I am in the same boat.  A LA stamp does not carry much weight.  Usually if a stamp is required for anything a civil is required not a LA.  Yes you need a LA license to work on public projects in most states, but you can also work under the guise of a "public artist" or a "urban designer" and team up with a LA should those opportunities ever pop up.  See Robert Irwin, Maya Lin, etc...  If you are not doing public works I wouldn't waste your time on a license, and I certainly wouldn't give up an established business to go work for someone else.  

Other then the fascist state of CA and NV  I don't know of any that prevent or limit residential work.  Some states like Mass., Vermont, and Illinois allow a designer to do everything that a LA does.  They do not have practice acts.  Must be very dangerous there...lol

Protectionism is a joke.  CA is probably the worst offender.  You can provide CD's for the design of a house in CA but not for the garden.  Why?  Because laws are written by lobbyists.  

I get the desire to have the title, and if it was just a matter of a paying a few grand and taking a few tests I would go for it...But to give up a good business to go work for someone else is not worth it...I know how much effort it takes to build up a business to the point of getting a steady work flow.  Do you really want to do that over again?

What jla-x said, in spades (pun intended). If you are successful you probably already have licensed LAs in the hedges snapping photos of your projects.

I have run my own LA business for the past three and a half years or so and we are very busy. My wife is licensed and is my partner, I am not licensed though I have finished all exams. The licensure issue really hasnt presented itself still to this point. We do alot of conceptual design, renderings, sketches, signage, kind of less traditional landscape architecture stuff. We have been doing more and more residential work and havent been required to stamp anything yet. From much of the discussion Ive seen over the years LA licensure is mostly a title act as pretty much anyone can practice or find a workaround for practicing.

Otherwise, if you hav an march plus experience under a licensed la or 10 years experience you can sit for exams and apply.

Depends on the type of residential work and control you want when you need a stamp: some public agencies want to see a seal, for example wetlands regulators. 

Throwing plants in is of little concern to agencies, but where there is a public health, safety and welfare concern, they will push for it as there is a minimum standard that licenses are intended to cover.  While you may be able to get someone to stamp your drawings, that is not something many people will do (as they will be the ones liable for the work, and in theory, the law mandates that the work was reviewed thoroughly by the licensed individual).

Working with building architects, engineers and surveyors,  it seems their attitude toward me before and after putting PLA after my name is different...

It's not that the license is the difference, it's that there is a general understanding that minimal competency is reflected in licensed individuals as opposed to anyone that 'can' do the work, so the likelihood that that individual understands the HSW issues is higher. If HSW is not a huge concern, it's a moot point...

^true, but a good reputation goes a longer way than a license.  Honestly, I want the title so that I can feel like I am part of the profession...I kind of feel like other LA's look at me with disdain...I feel a bit left out with regards to my peers... Sounds a bit pathetic, but its true...I am professionally lonely...lol 

BUT, its a cost benefit thing.  I would advise against giving up a successful business...as a business is a more difficult thing to build back up.

Good job insulting both licensed professionals AND unions in the same moronic comparison.

Licensure: created to stifle competition under the guise of HSW.

No relationship to unions.

You might notice I agreed with your sentiment about licensure being instituted to stifle competition and only took issue with your flawed metaphor. I have no interest (nor is it warranted) to debate the finer points of unions.

Not that it matters, but I'd say you are in the clear and proceeding properly given the type of work you are pursuing.

In the big picture, landscape lisensure has become more of thing at the state level these past 15 years or so. Part of this is advocacy, and part of it was due to the "explosion" landscape architecture as a field (and the boom in resi/urban development perhaps?), but I can think of only one state that does not have practice or title act in place to regulate landscape architecture. To jla-x's point, it doesn't hinder practice in that state. Instead the desire for high profile LA's from the coasts (primarily east) is the limiting factor of local practicioners.

So you might consider looking at how your state board defines LA as a professional practice. Not to determine what you are doing wrong, but if you can do more. Don't write an email, just look at what they post online. 

LA is also a very broad field.  Most landscape designers are focused exclusively on garden design.  Most landacape architects seem more focused on urban scale projects.  I mostly compete against design/build guys as only a few LAs in my area do residential projects...I know this is different in CA...but they also have more hi-end areas with large properties than most states...

