Mark7
-
Posts
82 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Mark7
-
-
Mark.
I didn't use the version of the double Palomar that is on Youtube and reproduced as a nanofil knot on the packaging. I used Geoff Wilsons version.
Double your line.
Pass the double line through the eye of the swivel twice.
Snug it down.
Finish as for a normal Palomar.
Edit: Geoff's tripple palomar is shown here. Same thing but go through twice.
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.
-
OK. I'm back from India and have had my first play with the Nanofil.
As has been reported elsewhere, the nanofil line is very slick so when I stripped the old 10lb Fireline off, I left about 5m on the reel and joined the lines. Last thing I want is to have the line revolving on the spool.
Spooling up was a bit strange because holding the line between thumb and forefinger to keep a little pressure on results in almost no friction or heating.
The 1000 size Shimano Sustain usually takes about 80m of 10lb Fireline but soaked up the whole 125m spool of 5.7kg (about 12lb) Nanofil - the stuff is thin.
After spooling up the reel, I sat down for a play with knots. I tried the recommended "Nanofil knot" twice and both times it broke with very little pressure - not good.
A little playing and pondering latter and I'd settled on a simple double Palomar which seems to work well.
Surprisingly, I was easily able to bite off the tag end and didn't need a blade.
With the Severn up, I took myself on a fairly urban section of the Stour for a play and I have to say that the reported increases in casting distances are not overstatements. I cast into trees and onto the far bank several times so it's going to take a little getting used to - but the chub on the far bank of the Severn will have no hiding place when the season opens.
I ended up with three trout, a chub and a perch from a very cold river with the biggest trout going about a pound. Worryingly, I did have the line part of the strike and lost a fish and lure but it appeared to break with almost no pressure so it seems likely that it either cut on some junk in the water or had been nicked on a previous cast - as said there's a lot of industrial garbage in the river.
There were no such sudden partings when I hooked up on the far bank and when I pulled for a break, both the line and the knot held up well and there was a distinct "ping" when the break came - indicating that there seems to be more stretch in the line than Berkley might have us believe.
Wading over to get the lure back (in shorts and sandals) is how i know the river was cold.
I need a few more sessions to firm up my thoughts and see how well it holds up to things like line twist and will post back when I reach conclusions on those issues but so far, I can say it's very thin, it's not as stiff as fireline but not as soft as some braids, it is slick, you will need to play with and test any knots you use, it's stretchier than I thought ans as usual, you can't trust the manufacturers claims about abrasion resistance !
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?
-
Anyone else remember the days when angling etiquette dictated that the arriving angler would ask the one already there if he minded if you fished next to him (presuming you wanted to of course!)? On a crowded day ticket water it was also expected of the first guy to say "yes" even if he didn't really want to!
Not only was this regarded as manners but also along with the "traditional" "caught anything?" opened the dialogue so
you would find out where the guy was fishing/baiting/casting to so there was no friction?
These days every one seems to think they are the only one who should be there and just scowl at any other anglers!
Kind of strange now that you can get half a dozen anglers on a 20 acre lake arguing when back then you would often on a weekend be sat shoulder to shoulder without any grief! Sadly indicative of today's society though me thinks.
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!
-
Looks like they weighed it in a polythene bag - the weight of the bag is probably below the resolution of the scales.
It was out of the water a while, wasn't it? The captor was getting a bit impatient about that!
Little river for such a big fish - surprising when you see people photoshopping the background out of their photos to see such candid video of the location.
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.
-
All,
Let me show my ignorance. I thought eels are sexless or could "change" sexes based on the environment (especially when they get "home" to breed)?
Phone
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.
-
Im afraid I must be old fashioned as not letting the line break in the first place is my solution...........
WHY oh WHY is it now seemingly acceptable to leave a hook and hook link in a fish? I go fishing to land them not lose them "safely"
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 with Budg'...
I've fished a water infested with crays, and a lot of eels. Now 4 years ago there were the eels but no crays, the eels avearged 2/4lb, 5 tops. 4 years on, still the same. This water holds mASSIVE bream, tench and carp, similar with the RARE rudd, perch and roach, but the eels, still avearge... They are thin claw turkish, which I would love to think between the eels, carp, cormarants etc would munch their way through the bloody things. Some local put them in for a laugh to annoy the one or two anglers, (wonker)... I mean really, have you seen these thin claws, ffs, like 12 inches long, pull done zigs and chods from a foot up, eat platics. anyway, no 8lb eels... hey maybe the crays have eaten the eels!!!!
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.
-
Sounds right to me but I recently got involved in a discussion regarding "dumping" leads as a standard carp tactic (regardless of situation/water). I was told that unless I made sure my 4ozs lead "dumped" every time I would lose carp all the time.When I said I couldn't see the point and in fact thought it was bad practice to do so unless there was a danger of the lead snagging that couldn't be avoided in any other way they "looked" at me as if I was on another planet!
