Jump to content

Discovered today there are two ways to break in a new rod


Rob G
 Share

Recommended Posts

Tim,

I wasn't sure whether I wanted to use a standard size or large tip top on this rod and so I didn't wrap and finish immediately below the tip top yet. But you have to wonder if that additional strength might have saved that? What do you think? Hard to say I know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

I wasn't sure whether I wanted to use a standard size or large tip top on this rod and so I didn't wrap and finish immediately below the tip top yet. But you have to wonder if that additional strength might have saved that? What do you think? Hard to say I know.

 

First, nice river fish. It would be great if the November prize went to a fly rod. If nothing else that 3/4" gets you a prize for precision.

 

I'll assume that that tip snapped "in normal use." That is, you weren't using the rod to poke a lure free, closing a door on it, stepping on it, or doing other "abusive" things. Then there is no way that tip should break like that, and wrapping would not have saved it. Besides, it broke at a point that might not have been wrapped anyway. I would chalk it up to a hidden defect or "accident that happened at the factory." Do you know the country of origin for the blank.

 

It reminds me that a while back, I purchased a Cabela's Salt Striker travel rod, The first time I flexed it the tip splintered. Cabela's replaced it. The second rod splintered the same place when I gave it a tug to free it from a minor hangup-not what one expected from a rod speced for 10-20# line and 1/4 to 1 oz. lures. That was it for Cabela rods. I got a Bass Pro Ocean Master light action (Line Weight: 8-17 lbs., Lure Weight: 3/8 - 1-1/2 oz.). Tells you something about "saltwater light." I have been using that rod for over 5 years now with no problems. They would say that Cabelas must have got a bad batch.

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice fish, too bad about the rod.

 

Next time, just leave the fish in the water, we'll get the idea.

 

You probably killed that fish by removing much of its slime layer when laying it on a dry surface.

 

I'm sorry to buzz-kill the frivolity of a broken rod tip, but I do get tired of people having to show their fishing prowess by laying it on the ground, and then "releasing" it.

 

I believe there was a good piece in the bulletin awhile back on handling fish.

 

I've wrote my own version here: http://fly-fishing-s...before-release/.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brad,

 

To say I probably killed the fish is quite presumptive with little data to support it. As someone with a degree in zoology and who worked with the DNR over a couple summers in collecting data in fish surveys, believe me we kept the fish out of the water much greater than the 20 seconds than this one, when we would measure on a board, took weights, took girth and tissue samples, sometimes tagged and no data suggested that we were killing our specimens. I do agree that the way of absolute least risk to the fish is for it to never leave the water but of course an even better way to insure the maximum life of a fish is to not produce undue stress in the first place by catching it. Point taken. Photo removed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Photo could have stayed. Although laying a fish on the ground could cause it harm the fact is we all have probably done it at some point in our fishing lives.

I have learned a lot and have changed a lot of my practices since joining the ISA. I believe that's kind of one of the ideas of the ISA. To educate. Live and learn.

Nice catch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

I wasn't sure whether I wanted to use a standard size or large tip top on this rod and so I didn't wrap and finish immediately below the tip top yet. But you have to wonder if that additional strength might have saved that? What do you think? Hard to say I know.

 

rob, i don't think that makes a difference. the blank should work with no wraps if possible. that said, i suppose, if the break was due to a score cassed by the weighted fly colloding with the rod, and where the fly tagged the rod where the wrap would be it would probably protect the blank. tat is a statisticly big if, tho. timothy troester

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ouch! Sorry about that tip Rob. It seems to be going around. Nice fish though.

I agree about the fish most likely having no permanent damage. I've been around tanked fish for most of my life and have tossed many back into tanks that have hit the floor. The only ones not surviving the planned escape were those not noticed until they were about dried out. I did have one die from developing a fungus after bouncing around on a carpet for a short period of time before I was able to get it back into the tank.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would be great if the November prize went to a fly rod. If nothing else that 3/4" gets you a prize for precision.

And honesty, too!

 

On pics and fish handling,

I like Ron's idea of the fish in the hand, and my preference is held near or partly in the water (although I am guilty of all fish-handling and fish-photographing crimes in the past). Steelhead fanatic (and guide) April Vokey had some thoughts on this too:

http://flygalventure...rin-debate.html

She thinks we should get away from the "grip and grin" or "hero shot" in favor of a more accurate depiction of angler interacting with fish during capture and release (as if no photographer were there). She'll be in Chicago on Monday if you want to take it up with her ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And honesty, too!

