Mark7

David Hockney made a good point when challenged on using an IPad to create "art"-the idiot interviewer suggested that technology and art are not compatible. Hockney said "but a pencil is technology, and so is a paintbrush". In the same way, a reel is "technology". I dislike baitboats, but cannot say that they are a cheat, any more than a smartcast is (I use one, by the way-brilliant tool). Polaroid sunglasses would have caused Halford to have a fit, but how many anglers do not own a pair? Unless we use a stick with a gut line and hook made of bone, we all use technology. If it's used to overcome an inability to cast or perform any other normal fishing activity then it is sad, and an indication of an individuals lack of skill and determination to perfect his art. I object to "technology" when it becomes a nuisance-loud alarms, baitboats buzzing around, spods frothing the water up-usually the result of an idiot angler lacking commonsense. But these things, used sensibly, are bearable.

Sorry, should have been clearer-double turn through eye of hook and swivel on both palomar and uni knot increased BS by a small amount (around 1lb), and they are the readings I posted above.It seems to me that the line is particularly averse to compression, and doubling through swivel eye was first option tried to counter this. I did obtain slightly better results by taking the line throught the swivel eye five times, and then tying the knot on the wrist of the swivle, but that is a most untidy way to be going on. All in all, a line for light work I think. I have also tried the triple palomar using your link, as it looked promising. Broke at knot at 14lbs for 26lbs BS nanofil.

I have been testing nanofil over the last 6 weeks. Knot strength is dreadful-at best 60% of stated BS when tying to hook or swivel. The recommended knot (double palomar) gave only 50% of stated BS, despite Berkley claiming 71%, and after much experimentation with dozens of knots, I managed 60% with a 5 turn double uni knot after seeing a recommendation for this on youtube. Various knot glues made no difference to the results. I will use it on waters where braid is banned, which is why I bought it originally, but it is a poor replacement for power pro for heavy duty applications. I will be using it for trotting, however, as I can see distinct advantages in terms of diameter there. It is difficult to have confidence in a line that knots so poorly. Has anyone found a more effective knot?

I still do this if I wish to fish near to another angler, in the hope that it might spread, and become the norm. Most anglers are suprised by the enquiry, but seem to appreciate it. I also say good morning/ afternoon/evening to all I meet on any water, and ask them if they have caught. Suprisingly, after the initial shock, most anglers will converse. If I just get a grunt, I wish them luck and move on. You never know, it might catch on again if enough of us do it!

Yes, the bag showed no indication on the scales-I would guess it weighed less than 1oz, and the scales read very slightly over 9.05. It will be interesting to see what the BRFC say as to weight when scales are checked.

An extract that might help: Near the end of the larval phase, eels enter freshwater where they develop into "yellow eels", and remain in this phase until sexual maturity. It is not until the yellow phase that sexual differentiation of males and females occurs (at a minimum size of 20cm). Males tend to be dominant near the coastal zones, and females further upstream. Eels may take many years to reach sexual maturity, with males generally maturing earlier than females, at between 6 and 12 years; females may take up to 18 years to reach reproductive age (9-18 years). Puberty is thought to be induced by a combination of internal and environmental factors, related to the migration phase (a period of prolonged swimming at depth) and arrival at the spawning ground. Of the fish maintained in groups, 77% became males, whereas 60% of those maintained in isolation became females. The implication is that both grouping and hormones are involved in sex determination of European eels.

Exactly!! Thanks for the comment on circles. I am trying to gauge the runs so that the bait is fully in the pikes jaw and on the way down, and not in its gullet. I have also removed barbs, and bent out the offset that is prevalent in circle hooks. I felt that the offset could cause the hook to catch in soft tissue. Baits are big, and hair rigged to tail so that providing I do not come a cross an idiot pike that takes a bait backwards then the hook should always be well up in the mouth. If, as you have experienced, I deep hook one I will stop using them. Did you remove offset/barb when you tried them

