Solving the snagging issue from an enforcement standpoint is simple really. All the rule needs to read, as it does, is that snagging and/or attempting to snag fish is illegal. From there all that is required is enforcement personnel that know the difference between legitimate drift fishing and snagging.

The problem is that to prosecute any sort of crime, you need to link the behavior or action to some sort of very clearly defined rule, regulation, or quantifiable set of actions. In other words, when the person who issued the snagging ticket is asked how he knew subject A was snagging, he/she needs to be able to articulate how they identified the subjects actions as snagging. Therein lies the rub. How does one articulate snagging in unbiased, objective terms that an uneducated court would both understand and support? Mechanics? Terminal tackle? Both or some combination thereof?

Assuming field staff are competent enough to delineate between the legitimate fishing and snagging two (a big stretch I know) the problem is at the court level should some snagger choose to take his snagging ticket to court and challenge the basis for having received it. Solve that problem and train enforcement staff accordingly, and you should have something close to a solution...on paper anyhow.