 

On pics and fish handling,

I like Ron's idea of the fish in the hand, and my preference is held near or partly in the water (although I am guilty of all fish-handling and fish-photographing crimes in the past). Steelhead fanatic (and guide) April Vokey had some thoughts on this too:

http://flygalventure...rin-debate.html

She thinks we should get away from the "grip and grin" or "hero shot" in favor of a more accurate depiction of angler interacting with fish during capture and release (as if no photographer were there). She'll be in Chicago on Monday if you want to take it up with her ;)

Tim

I'm not sure what you mean.But anyway, if it's true as I believe it is that if beautiful women were fish they'd all be rainbow trout Ms Vokey is one fine looking rainbow.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ron,

Since you quoted my whole post, I'm not sure where to clarify myself. I'll cover my bases like this I suppose...

 

I like this photo:

post-1902-0-66561700-1352243137_thumb.jpg

 

April likes something like this:

post-1902-0-09368600-1352243158_thumb.jpg

 

What we're used to (grip and grin):

post-1902-0-78703200-1352243215_thumb.jpg

post-1902-0-16291400-1352243189_thumb.jpg

 

In essence, April would prefer we do less posing for fish pics. Just land the fish, unhook it, revive it, release it--all as if there were no cameras around.

Now when you go back and read her blog post, try to focus mostly on the words, a little on the fish, and not so much on her ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I LOL how so many posts turn into "about trout." Gone are the days of salty tube jig fishermen sleeping with their marked Gazetteers by their sides. We're in a new age of kinder, gentler ISA members. A Hills Bros coffee can full of Clousers...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brad,

 

To say I probably killed the fish is quite presumptive with little data to support it. As someone with a degree in zoology and who worked with the DNR over a couple summers in collecting data in fish surveys, believe me we kept the fish out of the water much greater than the 20 seconds than this one, when we would measure on a board, took weights, took girth and tissue samples, sometimes tagged and no data suggested that we were killing our specimens. I do agree that the way of absolute least risk to the fish is for it to never leave the water but of course an even better way to insure the maximum life of a fish is to not produce undue stress in the first place by catching it. Point taken. Photo removed.

 

Clap! Clap! Clap! ....

 

Good reply, Rob. We need to strike some balance on this topic of photographing fish. Your picture displayed the fish in a very acceptable way to me. But you were slimed; I have had the same experience.. (Remember the slapstick Nickelodian routine from 20 years ago where they dumped a bucket of green slime on an unsuspecting character.) Our version of it is surprising a proud angler with unqualified criticism about slime removal. We seem to assume that Bass are the same as trout and that the lessons of trout handling apply equally to bass handling. But Bass are not Trout. We really don't know how April would handle a Smallmouth Bass. All we have is her article on handling trout which became a sidetrack to the discussion. I will stand with you on this. I think you should put the picture back. Did it look like this?

 

018a.jpg

 

Here's one that got me slimed a few years ago.

 

DSCF0047.jpg

 

I think both of these are acceptable displays of a catch.

 

You rightly point out that, if one does not want to stress a fish, one should not set a hook in its mouth and subject it to an exhausting battle. Apparently, April travels with a photographer in tow making photographs of interactions easy to achieve. I do not have that luxury.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John

Trouble is that a smallie will usually start flopping around when laid down whether onto a dry or wet surface..A hand held shot either as a timer pic or not is better for the fish.

 

Trouble is that your hands are a source of fungus and bacteria. Better for the fish to wear clean gloves or wash your hands first. :rolleyes: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brad,

 

To say I probably killed the fish is quite presumptive with little data to support it. As someone with a degree in zoology and who worked with the DNR over a couple summers in collecting data in fish surveys, believe me we kept the fish out of the water much greater than the 20 seconds than this one, when we would measure on a board, took weights, took girth and tissue samples, sometimes tagged and no data suggested that we were killing our specimens. I do agree that the way of absolute least risk to the fish is for it to never leave the water but of course an even better way to insure the maximum life of a fish is to not produce undue stress in the first place by catching it. Point taken. Photo removed.

Well played Rob, 9 posts and not even a club member Brad should check himself before he starts busting a are fly fishing officer's stones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We need to strike some balance on this topic of photographing fish. Your picture displayed the fish in a very acceptable way to me. But you were slimed; I have had the same experience.. (Remember the slapstick Nickelodian routine from 20 years ago where they dumped a bucket of green slime on an unsuspecting character.) Our version of it is surprising a proud angler with unqualified criticism about slime removal. We seem to assume that Bass are the same as trout and that the lessons of trout handling apply equally to bass handling. But Bass are not Trout. We really don't know how April would handle a Smallmouth Bass. All we have is her article on handling trout which became a sidetrack to the discussion. I will stand with you on this. I think you should put the picture back.

