Shawn, Please read this wordy response at it explains where we are together and why this topic is important to me. (I know I can be wordy and it is easy just to glanse over my writings without reading it)
I am also disappointed in that I believe I had to address a small but growing sentiment that trolling isnt as sporting as other methods. However it is real. There are even people putting up reports here that title them as "Non Sporting Fishing Report" when they catch fish via trolling.
You are right though that there are bigger fish to fry. However I see this as a key point as we move forward. We will see eye to eye on a possible need to reduce the harvest on spawning stock fish. Even if one doesnt believe this is the case, the number of fish harvested last spring does have the eye of some other states in the ASMFC and has the potential to be forced. Where you may fail to miss my point regarding this growing negative sentiment is in that there are several ways Maryland can reduce its harvest on the recreational side. They are:
- creel limits,
- season length,
- size limits, and
- efficiency.
This is why this topic is so important to me. Maryland cannot reduce its creel limit since it is at 1 fish per angler. The length of the season will be difficult to argue for as the trophy season has a HUGE economic impact to our state and a reduction in season length would probably have the greatest negative impact on that. So now we are left with size limits and efficiency.
Given the anti-trolling sentiment, arguements by the charter boat assn over the catch and release debate that the no-take slot limits of the past had excessive mortality, and combined with the action taken on the preseason and dnr's own data showing an increase in efficiency on the recreational side, it is easy to fear that
efficiency would be an easy target. I fear rod and gear restrictions would be easy targets and DNR would only be embolded to take such actions through this sentiment by a few. I also fear a reduction in ones ability to troll more efficiently to turn people off from fishing all together from the spring season reducing the economic impact and participation levels of fishing. To me, a weakening of recreational fishing means a less attention to the needs of recreational fishing causes and strengthens the commercial fishing markets (as their economic impact means more to the state).
I
fully agree with you that size limits are best way to handle this. We may disagree in what size-limit restrictions would be best for our state and our fishery but that is a debate for a later date. This will be a small issue in the sceme of things once we get to that point.
The point in my thread was to target the language being used to make trolling look inferior to other methods of fishing. I believe a reduction in this talk will better allow us to debate real issues - like what size or slot limits will best foster a good fishery in Maryland both today and tomorrow. I want to work to enhanse fishing in Maryland to the point where we can even argue for more of the allocation because recreational fishing has grown so much in economic value and participation. I just dont think that is possible when one type of recreational fishermen is viewing their method as "better" than anothers.
I hope this clears up my perspective to why this topic is important to me and you understand that I am not "going after" my friends. I attempted to do my best to publicly go after the language used and not the people. I apologize if you see that differently. If you believe my thoughts and arguements to be off base, I certainly am open to understanding your thoughts.
BTW, I have NEVER stated that you were working to restrict trolling. DNR and members of the SFAC have done a fine job of that without justification. I am just trying to eliminate the environment that would bolster their confidence to do so.