If you see a project you want that requires a license chase it in a Joint venture with an engineer or a LA, not worth turning back. 

^^Then you should totally use dual professional titles;  Professional Landscape Designer / Professional Building Designer

And Illinois finally jumps on the wagon.

if licensure protects the hsw I want numbers that compare states with and without practice acts...love how these statements "licensure protects the hsw..." are thrown around with zero evidence...codes protect the hsw...licensure protects the profession...

Klaxon have you taken any exams. The process of studying opened my eyes to a lot of aspects I took for granted or thought I understood. I think I'm a better designer for it.

Autocorrect, jlax is what I typed

^ not yet, I have read through a bunch of the study material.  I agree that studying makes one more competent.  The actual test is just a motivation to study.  I was denied access to the exams because I do not have an MLA.  I was granted permission to take the ARE, but have not done so because I am 100% commited to Landscape. 

Jla-x : very true on reputation, but it is difficult to build that reputation early in one's career without some credentials.  And yes, the insecure ones look down on the unlicensed.  Quite frankly I feel like there should be a process for MArchs and BArchs to get a license as the HSW portions overlap a lot.

To the argument that it protects the profession: yes that's the point, it's a peer review of your knowledge - other professions have it too (I'm sure there are great law and medicine people out there that are unlicensed, but they don't go around practicing the field as doctors and lawyers).  It's not very much time or money (2yrs of experience in written letters -there's no equivalent of an IDP- and a few thousand dollars -in the grand scheme of things that's pocket change)

IF some has a license, there is an understanding that they took the time and had the capacity to pass minimal knowledge of HSW - to a member of the general public that can be reassurance (and that they are not a convicted felon... as that seems to be a check box on those forms); without a license, it's an unknown.

Most of the larger and higher end residential work in the northeast tends to be done by LAs not designers, not sure if it's a legal stumbling block or just a preference on the part of the market (clients).  Urban work often requires a license, hence the dearth of landscape designers doing the work (maybe difficulty to structure a fee proposal to add in fee to have your drawings stamped by someone else...)

^ I'm not really familiar with the way the business works in the North East.   Where I am, all residential work is completely exempt.  There are even some well known home designers doing unconventional large homes (rammed earth, etc.)  In some situations an engineer is required, but never a LA in residential.  The vast majority of landscape work here is done by design/build firms.  Designers (design only) and LAs probably only do about 10% of the projects.  Among the designers and LAs in my area, I have a hard time seeing the difference in quality of work.  Most landscape designers have much experiance one way or another.  Its not exactly easy money, and typically requires a love of the field to endure.  Many have MLAs or have worked for design build firms before going out on their own.  I have seen plans done by LAs that were utterly incompetent.  Many LAs are used to doing large commercial projects and take a residential gig once in a blue moon.  Some residential LAs that I know are great designers.   Overall, it is almost impossible to tell who's who.  It's a mixed bag as the op said.

we do however have very strict regulations on contractors.  

Yeah, so it's not the law that has LAs here in NE or down in central VA that has LAs doing residential - I think it's more on the market end; though wetlands related agencies are more inclined to be reasonable when they see initials after a name. 

The LA firms that do resi tend to stick with it, but a lot of mid-sized firms do a large chunk of resi work (even if they don't advertise it or market it) for one of 2 reasons: 1. to maintain a revenue stream as they can turn a higher margin of profit and thereby be able to do the 'cool' public projects and/or 2. as a favor to their clients (architects who have high profile clients or donors on the institutional projects).  I noticed a few upper-midwest firms did the same approach.  At the lower and mid-cost range LAs weren't present, mostly for the $ I suppose.  In most cases the firms were offshoots from one of the more recognized firms in the area, making the immediate marketability easier.

Quality isn't contingent on a license - but the building of a practice is about gaining trust and sometimes the initials help.  It also is helpful to be part of the professional community (which as you noted, can be exclusive to licensed folks).

Thanks for all of the advice!  I will likely stay on my current trajectory for the time being.  I have invested too much time and money into building a steady business to turn back now.  Plus, I am having alot of fun!  Eventually, I may consider starting a sister company with a LA partner if I ever get the urge/opportunity to do public works.