 

I think both of these are acceptable displays of a catch.

 

You rightly point out that, if one does not want to stress a fish, one should not set a hook in its mouth and subject it to an exhausting battle. Apparently, April travels with a photographer in tow making photographs of interactions easy to achieve. I do not have that luxury.

 

Mike G,

 

First I want to say I agree; both photos are fine by me. Like I said before, I have been guilty of all fish handling and photographing "crimes." I obviously am personally working on the handling issues but I care a lot less about the photographing issue. The blog by April was not intended to "sidetrack" the discussion or make it about salmonids. I brought it up because we were talking about different ways to take pictures of fish. I wanted to bring in a few ideas from multiple sources. Also, when I said I "like" photos of fish in/on water, I really meant just that--"like"--it is an aesthetic preference, not a prescription for others to follow or a requirement for fish survival. I think you make a great point that black bass species tend to be tougher fish that aren't as fragile as other species (therefore the comparison is less valid).

 

I'm not here to criticize people or their photos. I am happy for the angler and his/her fine catch. I appreciate when they share it with us.

 

I do want to say a few more things about the photography topic though. In most cases it is ridiculous to claim the angler mistreated/mishandled the fish because a photo is a mere snapshot capturing a single moment. That is, we have no idea what else they did before or after taking the pic. I could have a really nice picture of me releasing a fish that I had out of the water for 15 minutes, struggled to unhook, and then took 25 pictures of which I posted 1 online. On the other hand, like I assume is the case with the pics in this thread, the angler could treat the fish well, use a single hook, unhook the fish while it's in the water, place the fish down on a moist bank for 10 seconds while photographing, and then release. Survival is more likely in the second situation.

 

Finally, as far as style goes, the "hero shot" or "grip and grin" is sort of a vestige of earlier non-digital photography. We are in a bind nowadays because in the online forum world, talk is cheap, so pictures are a requirement for validating one's abilities as a angler--it's a proxy for who knows what they are talking about and who is all talk. But this proliferation of pictures, including the ease of both taking pictures and sharing them online, drives us to take more creative pictures of our catch. Some mistake this for meaning that new styles of fishing photography are equivalent to better ways of treating fish. They are not, necessarily, and the drive to take the "coolest" pics can make you treat the fish pretty poorly just for the sake of one's online ego. Am I making any sense here? Sorry for taking up so much space.

 

[bTW, April says she still takes "grip and grins" with all other species because she hasn't caught enough of them]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ISA promotes catch and release sport fishing as well as safe fish handling. Photos of fish on the ground are discouraged. Members and forum registrants are going to slip up once in a while, and a simple PM is all that's needed as a reminder. Rob is an ISA officer so he is obligated to set a good example and convey the ISA's high standard. We don't want new members seeing pics of fish on the ground and thinking it's an acceptable practice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't going to post anymore on this thread and I know I'm going to regret this but......

 

When has any individual here done a study or can one quote a clean study that shows the mortality rate of a caught fish (of the sunfish family) removed immediately from the water, laid gently on its side for less than 10 seconds and then immediately released to be anything different than one taken by an angler who takes a self timed photo by himself holding his fish? Because I know what is involved in the latter photo, and I can guarantee the fish was out of the water longer, was handled more, and often left on the line trying to get away while one is setting up the camera and tripod into a more favorable lighting and background direction. Oh and tell me with that self timer that you get it right first time and everytime and you never stop, take a look at the photo you just took to see if you need to alter the distance from camera or recenter the subject, or change the background, lighting or flash. You might be so slick that you can pull it off in a few seconds but I can guarantee that most can not. I'm sorry if I offended anyone with the earlier photo, hence why I removed it. I will not post a similar one again (except for gar as they can live out of water longer than I can : ) But you will not see me with a self timed photo because I don't give a rat's butt that you see my face with a fish, I don't require that recognition and I feel that I've inflicted more stress on that fish in creating that photo than otherwise. Out of the two hundred or more smallies that I caught this year, I photographed less than ten, most all held at arm's length and only two were on their side. I can live with that.

 

Now how about those Bears and what do you think of those fly fishing baskets?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...