Apparently its (Den?) the in thing to do NOT to avoid snagging but to avoid the carp using the lead to get the hook out/the lead bouncing around pulling the hook out. If I didn't dump the lead every time I would lose carp. When I told them I had only lost 3 carp in 4 decades (2 hook pulls while snag fishing and one unforgivable time when out of lazyness I used an old hook link that subsequently went under the pressure of a big fish in a big river) I don't think they believed me! I also suggested that maybe the routine use of such size leads and 3lb+ TC rods might be their problem............
The way I see it is to get a bolt/pricking effect then 1 3/4ozs is the minimum (with a size 8 or more hook and boillie/hair set up at least) weight needed and it doesn't even need to be "semi fixed" either if the hook link is short enough.
Yes I agree that your lead has to stay still for a free running rig to actually "run free" and 3ozs+ is often required.When you start using rigs that incorporate sunk floats you also have to take into account that more lead will be required to "cancel" the "lift" given by the sunk float.
So as was originally said "Sometimes you need a heavy weight, and sometimes you don't!" just a matter of learning.....
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!
-
Hi Mark
How do you know when a predator has picked up bait and comes towards you a foot or two and sits there chomping your deadbait down.
John
[/quote
Hi John
Using braid, Delkims and rollovers set heavy to indicate dropbacks and tightening up very carefully after casting. If a pike so much as looks at the bait I will get a bleep! I would argue that this method, at short range, gives better detection of fish coming toward the rod, because you are tightening up directly to the bait. With a 12-18" trace to a running lead, then theoretically a fish could pick up the bait whilst moving toward you, stop and eat it static and you' be non thw wiser until it moved off. If a fish picks up my freelined offering it will give or take line immediately. Also using circles exclusively for pike now, so in the unlikely event that it does happen, I will still hook the fish in the scissors. Circles for pike are new to me this season, and it took a while for me to get used to waiting for the bait to be engulfed before striking. So far, 100% scissor hooked, with only one missed run (the first one one circles belcause I tightened up too soon.
-
I agree, but I think they have to be inline rather than pendant (e.g. a lead clip) for maximum effectiveness. In the warmer months I use bolt rigs a lot for tench and bream (and the occasional daft carp) and very rarely go above 1.5oz, only if I need a bit of extra weight to punch through a cross-wind. Even then 2oz is my limit. Those little inline leads really work well.
I saw a DVD recently that, with the help of a diver, 'proved' that anything under 4oz will not hook fish, as there just isn't enough weight. This was proved by the diver picking up rigs with his thumb and seeing how painful it was. Oddly, I don't fish much for thumbs or divers, and have ignored this scientific research! Although I expect a lot of waters will be bombarded with 4oz leads for a while...
A big advantage of a 1.5oz lead over a 4oz lead is they land with a plop rather than a ka-booosh, and also don't require really strong gear to launch it out there.
Yes, smaller leads are certainly quieter!
-
I have always found with a straight forward run rig that the lighter weight I can get away with the more successful I have been. But I hear weights of 3oz or 4oz being used and I think why?
So obviously the theory is that it holds the line down and as soon as the fish runs with the bait the line can run freely through a heavy weight keeping the whole thing very sturdy. It is not rocket science but I found over the years the heavier the weight the more bites I missed due to dropped baits as resistance could be felt I think not by the weight but the lake bed due to the fact the lead has hit the bed so hard it has fractionally buried itself even on a gravel bar but on weed or silt definitely and then the result is the fish feels the silt or weed before it even gets through the lead.
The exception being is obviously distance casting as the chance has to be taken which is why i rarely fish beyond 50 yards
I have always religiously stuck to my River type ledgering method and that is just enough to hold bottom in the flow (maybe a bit of movement slowly but you get my drift as far as the rivers are concerned)
So then I rarely have fished with anything other than a 1 1/2oz max !but with the largest run ring connected. My theory is to lay the weight on top of the weed or on top of the silt so when the fish runs it feels no resistance. If I could be sure that casting a 3oz weight even feathering it on the cast would land on top of the floor I would use it but I never am.
Thoughts?
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.
-
Ive been debating fishing sessay's the oaks but ive been told the crayfish are rife in there so ive avoided it so far.
Crayfish = monster eels. Baits Dysoned 18" of bottom are crayfish proof.
-
And this one-
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.
-
Pretty sure thats right as well Anderoo as Wol Gaunt told me he got rung up to go and weigh/witness a big chub early this morning.
I was fortunate to be asked to witness the fish-a magnificent beast, and a tremendous achievement!
-
How does that work as a drop back indicator when there is no effective weight on the line?
How does it offer low resistance, the fish would still have to lift it so how is it better than a bobbin?
