Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Center Pin Fishing' started by antlerhunter, Jan 25, 2018.
Thanks, I'll check those out.
Glass I have seen sink but not hard plastic sinking yet
You got me thinking...
So, I went out and grabbed some beads in the garage and started screwing around.
First I dumped some in, expecting them to sink cause they always do, but they didn't. I poked at them a bit and got them to bounce around and eventually they stayed down. I had tried cold water because that is what the river is. So I switched to hot water just for grins, and they floated for a second then sunk slowly.
They sunk because the surface tension of hot water is not nearly as strong as cold water. Surprisingly enough, there is enough surface tension to hold the air in the hole of the bead, and that is just enough to make it float. Till you get to the big jumbo beads some guys use for kings anyway. Those went straight down.
Then I stuck a fairly neutrally buoyant piece of the rubber stop i use to plug the hole in the beads, and trimmed flush, and they sunk right away.
But I never like to stop thinking there, a rigged bead will obviously sink, but a rigged bead with a hook will sink very quickly! It actually might sink too quickly to be completely natural??? So maybe I should start making beads that do float, at a specific rate that the weight of my chosen hook counterbalances them to being just over neutral buoyancy...
That might be tough. Current obviously plays a big role. Surface current is faster than bottom current. Shot patterns and shot weight dictates how quickly the presentation will sink but once it’s down it’s really up to the bead to stay where you hope it should. Different hooks have different weights and profiles but most of them are in tenths of grams. The only way I have been successful to get hard plastic to appear to be buoyant neutral is adding #6 soft shot on my Leader. Not a huge fan of that setup but it works. Even more important believe it or not is the fluoro Leader. Too stiff and the beads look really un natural and don’t seem to roll in the current and get down and stay down. A softer fluoro Leader works better but make sure the abrasion resistance is no less than the stiffer leader. These little details in presentations make a big diff imo, I have been able to watch rainbows in super gin clear and shallow situations react to all of these setups and it does make a difference.
I certainly don't have an issue hooking fish on plastic beads. I got sick of bait and whatnot, so I have been fishing them almost exclusively for a couple seasons. exceptions are when the water is high and dirty... I hook just as many fish as I did before, and am not convinced that there's much else that will allow me to pluck a couple fish from each spot on a regular basis. Mostly its a confidence thing, and a simplicity thing with me. I am always looking for a way to improve tho. My question is, what is closer to neutral buoyancy and more natural to a real egg with nothing attached? Something that sinks, plus a hook; something that sinks like a real egg, plus a hook; or something that doesn't sink as fast, plus a hook... It is only logical that something that has a slower sink rate would be closer when the weight of the hook is added?
The only reason I have used soft plastics is for scent, and in situations like slow water or long drifts, where the indication in the float is delayed or the hookset is delayed. I don't think you can argue that they spit a hard bead faster than a soft one!
my son uses modeling clay and makes his own these sink
Sent from my SM-G955U using Michigan Sportsman mobile app
Couldn't that be interpreted as snagging?
The entire premise of using beads is based on encouraging safe CIR... It could be, and the conversation has been had whether you can keep the fish caught that way. Frankly, I am not sure how many people using beads are not practicing CIR anyhow? so does it matter? compared to chuck n duck???
I did have a conversation with Nick Popoff and Jim Dexter, and someone else?, about whether having the bead on the line, and a bare hook was legal. I responded that it was no different than a spinner rig for walleye with no minnow. They agreed it was still legal (leader line becomes a separate attached lure). They are/were working on coming up with verbiage on how to have the LEOs enforce it. Though, because of its nature, I think they agree it is a legal and an intentionally more ethical way to catch fish.
In good faith, it is still trying to get the fish to eat the presentation, and be safer to release. Which, is a lot more than a couple other methods I could mention can claim.
To me if less than 99% of the fish I hook are not hooked in the mouth, I can't justify using that method. I can say that I still fish beads.
The word "intent" comes to mind. If your bead is within an inch or two of the hook, your intent is to get the hook in the mouth. If your bead is 8" from the hook, different story.
Lots of grey are with intent.
vano397, you stated that you were trying to hook the fish from the outside of the mouth towards the inside. I can see where it could be interpreted as foul hooked and repeated catches like that, you were intentionally foul hooking them.
You are right with the grey! The conversation I had was an aside to a discussion about musky regulations... they thought it important enough to define the intent that they stopped talking about current issues to get an opinion from a fisherman. It is a conundrum that needs to be defined. Like I said, the intent and mechanics are that the fish has to eat the presentation to get hooked, and hooked in the most ethical way to ensure safe release. There is no dispute that the geometry and physics of it would make the intent of snagging nearly impossible. There are NO happy accidents in this type of fishing, the fish eats it. Conversely, running a 9' leader with a bunch of stone flies has a TON of happy accidents, to the point it could be viewed as intent to snag (and is by many). Hopefully they will publish their ruling, and I will ask the next time I am at a meeting where they are present.
That was a very murky issue. DNR addressed that issue a few years back via memo, I don't believe they actually changed the law. They did however clear bead fishing, they placed a maximum on hook to bead distance. It was posted on this forum when the memo was released
I thought at 1 time(in the past) if you hooked a fish in the mouth area(not inside)while legally fishing you could keep the fish according to DNR? Has this been changed? Back then I thought DNR said the fish was legal because the fish may have been striking the bait/lure and was hooked outside of the mouth in the process. Saw that 1 time on the original Michigan Outdoors where they were trolling for salmon and kept a salmon that wasn't hooked inside the mouth.
Here is the post that appeared on M/S
From the DNR.
We've received guidance from Lansing that trout bead rigs will be considered legal, as long as the hook is relatively close to the bead (resulting in the fish being hooked in the mouth). In the past there has been some question about this rig because of the bare hook below the bead. Kind of similar to how some fish wobble glos. Intent goes a long way in the eyes of a CO- if the angler is truly trying to get fish to bite, that is very important.
The one caveat is that trout bead rigs would not be legal in any flies-only reaches, as a plastic bead does not meet the legal definition of a fly.
Hope that helps!
MDNR Fisheries Mgt. Biologist
Cadillac District Office
Be the first to comment
Mar 27, 2014 Edit
Relatively close, that narrows it down