Does anybody really regulate outfitters on USFS lands?

[BuzzH]

As somewhat predicted - this was the response from the Special Permits coordinator :

"XXXX,

This request for assigned sites of our outfitter and guides is massively time consuming and borders on privileged information potentially requiring a FOIA. I would encourage reaching out to the individual outfitter and guides for that information. They may or may not share that with public."

I understand the rationale for this to some extent, but at least in this national forest (and at least 2 others in CO that I know of, it could be all of them, I suppose), planned 'reserved' campsites/trailheads/etc are required information as part of the outfitter's permit application.

And, as there is an active Forest Order in this NF restricting the public from camping within 200' of these locales, it seems like it should follow that the public should be able to know in advance where they need to avoid.

I know of one of the outfitter camps in this area (most years, anyway) and there's no visual signage or indication it's an outfitters camp (a couple wall tents and some pieced together logs and limbs for various things - something I have seen many DIY horseback hunters erect on their own). I would't camp within 200' of another camp anyway, even if unoccupied, but it is certainly possible to do so, and seems fair the public should know, especially when there are substantial penalties (I can't imagine anything like the max penalties below actually being applied, but it's in the order):

"Order Number: # XXXXX-2024-XXXX: A violation of the above prohibitions is punishable as a Class B misdemeanor by a fine of not more than $5,000 for individuals and $10,000 for organizations, or by imprisonment for not more than six months, or both"

I'm not sure if I want to go down the FOIA road or not, will have to chew on it a little bit.

Thing to do is ask about a specific spot/drainage if you intend to hunt there.

I did that exact thing when I had my WY sheep tag. I had plan A-D on where I wanted to hunt on the opener. Called the FS office and they know which camps are permitted to hunt sheep and what camps they plan on using. My plan A spot didn't have an outfitter camp there so that's where we went.

I just didn't want to disappoint a paying client by killing a ram out from under them.

After opening week, we just hunted where we wanted to and didn't care where the outfitters were. Ran into outfitters a few times, never any issues.

 

[Treeshark]

Not true, total fabrication.

70%+ of companies now have a formal return-to-work policies. 87% of all new job postings require being fully on-site.

Are you saying that companies are making these decisions, while also drastically increasing their overhead, to actually decrease productivity?

 

[BuzzH]

70%+ of companies now have a formal return-to-work policies. 87% of all new job postings require being fully on-site.

Are you saying that companies are making these decisions, while also drastically increasing their overhead, to actually decrease productivity?

Yes...bunch of old boomers stuck in the 70's. They probably still wear suits and ties to the office too...and wingtips. Hard to teach old dogs new tricks.

Check the Bureau of Labor Statistics...

 

[Treeshark]

Check the Bureau of Labor Statistics...

I have. So have the top 70%+ of the top business leaders in the world, apparently.

I don’t blame some people for clinging to a work-from-home arrangement, for the right mindset I’m sure that is a gravy gig. But the jig is up… it’s time for America to get back to work.

 

[BuzzH]

I have. So have the top 70%+ if the top business leaders in America, apparently.

I don’t blame some people for clinging to a work-from-home arrangement, for the right mindset I’m sure that is a gravy gig. But the jig is up… it’s time for America to get back to work.

Productivity and Economic Impact​

• BLS research shows a positive relationship between remote work and total factor productivity (TFP) growth: a 1 percentage-point increase in remote work is associated with a 0.05–0.09 percentage-point increase in TFP growth U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
• The pandemic-era rise in remote work (2019–2021) contributed to above-average productivity growth in many industries U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Did you just miss this part? Or do you just have a bromance with Jamie Dimon?

 

[Treeshark]

That’s from 2021.

In hindsight, we got a lot of things wrong in 2021 didn’t we?

 

[Bonasababy]

70%+ of companies now have a formal return-to-work policies. 87% of all new job postings require being fully on-site.

Are you saying that companies are making these decisions, while also drastically increasing their overhead, to actually decrease productivity?

Depends on the job, but yes, in many cases. I mentioned the classic case from my former employer in an earlier thread. A fellow who routinely worked with people all over the state...through online meetings. No need for office space. Lived close to his spouses work. Forced to return to work driving over an hour each way...so he could sit at his computer in an office that cost money and do the same thing he did working from home.

Totallly unnecessary...and costly.

 

[BuzzH]

That’s from 2021.

In hindsight, we got a lot of things wrong in 2021 didn’t we?

Still as pertinent...sorry to disappoint you and Jamie.

You have an office only policy, you're not drawing from the top of the talent pool, fact. People don't like to commute hours a day to sit at a computer when they can do the same thing at home...and they'll take less pay for the flexibility.

Me personally, I don't care either way. No question I get way more work done at home. But, always fun to chew the fat with coworkers for a few hours a day. Lots of distractions at the office for sure, so production suffers.

Not to mention all the office politics problems when people start sniping at each other...but that kept me busy as a Union President too.

I've been a remote worker for over 30 years, in that time numerous cash awards, certificates of merit, and one of the top producers. Why f&%# with success?

When I've supervised people, I just handed them a stack of work and said, "get it done". Don't care what hours you work, don't care what your work schedule is, don't care what days you work. Just don't make me have to ask you why it's not done.

Again, my employees were all top performers...funny how hard people work for you when they aren't micromanaged and you treat them like adults.

 

[Treeshark]

Please take a minute and read this thread from the beginning.

In a beautiful twist of irony, it was started in 2021

 

[BuzzH]

Please take a minute and read this thread from the beginning.

In a beautiful twist of irony, it was started in 2021

To get the right results you have to ask the right questions, no matter what year.

Land Management agencies have been severely underfunded and under-staffed since the late 80's/early 90's.

 

[Irrelevant]

Not true, total fabrication.

Our internal metrics show a significant decline in production from wfh employees. While it is not universal, it is/was sufficiently so for us to revise our policy.

We don't have a single boomer on the board.

 

[Drake4]

We’ve lost multiple very talented people to WFH jobs. I’d love to have several of them back. Top performers for sure.

No official metrics here, but after being involved in dozens of professional interviews since COVID, I can very confidently say you are missing out on some very talented folks if you don’t have some sort of WFH policy.
This coming from someone who would be absolutely worthless if I had to work out of a home office.

 

[El Jason]

IME the work from home issue is just part of the larger culture war. Jobs vary with how productive folks can be at home, just as the employees themselves.

My current position doesn’t allow nor warrant WFH. My previous one did, and I was far more productive at home than the office. If you can’t trust employees to do their work at home, there’s a pretty high likelihood you hired the wrong person.

All that said, I’m to the point where I don’t really care. If someone is so dumb as to hamstring productivity by requiring folks to sit in a cubicle, that’s on them. Like Buzz said, the comraderie is nice, but often comes at the cost of productivity. I give an honest days work for my pay, but I’m also past taking ownership in stupidity I can’t control.

 

[mtmuley]

Thanks Anthony. mtmuley

 

[BuzzH]

Our internal metrics show a significant decline in production from wfh employees. While it is not universal, it is/was sufficiently so for us to revise our policy.

We don't have a single boomer on the board.

Sounds like you need to hire better people.

 

[Irrelevant]

Sounds like you need to hire better people.

Or have them come back into the office.

I would love to only hire people who worked hard no matter what. But it is what it is. That policy change didn't cost us anyone we couldn't stand to lose and our profitability is back to normal