I agree, as Budgie states, that the majority of eels caught by accident are either mis-weighed or poorly estimated. I became so fed up with this last year that I wrote a piece for one of the comics on weighing and measuring eels just after a so called 13 was publicised. I don’t suppose it’s made much difference, but it made me feel better! However, there are a few waters that have repeatedly produced genuine eels of over 8lbs, sometimes even over 9lbs. Of the four seemingly genuine 9s publicized over the last 2 years, 3 have been from crayfish rich pits. The EA were interested in the relationship between eels and crayfish, as well stocked eel waters often remain crayfish free when others nearby are full of them. The eel is certainly well equipped to eat them. It can access their burrows and has a strong jaw muscles. There was a plan to stock a crayfish infested commercial water with eels and see what happened, but I believe that the owner chickened out when his match customers found out, and rebelled! I also believe that there are more big eels out there than is indicated by the catch rates. I know of 2 nines that were caught from small pits (around 2 acres) after intensive campaigns by competent anglers-one came after 67 nights, and another after 60 nights, together with an 8 (not consecutive nights, obviously). My own PB came after around 80 nights on a water, and a string of 5s and 6s. You would expect a small water to give up its eels relatively quickly, but it would seem that the slow metabolism, sporadic feeding periods and cautious feeding habits of larger eels make them very difficult to catch. We no longer believe that the biggest eels in a water are caught in the first few sessions. The water you mention above probably contains mostly male eels, as sex is determined by stock density. That doesn’t mean that there might not be the odd big female in there, but having to wade through the smaller ones, and the factors mentioned above, will make the bigger fish very hard to catch. Normally, male eels do not reach 4 or 5lbs in weight, as they return to the Sargasso when they reach maturity at a smaller weight, but if they are unable to return then I would guess that they would grow, but maybe not reach the weights attained by landlocked females in lower stock densities. Not sure about this, though. However, I would put money on finding big eels in a crayfish rich lake with only a few eels. Mind you, odds are I’d lose it, the eel being an unpredicatable beast. It seems to be generally accepted that the increase in barbel and chub weights is, in part, due to a crayfish diet, especially when there is a low fish stock level. The Old Lea is a good example of this.

I, too, used to wonder about the current fad for "dumping" leads, as , like you, I had fished for carp since 1968 without losing fish because a lead had snagged. It has now occured to me that, almost without exception, the writers of carp articles today are sponsored by tackle companies who sell, amongst other items, leads. What a wonderful opportunity to sell more leads-make 'em fall off every time you hook a fish! I always use a link to the lead that is 75% of the BS of my mainline, and seldom lose a lead. It breaks my heart that I am not adding to the profits of the lead manufacturers! Add to that the advice to change the hook after every fish, rather than sharpen it, and you have the answer to built in obsolescence!

Yes, smaller leads are certainly quieter!

I would not advocate big leads as a matter of course. Given the opportunity, I would freeline, as I am doing at this very moment, using clonking great deadbaits in the margins - no need for leads here! In some circumstances (upstream legering, for example) I usually opt for just enough to hold bottom, but on occasion I've used big leads to combat adverse conditions. If you require low resistance with sensitivity then a large lead is critical. Anderoo's point is good-using a link of appropriate length to prevent the run ring ending up in silt or weed does the trick. I use a cork ball up against the run ring and semi rigid tube over the mono link. That way, the line runs freely through the ring. A lead of under 3ozs will follow the fish on a run, bouncing and clattering along on the gravel or snagging in the weed. This will not affect a daft carp or barbel that has already hooked itself, but may well cause a shy predator to drop a bait, as they often do. With 30 or 40lb braid there is little risk of cracking off, and even the 40 lb test is only the diameter of 10lb mono. Try experimenting with different lead sizes in a tank or bath. It as suprising how light a 1oz lead is under water, and how easily it moves against the resistance of an indicator. Even on gravel there is little grip with smaller leads. Oddly, I have found that small leads are just as effective as large with bolt rigs.

Crayfish = monster eels. Baits Dysoned 18" of bottom are crayfish proof.

This thread: http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/Roll-bi...s-t4104486.html : covered the Rollover and its use as a drop back indicator in some detail. The rollover is arguably the most effective indicator for eel fishing, although Barry originally intended it for zander. The "drop back" function is irrelevent if you use a big enough lead. I have found that anything less than 3oz is likely to move during a run, and for Dyson rigs 4oz is more appropriate. Ceramic run rings as a running link instead of swivels will also help, as friction is reduced. If the lead stays put then drop back indication is unnecessary. Short hook lengths (less than 6"), braid and optonics (sorry, I mean Delkims-showing my age there-at least I didn't put Herons!!) will give you a sensitive set up that will give a bleep if an eel even looks at a bait. This is critical for the eel that decides to sit still and devour your offering prior to moving off, and makes early striking critical.

