• Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Volitan last won the day on June 2 2019

Volitan had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

160 Excellent

About Volitan

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Central Coast, NSW

Recent Profile Visitors

1,415 profile views
  1. Well, let’s think about this. prolonged drought means less runoff. Less runoff means less nutrients in the estuaries. Less nutrients means less algae and other baseline foods. Less algae means less food for small fish and other critters so less baitfish. Less baitfish means less big fish. Altogether it makes for a couple of lean years. I think the entire biota is currently just a fraction of what it is in good years.
  2. Hold on, catching kingfish on yabbies? That’s something I need to know more about. You mean nippers, the things you pump out of local sand flats? and you are drifting and using a downrigger, so is this like really slow trolling of a yabbie in midwater ? Just one yabbie on a small hook? cheers Volitan
  3. Volitan


    By ‘the ladders’ are you meaning Iron Ladder Beach, near Little Box Head?
  4. There are normally 1lb blocks of Lunds Squid available, just not at the moment. The 5lb blocks are available. For those who don’t know, Lunds Squid comes from the US and is hi-tec quick frozen at sea, not left kicking around a boat hold in an ice slurry like the local product. That’s why it’s in a different league to the local product if you’re after fish that are normally reluctant to take a dead bait.
  5. Just wondering if anyone has any good ideas for how to divide up a large block of frozen bait. Reason I ask is because I often buy the Lunds squid in 5lb boxes. I use about one third of that per fishing trip, so I usually divide them up into three with a saw while still frozen. Because the squid was small and packed across the box I was mainly ‘cutting between the squid’ so there wasn’t much wastage. Now the new season Lunds Squid is in the shops. It’s in a bright yellow box now and $6 dearer. The quality of the squid looks amazing, but they are about twice the size and packed along the box, and they don’t lie neatly parallel like before. Now regardless of whether I cut along or across the box I end up destroying most of the squid. I don’t want to partially defrost the squid and refreeze it - destroys the advantage of the product. Is there something I’m missing. What do others do? cheers
  6. Yep. Most of the time the double loop uni will break at one of the two loops that go through the hook eye - like 90 or 95%. It’s easy to tell because you end up with a clean hook. Occasionally the knot breaks at the other end, where the main line exits the wraps. I think these are inferior ties where the knot has not drawn up well and one turn is excessively tight. When this happens you get a little knot left on the hook which must be cut off.
  7. And yep, Kingie Chaser, the line used was Penn Super X nylon mono, 20 lb bs. it actually breaks at 25.5lbs, being underrated by the manufacturer.
  8. Nope. Maybe I didn’t express myself well but the first set of 5 tests (ie 3,4,5,6 and 8 turns) was the DOUBLE LOOP. Then I tested the SINGLE LOOP, but only for 6 turns around the mainline. The single loop broke at an average of 20lbs. And just to be clear. By ‘turns’ I mean the number of times the tag end is wrapped around the mainline. By ‘loops’ I mean the number of times the line is passed through the eye of the hook. cheers
  9. Yeah, I have always instinctively done less turns for heavier nylon. Never tested it though. cheers
  10. I have been tying the uni knot for probably 30 years and for all that time I’ve wondered what is the optimum number of turns, or if it even matters. Today I decided it was time I answered the question. The original 1944 specification for the knot was for 3 turns. I decided to start there but got slippage, so assume that back in 1944 lines were different then they are today. Then I tried 4, 5, 6 and 8 turns. I have heard people claiming as many as ten turns is ideal. As you can see from the attached spreadsheet, the differences are not great. The optimum number of turns works out to be around 5 or 6. I doubt either of these results will surprise anyone. Note that the result for 8 turns starts to get a bit erratic. Using Penn Super X in 20 lbs (real tested breaking strain was 25.5lbs, the line is underrated by manufacturer). For those who cant download: 3 turns – slippage occurred on 4 of 5 tests 4 turns – average = 23.4lbs 5 turns – average = 24.3lbs 6 turns – average = 24.4lbs 8 turns – average = 23.7lbs While I was at it, I thought I’d try comparing the double loop uni to the single. I’ve heard people say that the single loop is actually a better knot because it provides almost the same strength without the slight unreliability that comes from drawing up a double loop. Using 6 turns around the mainline, the results for were: Double loop – average = 24.4lbs Single loop – average = 20lbs So wrong, not even close. FYI, by double loop uni I mean two turns through the hook eye. I also use the uni knot for braid, so one day soon I’ll test that too. Optimising the uni knot.xlsx
