Overkill Overkill
Jr. Member
- Feb 18, 2010
- 76
- 1
If it were possible, would there be any utility in being able to detect out in the water without the water being in the way? You ask: "What the heck kind of question is that?!" Well, as usual, I'm serious. Picture for a moment the water's edge being 1/4 mile more out to sea than it is now. Would that scenario make it any easier to hunt and find targets where the water once was due to the obstacle of water being removed? For example, maybe you could penetrate deeper?, cover more ground in less time?, not worry about bothersome marine life? etc.
If in theory there would be a benefit to removing the water, my idea is to surround myself with, say, a 5' X 5' X 5' sturdy, framed plastic 'box' that would touch the sea floor in, say, 3' or less of calm water. Then, the water inside the 'shelter' would have to be removed (perhaps with a makeshift sort of quiet, portable sump pump) and one could then beach hunt where there was once water. (I think this idea is similar to how bridge builders dig into the sea ground so they can plant the bridge supports.).
So, in theory, at least, is there any benefit to removing the shallow water that you are hunting in?
Would the hassle be worth any advantage(s)?
If in theory there would be a benefit to removing the water, my idea is to surround myself with, say, a 5' X 5' X 5' sturdy, framed plastic 'box' that would touch the sea floor in, say, 3' or less of calm water. Then, the water inside the 'shelter' would have to be removed (perhaps with a makeshift sort of quiet, portable sump pump) and one could then beach hunt where there was once water. (I think this idea is similar to how bridge builders dig into the sea ground so they can plant the bridge supports.).
So, in theory, at least, is there any benefit to removing the shallow water that you are hunting in?
Would the hassle be worth any advantage(s)?
Amazon Forum Fav 👍
Upvote
0