I was fortunate to be asked to witness the fish-a magnificent beast, and a tremendous achievement!

I agree that there is a change in resistance when the rollover releases, and also that if you increase the forward weight on the rollover to detect dropbacks then it offers increased resistance. I have used rollovers for around 5 years now (my first set were a home made affair after Barry explained how the prototype was made. When he started producing them I bought 4). The advantage over a bobbin is that once the rollover releases there is no resistance to a taking fish- a bobbin would remain on the line and clatter around. The advantage over drop offs is the absence of a clip, and consequently no increased resistance as the indicator releases. Anderoo's comments are spot on-at least a 3oz lead with a run ring ensures that drop backs do not occur, and the lead stays put when a fish picks up the bait. Using braid and a very short trace of max 6" helps too. We have mucked about with rollovers and lead sizes at length, both on the lawn and in the water, and the resistance felt at the hook is very small, even with the weight moved forward to increase drop back detection. Regarding change of resistance, I have experimented with eel runs using circle hooks on an "easy" water by allowing the run to commence on a rollover and open bail arm, then engaging the bail arm and letting the baitrunner take over. The eels in all cases continued to run (tried this around a dozen times over two sessions before I got bored with it). Eels do drop baits frequently, but I am not sure that it is to do with resistance. It is, I think, just a characteristic of their cautious feeding habits at times. Many of the so called nuisance fish that worry baits are big eels checking them out, I am sure. I have had many big eels on touch leger tactics when twitches have occured, and proper runs have been absent.

I did try fishing the closest margin rod on the float a couple of seasons ago, using a modified "chubber" float with a small betalight. The problem is, I average an eel for every two nights fished, and I found that I was constantly dozing off after the first 2 or 3 hours. In the end I gave it up.It reminded my of late 60s carping, when after a few hours of watching a tin foil tube, your eyes would start to play tricks, and the indicator would appear to move all on its own! I had the same problem with the float after a couple of hours. It would be an excellent method on a productive water where you could afford to fish for short sessions of a few hours though. A friend (Steve Cotton) had a couple of fives this last season using the float, so it is obviously effective. I might give it another go on the shorter nights (perhaps June to July) this year after your comments.

I have not used the "T" rig, as I decided that the size of the "T" would need to be substantial, certainly much larger than the hooks that I use, to prevent a decent eel swallowing the lot. I can see how it might work for smaller specimens, but how big would it need to be for, say, an 8 lb eel? Probably a couple of inches across. I would be interested to see if you can make it work effectively. I have posted a couple of photos of my preferred hooking arrangement below. I have shortened trace lengths since these were taken, and also now thread half a big lob along the length of the wire when using the lobworm rig. I started doing this after a discussion around dropped runs, and the possibility of the eel detecting the wire. Mind you, the presence of the hook is more likely to put the eel off, so it's probably completely unnecessary. Makes me happy, though.