  11. Just for completeness, I tested the Double Eugene Bend on mono - again the Penn Super X 30lb. Average break strain in lbs. Eugene. — 32.45 Palomar —. 32.40 Double loop uni. —- 32.60 So much difference in it, and what there is probably being down to chance. Jon, those metal loops are interesting, but I always try to have the disciple to retie after a decent fish, even if I can’t actually feel anything wrong with the leader. Considering the size and power of the fish you regularly get acquainted with, don’t you do the same?
  12. With fisheries regulations, it’s a mix of managing a wild population and managing human behaviour. The human behaviour side is the difficult one as we all know that there is a percentage of fisherman who will cheat the regs in any way they can to get a result. So you end up with regulations which are not immediately logical. So I assume that Fisheries know 1. most people aren’t going to get a bag limit, or anywhere close to it. If the majority of people caught their bag limit the result would be catastrophic. 2. allowing people to keep undersized fish because they may die on release will lead to a certain number of people targeting undersize fish. Eventually you would have a situation where everybody catches a bag limit, mostly undersize, and all perfectly legal. i grew up trout fishing in NZ and the regulations at the time read that it was illegal to target (catch, not just keep) undersize fish. If you found yourself catching undersize fish accidentally that was OK but you had to change location or change method to minimise the chances of it occurring. Any undersize fish you caught counted towards your bag limit even though you couldn’t keep them. There is also the public education angle. Regulations change peoples’ behaviour, albeit very slowly. I know a lot of people scoff at this, but I know it’s true. When I was a kid we kept everything we caught. I remember hearing about catch and release and thinking it was just some crazy American thing. Things started changing when I was about 14 or so, and new attitudes started surfacing. I was pretty late joining the bandwagon, which was mostly about parental example. on the subject of keeping fish out of water, I did come across some research that showed keeping fish out for more then 1 minute dropped survival rates to 28%. I’d have to read more closely before accepting this, seems pretty low, and I think it would depend upon handling and fish species. i know that in some US fisheries fishing is not allowed in weather over (I think) 74 degrees f., as the survival rate of fish boated is too low. All this stuff is on the net. There is an amazing amount of research done on fish survival because both recreation and commercial fishing are important industries worldwide. You need to do a bit of study on how to access scientific papers, but they are mostly out there and free.
  13. It’s just guesswork unless research is done. Fortunately, there has been a LOT of research done on this. Eg. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233287967_Effect_of_Hook_Type_on_Mortality_Trauma_and_Capture_Efficiency_of_Wild_Stream-Resident_Trout_Caught_by_Active_Baitfishing https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233012131_Hook_Shedding_and_Mortality_of_Deeply_Hooked_Brook_Trout_Caught_with_Bait_on_Barbed_and_Barbless_Hooks if you scroll down to the bottom and click on ‘Reference’ it will lead you to many other studies. Paraphrasing Bob Dubois research: of deeply hooked fish 74% mortality rate if hook removed. 47% mortality rate if hook left in of those with hook left in that survived the test period, 74% shed the hook within two months, which if I read that correctly means about 35% of the total deep hooked fish shed the hook. Another study found 55% mortality when hook removed and 21% when hook left in, but a shorter follow up period was involved. There is a lot of research on this topic. Some bad, some good. Dubois’ research is well done because it involves catching fish by real anglers in real fishing conditions, then keeping the fish in pens in the same environment.. A lot of the research is done in fish farms or confinement ponds where fish don’t have to pursue wild food. A couple of other interesting claims by researchers that I noted in the reading. Hold a fish out of water vertically (eg holding up by tail) and you have effectively killed it - fish are not adapted by evolution to be held upside down. %%%%%ing the air bladder of a fish caught in deep water does not increase survival rate - barotrauma kills fish regardless. I always wondered about that one.
  14. i think you guys are probably right about the claim that Flouro is less visible being rubbish. As I see it, some marketoid came up with the line that Flouro has the ‘same refractive index as water’ and that makes it less visible. Now everyone just repeats it without thinking about it. The two problems I see are: 1. We see reflected light, not refracted. Same with fish. Maybe refraction plays a role, but it would be very small by my understanding. 2. what exactly is ‘water’. It might be true for laboratory standard water but that’s nothing like the deep green stuff in front of my house, for example. maybe someone who understands the properties of light better can enlighten us.