Fluorocarbon pike traces

[philocalist]

...and when can anyone actually say for sure they'll encounter anything but jacks?

 

I'd also say the hardest fighting pike I've ever banked have been of the 14lb range, so definitely not that big.

 

Andy: you can't, but you're missing my point. I'm NOT actively targeting pike in these circumstances, but smaller predators, using VERY small, lightweight lures, in a water that is known to contain pike. ANY wire trace will / does kill the action of these lures, so makes the exercise a bit pointless. If I completely disregarded the outside chance of a pike taking these small lures I wouldn't be concerned with any sort of trace at all.

Following your logic, I should not fish for silvers using say, 4lb mainline, in a water that contains large carp - it's an analogy only, as I fully realise that there is a major difference here between the use of single hooks and trebles.

 

Another thought does (seriously) occur to me.but it may not be a popular one amongst the piking fraternity ... should I bother about this at all, and simply fish for the smaller species without a trace, and a total disregard the for the possiibility of being bitten off by a pike? .. and before I get a typical knee-jerk reaction, consider my logic:

I've no wish or desire to leave ANY hook in a fish if it can reasonably be avoided, but at some stage, EVERYONE has done it, including, I would suggest you. Sometimes this is down to nothing more than stupidity or ignorance on the part of an angler; other times it can be largely beyond our control when an unknown / unseen problem raises it's head and causes a break-off - wind-knots, kinked traces, a chipped rod ring - the list of possible causes is endless, but the end result is the same - hooks left in a fish.

It might seem obvious to many that the very worst culprits here (under said conditions) are pike anglers ... they are leaving behind (multiple) large treble hooks and a wire trace rather than a dinky little size 16 and mono, no? ... and we ALL know which of those combinations is going to cause more problems to said fish, don't we?

 

Now, we also hear, almost unilaterally, that fish seem to 'lose' these offending hooks in some way, the argument particularly with larger trebles being that they soon corrode and fall out or somesuch - or perhaps we just use this theory to convince ourselves that the fish really WILL be OK afterall?

For the record, it's something that I suspect DOES happen, which leads me nicely back to the point I'm making: if that IS the case (as is widely argued), maybe I should forget all about using a trace of any description when using these lighter lures (targeting other species), even in a water known to hold plenty of pike?

Logically (while it may be undesirable to do so), what real lasting damage am I likely to do to a pike who bites off a lure holding very small trebles (a BIG one under these circumstances would be a size 12 - usually they're 14's, even 16's and quite fine in the wire!) ... after all, the perceived wisdom (often expounded by pikers) is that (their) large trebles will soon corrode and fall out, so very small, fine-wire trebles are simply going to do the same, just much quicker, no? ... ergo, no threat whatsoever to a pike?

Edited April 9, 2013 by philocalist

[tomhaggett]

I can't agree with your argument here Philo, though I commend you for openly saying what I'm sure a lot of people have thought in the past. Most of the examples you use for leaving hooks in fish are down to bad luck and will of course happen to all of us at some point. They are largely unavoidable, if a little careless in some instances. Leaving a lure complete with trebles in a fish's mouth for the sake of not using a trace is totally avoidable.

 

Regarding hooks falling out... I'm sure they often do, especially when only in the extremities of the mouth, thus causing no damage to the fish. A treble though, regardless of size, would struggle to 'fall out' of a pike's throat...

 

I've been using a product called Wirebite, sold by the fly fishing company Rio.. It's nylon coated and fantastically supple. I've used some fairly small lures, granted they're not UL's but the 20lb gear doesn't seem to have much effect on the action of a 2" Kopyto. I'm pretty sure they do a 15lb version as well so it's worth checking out if you haven't done so in the past.

[Phone]

philo,

 

I'm on the "you don't need wire" side for I am reluctant to post this.

 

I cannot find the stats (and I've looked) but I remember carp have a huge corner on hooks coming out as a natural occurence. Seems, and it's from memory from many years ago, Yellow Perch (a perch similar to yours) took 3 to 4 times longer than a carp to shead the hook. Carp have some powerful juices. Probably pike would more nearly mimic perch than carp. In carp ferrous hooks (size 1/0) took 4 - 7 days in ideal conditions. Of course with certain non-ferrous metal hooks "forever" was the half life.

