not including it in the SGC is that most of the ski work in the US is nowhere near a glacier.