are well aware, is the way to succeed and now, according to this statement, is cast in a negative light and not appropriate. The regard of the fishery and other anglers is also mentioned to cast more negative light towards this type of angling. If my memory serves me right this was also a concern when "motor trolling" was being opposed in the early 90’s. It sure sounds like the person(s) making this statement do not agree with the angling method, possibly the use of single hooks, versus the practice of shore fishing, which is an entirely different issue and will be discussed later in this rebuttal. Also in the third paragraph of the "Statement of the problem", it is said, "rods, in some cases are set as much as one mile from the attending angler". I have watched this statement grow from ¼ mile to ½ mile and now to one mile. It is obvious that the longer the distance mentioned the more disapproval of anglers you will get. You will notice this tactic later on in the third paragraph when, and I quote, "anglers who engage in this practice, typically observe their rod sets – on occasion – from these great distances with high powered binoculars and spotting scopes". Again, these terms are being used to provoke a negative response from the general public. I have never seen rods set over ¼ mile away from anglers, high-powered binoculars or spotting scopes being used to "attend" rods. While I will admit to using binoculars at times I will state the binoculars I am using are the best I could buy for under $16.00!!!! As far as the statement regarding observing rods on occasion, this again is false. Let me describe that the longer a rod is left after a hit the chances greatly increase of getting snagged on something. To get snagged means a lost fish which is counterproductive. The sooner I can get to a rod, and the fish, the better my odds are to landing my quarry. When shore fishing it is a constant issue to
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy ODA4MA==