 

Two things can happen with carp. A festering wound wollows the hook out then quickly heals - or - acids dissolve the hook. Usually they wollowed out.

 

Phone

[Steve Burke]

Like a previous poster I can't see the advantage of a fluorocarbon trace for pike. Pike aren't tackle shy on the waters I fish and readily take both baits and lures on wire.

 

If they ever did become picky that would mean that the best of the piking on that water would already be over. Even if I hadn't already done so that would be the final straw and I'd be moving on to a different water. All fish thrive on neglect, and predators particularly so.

[philocalist]

Like a previous poster I can't see the advantage of a fluorocarbon trace for pike. Pike aren't tackle shy on the waters I fish and readily take both baits and lures on wire.

 

If they ever did become picky that would mean that the best of the piking on that water would already be over. Even if I hadn't already done so that would be the final straw and I'd be moving on to a different water. All fish thrive on neglect, and predators particularly so.

No argument from me there - it's the issue of fishing intentionally for other, smaller predators, in a water containing pike, that causes all the confustication

[philocalist]

I can't agree with your argument here Philo, though I commend you for openly saying what I'm sure a lot of people have thought in the past. Most of the examples you use for leaving hooks in fish are down to bad luck and will of course happen to all of us at some point. They are largely unavoidable, if a little careless in some instances. Leaving a lure complete with trebles in a fish's mouth for the sake of not using a trace is totally avoidable.

 

Regarding hooks falling out... I'm sure they often do, especially when only in the extremities of the mouth, thus causing no damage to the fish. A treble though, regardless of size, would struggle to 'fall out' of a pike's throat...

 

I've been using a product called Wirebite, sold by the fly fishing company Rio.. It's nylon coated and fantastically supple. I've used some fairly small lures, granted they're not UL's but the 20lb gear doesn't seem to have much effect on the action of a 2" Kopyto. I'm pretty sure they do a 15lb version as well so it's worth checking out if you haven't done so in the past.

 

It's not my 'argument', Tom, just presenting perceived facts - that hooks left in fish are 'got rid of' in some way, be it by decay, rusting away / whatever; the relevence here being that it is often members of the piking (and carping!) fraternity who tell us this.

 

The point I'm trying to get across is that if this IS the case, as they would have us believe (and they are usually referring to large, multiple trebles attached to a wire trace), then what real damage can I do to a pike by leaving a tiny lure in there with very small, fine wire trebles, which will presumably be 'lost' by the fish even quicker (by whatever mechanism is responsible) - and is therefore potentially less damaging to any unfortunate pike.

They 'might' leave hooks in a fish inadvertently or otherwise (though they mostly strive to avoid doing so), but it's an acceptable risk to them, or presumably they would not do it, no? ... in which case, why should something I choose to do be problematic if it's actually safer than their own practices?

 

Devils Advocate etc

[Andy Macfarlane]

Andy: you can't, but you're missing my point.

 

I didn't mean that to sound like I was questioning what you said, rather adding to your point, when you said that although the stuff was pretty abrasion resistant, it didn't stand up to much pressure, hence it's unsuitability for anything larger than jacks. Sorry for the confusion.

Edited April 10, 2013 by Andy Macfarlane

[tomhaggett]

Perhaps argument was the wrong word then Philo, view/opinion may have been more apt.

 

I see where you're coming from now.

In my opinion there is very little fact whatsoever in hooks always being "got rid of". No way on earth could people give evidence of enough instances for it too be considered factually correct. I'm sure plenty of hooks are shed but it is by no means an acceptable rationale for not using wire.

 

It's akin to saying "I'll use a totally fixed rig, complete with 4oz lead and 5m of leadcore for carp because hearsay has it that they get rid of hooks"...

[Steve Walker]

Isn't the very concept of "safe" carp rigs an acknowledgement of the reality of leaving hooks in fish?

[Ken L]

Everything you could ever want to know about fluorocarbon pike traces is just over six minutes into this video.....