When I first fished for eels I was concerned that deep hooking would cause fish deaths. My comments below are in no way intended as the right way to fish for eels: it’s just the way that suits me. When I first eel fished, I too thought that the tales of regurgitated hooks were a thing of myth. In those days I used barbed size 2s and 4s. The third eel that I caught was deeply hooked: hook out of sight. I followed tradition and cut the wire as close to the jaws as possible and sacked the fish for weighing and photographing in the morning. The hook was in the bottom of sack when I removed the fish. I continued with large hooks for the first two seasons, and deep hooked some 15% of eels landed. On many occasions (around half) the hook would be regurgitated whilst the eel was sacked. Interestingly, smaller eels were more likely to be deep hooked. Most eels captured were, however, in excess of 4lbs. In season three I reduced the size of hook to a barbless raptor 7 or 8, irrespective of bait size, reduced the length of the hook link to a maximum of 4 inches, and hair rigged the baits off of the back of the hook, leaving all of the hook exposed. I began to use Dyson rigs almost exclusively, coupled with 3-4oz leads, braid and rollover indicators. If the bait is positioned at least 6 inches off bottom, and the eel rises from the free offerings on the bed of the lake to take the bait, then falls back to the lake bottom to continue feeding, it would seem that deep hooking is reduced. Also, with a correctly balanced Dyson rig, then any activity at the bait end is noticed at the rod, especially if using braid, Delkims and rollovers. I assume (and my personal experience, and that of other eel anglers seems to bear this out) that a traditional on bottom rig presents a bait in a manner that allows the eel to inspect and swallow a bait without giving immediate indication, especially if the fish moves toward the lead on picking up the bait. For this reason, I seldom use on bottom rigs, but always use Dyson rigs, usually with baits between 6 and 18 inches off bottom. I seldom experience traditional runs fishing like this. One or two bleeps on the indicator is the norm. An immediate strike usually connects with the eel. If the run is missed then a re-cast normally results in another take within the hour-I believe the eel continues to feed on the bed of dead maggots until it comes across my suspended bait again. I never fish more than 4 or 5 rod lengths out, and always with one bait within a foot of the bank, and this aids sensitivity. In 6 years of eel fishing I have experienced two fatalities, both involving eels that bled heavily on capture. As all fish are retained for many hours prior to unhooking and photographing, I am relatively sure that there have been few other casualties. I record all catches, and taking last year as an example, of 28 eels landed, 4 were deeply hooked, and only one did not regurgitate the hook in the sack (in fact, the lot had disappeared, so I can only assume it dislodged the hook and swallowed it all!). Most of these eels were of a reasonable size-five 4s, six 5s, two 6s and a 7. The year before 4 eels were deep hooked, and two did not regurgitate the hook in the sack. Again, they were mostly larger fish (ten 4s, ten 5s and three 6s). I am convinced that small, barbless hooks, braid, off bottom rigs and instant strikes help reduce deep hooking. Ultra sensitive bite indication is critical. As for deep hooked eels surviving, both Tesch and Moriarty provide much evidence, from dissected eels, of old injuries caused by fish hooks that have not affected the survival of the eel. In fact, Tesch quotes instances of partially occluded sections of gut containing hook injuries that have not prevented the eel thriving. You mentioned the resistance issue: In the early days, on a “runs” waters when I was experiencing missed runs, I experimented with open bail arms and then engaging the bail arm, with baitrunner on, prior to striking. The eels continued to run on the baitrunner, and I still missed them! The change in resistance made no difference to the eel. I fish open bail arms, but good friends (and successful eel anglers) fish off the baitrunner. Personally, I believe that big eels feed very carefully, especially when they are fished for. I have caught many big eels on repeated “twitches” that I might once have dismissed as nuisance fish. I do not want to chance that elusive double dropping my bait because it feels a little resistance, so I fish open bail arms and low resistance. There are some interesting films on Youtube showing Irish eels feeding on free offerings-more correctly, they are not feeding, merely inspecting the bait, mouthing it and then ignoring it. I am convinced that many of the twitches that we attribute to nuisance fish are, in fact, eels checking out our baits. I investigate every bleep, feeling for movement on the braid-I have lost count of the fish hooked on the smallest tug!

I may be brave enough to work with the Angling Trust on occassion, but I don't think I will take you up on your offer of a fishing trip, but thanks for asking. I feel that your request for an article that will "teach you all how to fish for eels with minimum impact" is mischievious rather than sincere. I have no desire to "teach" anything, and if I do submit an article to this forum it will be in my own time, and not at your request. I look forward to posting again at a later date, and enjoying your egotistic bluster once again.

Well, of course you feel like that-you agree with each other! And I loathe compliance. Whenever we have debates like this online we gain more members, so it must be good.

It would seem that your views are in a minority when taking into account the responses on other forums. I might be inclined to get involved in your eel discussions if your approach were less aggressive. Consequently, I am dismayed by your offer to teach me diplomacy. Even on this forum, fellow posters have agreed that Dan's comments were rather suprising, especially his view that as few people fish for eels it doesnt matter if they go extinct. It would appear that your problem is with me personally, as opposed to the content of my post.

I agree, and that was the point of my initial post. If it were pike, the attitude would be a little different, methinks. I have now received an e mail from Kevin Clifford in respnse to my communication to Dan Williams. Kevin points out that his publications have always supported the conservation drive in the past, and his own experiences of eel stocks does not coincide with Dan's. I will not disclose his comments on the content of the editorial at this stage. He has undertaken to put their (as publishers) view on the issue in the February edition.

Have a look on the other forums and you will see that the overwhelming veiw is supportive of our stance. Your usual rather rude response is typical, and completely in character. I have not lectured, merely presented the club's stance. I would be pleased if you joined-we might be able to help you hook eels more effectively.