As the fish raises the arm to the point where the arm releases the line wouldn't there be a change in resistance?
Phone, as you didn't seem to understand the above are questions (the clue is the question mark at the end
)If you don't know what a rollover indicator is this might help
These are very popular with eel anglers because they are said to offer no resistance or no change in resistance. i wondered how that would be the case.
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'll add my thanks to those above Mark.
I've not done a lot of (intentional) eel fishing, apart from a period about 20yrs ago, and that was with very limited success, with a top weight of just over 3 1/2 lb. I found your post very interesting, especially the part about how close in you fish. I wondered if you ever tried using a float rig when conditions allowed. I found that it was much more sensitive, at times too sensitive and you had to move the rod tip towards your float, or the bait was dropped when the fish felt resistance from the rod. I found that it was best in slow rivers, or fishing close in, to the side on a stillwater, and I got less deep hooked fish than fishing on the bottom. I'm not talking about a pike float, but I used a big avon, just big enough to support a bait and a 'tell tale' shot. It would also help with the suspended baits you mention. I realise that concentrating on a float for long periods at night is not as comfortable as listening for the bite alarm, but I always stayed awake during night sessions, and if I started to nod off, stopped fishing.
What are your thoughts on this?
John.
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.
-
Thanks Mark that's very interesting.A lot also agrees with what Ive found.
I started to rethink the whole resistance thing when one season whilst carp fishing we were all plagued with screaming runs (3 ozs semi fixed short hook link bolt rigs).In them days we used a light nylon hair rather that today's knot less knot set ups.The result of striking these screaming runs was either a broken hair or very occasionally a 3lb+ eel (often a wide headed one) It became quite obvious that the "broken hair" runs were smaller eels that had grabbed the boilly but not taken the hook in.The resulting strike just broke the light mono hair. The bigger eels that were hooked obviously had been able to take the lot in, The MAIN point however being that neither were put off by the 3 ozs lead. This was in the days when eel lore said free running was a must and open bail arms with Fairy tops were standard.
Latter even the carp anglers tactic of "foaming up" (pushing a cylinder of foam in the butt ring to trap the line and give steady resistance in these pre baitrunner days) became popular.
So as such Ive never really accepted that resistance (as long as its constant) is a problem,Strangely enough 9 out of 10 times I still set up to avoid it though! I suppose old habits die hard!
As for hooks I have allways used barbed as the deep penetration of singles has worried me.Possibly why Ive never seen or believed in the "regurgitating" issue. However now you have said about barbless (even though I will still have to try it to "see for myself") it certainly changes my views on the possible out come.
Ive stuck with standard length hook links on JS rigs but have allways used short ones on CD rigs. Maybe I should try short ones on JS rigs or just switch totally to CD's? Not sure but will be giving it a good go this spring. Unfortunately I'm limited to no fish baits on the water I'm fishing at present so dead maggot (learned through bream and tench fishing) as freebies with worm fished on the hook is my main attack.I tend to use two Dendrobaenas rather than one lob as I find this gives me a better hook up rate. Ive avoided maggot on the hook as even though there are no other small fish present the carp are a bit to keen on them! Also I worry that a small bait like this will be swallowed to quickly.That said I intend to try they this year on self hooking rigs as I have noticed that any I have caught on the same set up whilst tench fishing have all been lip hooked.
What are your views on "T-ing" any luck with it any suggestions? I ask as my past few seasons playing with it have been a bit mixed to say the least! I think this may be down to not using a big enough bit of tube and will experiment more this year....and definitely with the small barbless hooks you mention.
I'm hoping that just small changes like this will help me reduce deep hooking to an even greater degree and therefore bring it into my own levels of what is acceptable. Thanks for admitting that you still get the occasional deep one though.
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.
-
I'm genuinely interested in this but fear that people may think I'm just trying to draw them on the subject for mischievous reasons.
I personally think that all the talk of cut lines and eels in sacks having regurgitated the hook the next morning is rubbish! So much so that I'm going to try and get permission to retain a few this year to actually see. However as Ive never retained eels over the years Ive fished for them I have to keep an open mind when others tell me different.
I love eels and fishing for them (well big ones any way!) but have done less and less over the years due to the problem of deep hooking and therefore (IMO) killing them. Ive tried several of the new "wonder rigs". Admittedly some such as "T-ing" the hook (hooking a length of stiff rig tube and positioning it so the hook looks like an anchor) does indeed help but I still get too many deep hooked eels for me to be happy. Bolt rigs despite being against all my traditional thoughts (I still use John Siddly rigs and CD rigs) does seem to help as well but as previously said I'm still not 100% happy.
