Hooks and stuff

I don't know if this has any bearing on Pike, as it was mainly applicable to marine fish, but I was a member of the tag and release program run by the Oceanographic Research Institute in South Africa. Great emphasis was always placed on the correct methods of handling, unhooking, insertion of tags, revival, and liberation of fish as part of the research process.
After browsing through the last few posts, I thought it impotant to mention that, in all the litterature and talks/seminars which I was exposed to over the years, one important aspect was constantly hammered home - the importance of protecting and not causing harm to a fishes gills was always held paramount! (this included potential accidental bruising caused by prying hands/fingers/foreseps etc.)
The fishes gills, whether we want to believe it or not, are the most delicate part of a fishes body - if they are harmed, the fish cannot breathe efficiently (or at all) and death is in most cases inevitable. Other wounds such as gutt punctures or rips are less life threatening and, as with humans, will normally heal relatively quickly.

While running a search on the subject, I found the link below which I found interesting, is applicable to pike, and highlights the topic at hand....
http://www.predator-fishing.co.uk/articles/conservation.htm

yes duane i agree with the gills vs gut thing, but as long as you go through behind the rearmost gill if you have to remove a treble in the manner i have already stated then the chances of damage to the gills are greatly reduced. i can only recall one fish that has actually bled from the gills after unhooking (this was due to a treble in the gill NOT forceps damage).
unfortunately it was the fish in my av pic but i have seen the same fish captured again 6 months after i caught her so i know she healed.

Rob, if you are confident enough that you can do it that way without inflicting any harm to the gills(visible or invisible), then be my guest - I am not here to try and convince you differently mate.....
What I will say is that I, personally, base my opinion on that of highly qualified ichtheologists who have years of experience in their field of expertise - I think their guidance carries some weight and should at least be considered......

yes mate i know where you're coming from with that, but unless you carry 15"+ forceps with you then at times it is absolutely necessary, and i do avoid it as much as possible. you'll know what i mean when you get a decent sized pike and see the sheer depth of the mouth, its just not safe or practical to attempt to unhook a treble from the back of the mouth of a good fish any other way.

spade floor big hole digging it myself

ok here goes i will usually go through the gills fairly quickly if the bottom treble is at the back of the mouth. one thing i only useshort forceps well usually pliers

speed is of the essence for me with a little luck i can have a fish back into the water when baitfishing inside a minute. its better not taking them out but with awkward hook ups its needed

why the spade noodle??

digging myself a hole

Jeez Noodle, you said your missus had you busy with a bit of DIY - sounds more like major constrction mate?

...............................or did the missus overstep the boundaries and you need to get rid of the body?

i managed to escape the worst of it yey

just doing daft little things like squeeky doors

wardrobes are now pencilled in over the weekend

Still one of the best discussions...

Single hook rigs were brought up by Eric Edwards at the PAC convention.

One angler had reported a three fold increase in fish landed after switching to single hook rigs, compared to mates fishing trebles alongside him.

And, as you know Andy, I use singles exclusively when baitfishing.
I only use trebles if there are present on a lure so as to keep the action it was designed with.
Maybe this season I can get on the banks a little more to keep experimenting with the tagging method.

Andy Webster wrote:Still one of the best discussions...

Single hook rigs were brought up by Eric Edwards at the PAC convention.

One angler had reported a three fold increase in fish landed after switching to single hook rigs, compared to mates fishing trebles alongside him.

they were indeed and the angler in question Mark houghton, is technichalyy a good thinker, by that i mean he thinks in technical terms lol
and when he posts something like that it does pay to listen

eric did put him on the spot a bit didnt he
he wasnt the only one he did that to unfortunatly

Were you there Noodle?

Andy Webster wrote:Were you there Noodle?

yeah i am occasionaly known as john woods

a distance casting freak who couldnt get erics method to work, i liked the idea of being able to get proper fish baits further, i can put launce lamprey etc a long way, you heard eric mention 99 yards i cna do over 135 consistantly with baits mentioned above and a variation of a clipped down rig well i could when i fished with baits a lot anyway now i do more with lures i doubt i could cast like that straight off now.

i didnt try it with a spod rod i was using 3.5s

I don't suppose Eric got his lure back? His face was a picture.

The planer float looks like a handy item in the right situation...and the right hands. Really surprised no-one is marketing something to do the job.

Andy

rumour has it a certain verticly challenged piker from southport has pocketed it

the planer float in truth well in my opinion is probably too hard for the average angler to have a go at, how many anglers now buy everything ready made

it does work and one added thing stick a small vane on top let the wind catch it and see how much water you can work on a stillwater

noodle wrote:the planer float in truth well in my opinion is probably too hard for the average angler to have a go at, how many anglers now buy everything ready made

What! You mean you can't cast it out, put the rod on the rest, clip up the alarms, and watch it search out 300 yards of river.

I am disappointed

Precisely why I say "In the right hands"

It will take some mastering and will result in a few lost rigs.

Andy

it needent if you try it with just a lead on at first ok a lilttle wasted fishing time but its time well spent.

now though i cant really get past lures as i can do so much with them covering water is far easier and hence covering more fish...

i do loose out on distance though so i cant search out waters to the same point as i could with baits in a distance perspective.

saying all that im actually craving a few lazy sessions on a lake with the kettle and bacon sarnies, too the point ive just spooled up reels with 18lb sensor for a rocky swim or two

http://www.baintonfisheries.co.uk/articles/preds_planer.htm

tootall wrote:http://www.baintonfisheries.co.uk/articles/preds_planer.htm

not the same in the slightest ive used both and although they are initially similar in intended use or at least the idea behind the use they are not.

so how do they differ?

what size shrink tube shud i use on the bottom treble of my traces and will i need a dif size for the swivel end, i like to use a size 6 on the bottom and a 4 for my second hook, i find i can get a deeper hold onto my bait with the 4 just at the back of the dorsal fin,

tootall wrote:so how do they differ?

Tootall

Although the purpose of this planer is the same, the execution that Eric Edwards uses is very different.

Take a standard drifter float, then swap the drift vein with the polly ball so that the polly ball is at the top. Add an anchor point for the line onto the vein, but offset. Thats about as much as I can remember.

Andy

a planer wont hold position flow, it will work walking, trolling etc when the uniform pace and the way they are anchored to your line suits that

erics is more suited to holding baits still it doesnt really push out as harshly as a planer board.

plus it is still float planer boards fail on that score