I hope people will reply as my frustration is that many eel anglers (afraid I must say also NAC members) will often tell you what to do but once you get back to them asking for any help on the problems you have found with the methods (I would like to say suggested but cant) they have TOLD you then the drawbridge goes up and the heads buried firmly in the sand! So is there something I'm doing wrong? is there a way I can tweak these methods to make them work to an acceptable level (I say acceptable as I'm a realist) or is it simply that they like to preach/kid themselves that these things work 100% when they use them and my failings are simply because I'm not an NAC member! (incidentally like the PAC and a few other single species organisations that anyone can join without any test of competency!).Never encountered this deffensive attitude with the BEAC but then they were all in the real world! and only to pleased to help.
I hope I'm wrong and that some one has the balls to step up and debate this issue,hopefully pointing me in the right direction or simply fessing up!
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!
-
"The EA are also working with the Sustainable Eel Group, whose mission appears to be to increase the marketing of elvers and eels as a food source. The NAC and the Angling Trust withdrew from the group in protest some time ago, but EA support continues......"
And there lays another very strange story!
As you say Mark it is quite worrying but then again to be honest its not supprising that the EA has chosen a very strange bed fellow with the SEG. But Ive allways felt that the EA's prime interest has allways been water and not necessarily whats in it!
A brave man to link your club with the AT though!
So when you comming down for a bit of eel fishing and to show me and Dales how not to deep hook them? In fact as well as that (despite my rudeness you might actually enjoy it aswell!) how about putting together something that Elton can publish on here teaching us all how to fish for eels with minimum impact?
In the early days of "Put Pike Back" (and indeed "Eels are for sport not for bait") campaigns I would have leaped at such a chance.
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.
-
If I were aske to point out the most diplomatic, even handed and most likely to see boths sides of an issue contributor in here it would consistently be Budgie.
Perhaps we in here are more used to debate, there being by chance enough characters in here to challenge...well almost anything, perhaps you are used to a more compliant audience?
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.
-
Sorry to be "rude" again Mark but you still dont seem to realise that no one is disputing that something is going wrong with anguilla anguilla. Not entirely sure where the problem lays but its certainly not with recreational anglers!
What we are objecting to (sorry if Im speaking for others but I get the impression we all seem to think much the same) is the way you go about things.You obviously dont realise it but it is quite offensive. Educate,advise but dont preach mate.
I would love you to "help me hook eels more effectively" and thats why I keep asking you to show me how to and prove to me all of these (what I believe) wives tales,eel angling myths and other so called claims are true! Show me that you dont ever (no thats me being unfair now, lets change that to hardly ever,NO infact lets say dont more than do) deep hook eels when your specificaly targeting them.Show me that if you cut the trace on a deep hooked one that they can get rid of the hook etc etc. I would gladly join up and publicly eat humble pie.
And maybe in return I could try and teach you how to be a bit more diplomatic in spreading the good word? Maybe just joining in on the eel threads we often have on here with your own veiws,sugestions general eel chat rather than just (seemingly) only taking part in the forum when your riding your high horse?
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.
-
While all this is going on the EA are supporting the return of otters to prime Nth Yorkshire trout rivers (where they have been extinct for many years) on the basis that otters eat..............................................
The EA are also working with the Sustainable Eel Group, whose mission appears to be to increase the marketing of elvers and eels as a food source. The NAC and the Angling Trust withdrew from the group in protest some time ago, but EA support continues......
eels
-
To be honest, I think the question of whether anglers should be indulging in eel bothering is a separate question, it was the idea that if a fish wasn't angled for it didn't matter if went extinct that I found particularly gobsmacking.
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.
-
Jeeze youve done it again havnt you Mark? it seems you just cant help yourself or indeed learn from previous lessons!
Despite being a long time keen eel angler (and strangely enough Dales is quite fond of them as well) Im glad Im not an NAC member else I would be well sucked off that a senior member of my club was alienating so many other anglers!
You are right the article in the mag isnt worded particularly well but as others have pointed out the way you come on here (only ever it seems) to lecture and have a pop is pi$$ poor mate.
Dont you remember how you got backs up last time you tried to gain the moral high ground re NAC members not killing/damaging eels but other anglers do? Need to wake up to reality bruv!
As usual a great shame that youve (once again) taken this stance as most (if not all) on here would support the eels cause!
Again the question is if your so sure anglers (well your members any way) dont do any harm to eels by fishing for them do you apear to (and on everyone elses behalf) seemingly accept/admit anglers culpability in the eels so called demise?
I know this post makes it look like I have a personal problem with you (all though Im probably starting to develop one!) and just leap on anything you say but come on.....
Tell you what how about I see if I can get you a couple of nights eel fishing on a water that produces 3lbrs like they are going out of fashion and you show us all how you never deep hook/kill/damage eels? Pike anglers seized the bull by the horns re deep hooking years ago by running teach ins etc to educate and therefore protect their favourite species how about you taking a leaf out of their book?
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.
at what point is using technology cheating
in Coarse Fishing
Posted
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.