[abomb]

I have a question about "artificial fly and lure only" waters next year.

The way I read them there is no scented plastics at all, but it looks like they did away with the 1.5" rule. So starting in 2006 you can use any size as long as they are unscented, right?

 

[James]

I think that's correct, but only at waters that are "artificial fly & lure only". They're (scented plastics) ok at most places.

 

[abomb]

Thanks James I edited my post to make it more clear.

 

[Guest]

That's correct. But "scented" includes artificials made with salt injected. And there's a ton of those, especially tubes.

 

[Neal/CO]

What a nightmare to enforce!!!!!

 

[Guest]

What a nightmare to enforce!!!!!

Yes, and a nightmare for the fishermen who try to stay legal. I had a discussion with one of the CDOW folks out at Bass Pro Shops on opening weekend about this and they certainly do not seem open to discussing any sort of compromise to allow lures with salt.

 

[afishman]

at the dow meeting that i went to, they said absolutely no way they were going to allow any scented baits or salted baits. i asked about a 8"worm they said no way. they are not going to flexible at all about this rule so be very careful. btw this rule came about because of some technique some people were using up at spinney. ???

 

[Cutthroat]

Scents and salts work by "baiting" fish to take and/or hold onto your hook. Scents and salts are therefore baits, and it doesn't surprise me that states define them as such, and any lure that uses them to attact or trigger bites. The idea of artificals is that they are supposed to only appeal to the visual senses of fish.

 

[Guest]

Scents and salts work by "baiting" fish to take and/or hold onto your hook. 

I don't have a problem with it except that now I have to specifically hunt out plastics that don't have salt, empty my boat of any Yamamoto stuff (cuz all the Senkos and Yamamoto grubs have some salt) before I hit any artificial only water and create an entire new set of lure boxes for unsalted artificials.  It's expensive and it's a huge pain in the ass.

It seems to me that a reasonable compromise would have been to outlaw soft plastics that contain fish "food" such as Yum and Gulp and Power Bait and leave those that only have salt as legal.  The purpose of the reg was to keep people from fishing an "artificial" passively when it was likely that the "artificial" would be eaten and swallowed by the fish, causing mortality.  I have never had a fish "swallow" and "eat" a salted tube or a Senko.  Salt is promoted as a substance that may cause a fish to hang onto a lure slightly longer after you have deceived him into biting it, not as fish "food".  Yum and Gulp and Power Bait, for example, are specifically touted (and engineered by the manufacturers) to be actual fish food. 

I'm all for protecting fish populations through the use of reasonable regulations, but it seems to me that the outlawing of soft plastics that contain salt only crosses the line. 

In my opinion there was a less burdensome alternative that would have netted the same protection, at less cost in dollars and hassle to anglers.

 

[Guest]

I agree don...I still think to have a fishing license as an adult you should have to take a class.  Covering ethics,  how to properly handle and release fish,  and many other things that someone new to fishing may not know.  I've seen people handle pike at the rocky mountain arsenal...it wouldn't matter if they hooked those fish with a griffiths gnat or topsluggers4's rainbow deciever those people had no clue on how to grab a pike much less handle one long enough to release it.  Instead of instituting more rules and regulations why shouldn't the d.o.w. try to educate more fisherman.  I think small tube jigs under 1.5 will account for a higher mortality rate in mountain reservoirs filled with large trout.  Opposed to a 3 inch salted tube or curly tail jig.  Even the single tubes you buy at the smaller tackle shops are salted...I think its a unenforceable rule that will only cause confusion...Can you imagine being the d.o.w. officer asking to sniff or taste a lure...how else will you be able to tell if its salt impregnated???  I follow the rules but like don it will be a pain setting up yet another box for certain waters.    

 

[Cutthroat]

I think they probably would just ask to see what kind of bait you're using, and read the package for themselves. When you're fishing above 7000 feet, that's what the do with my cut bait (to make sure it's not living, I suppose) - they don't bother asking when I'm fly fishing. Of course, folks don't usually fly fish with live fatheads.

 

[Guest]

I put most of my plastics in clear zip lock baggy's ....been doing that for years it just makes it easier on me...Tubes in one, worms in another, and senko's in another...

 

[Cutthroat]

I guess they'd have to go by taste then...

 

[TroutFishingBear]

I agree with don. In my opinion it is a poor rule at best.
Passively fishing scented plastics really doesn't work anyway; especially on wily wild trout and those are the ones this rule is probably most concerned with. I have deep hooked 2 bass with a senko before, but that is out of (literally) thousands I have caught on senkos. I have never really caught a fish on a passively fished plastic. To put a rule across the entire state just cuz they say it happens occaisionally at spinney isn't right. Spinney isn't the only fishery in the state ya know. I doubt they will be able to enforce it well; they will have to go by taste.

 

[Cutthroat]

I catch wild trout on Powerbait micronymphs on a dead stick in winter. Not sure if it's the scent, the flavor, or the wiggly legs that draws the strike, but I do suspect it's the flavor that keeps the bait in their mouth long enough for me to get a hookset. They seem to work on it for a long time, like real bait. When they aren't fresh, you don't get all the strikes, and they don't hold on long at all. The wild trout I catch with them are mostly browns in lakes. Haven't tried them in streams. I note also that I have more success with them than I do with completely artifical lures, like kasty's and other jigs and spoons without bait.

Even so, there are problems with enforcement of this law. Anglers pretty much have to self police. It is often understood that certain regulations are not easily enforced, and the thinking is that most anglers will obey the ban voluntarily, and the few that ignore it will be few enough in number not to cause a big problem. I talked to a warden friend of mine and he acknowledged that they find bait and bait containers at Parvin (artificials only), but that they find a heck of a lot more at nearby Dowdy (bait allowed). My observation, fishing up there a lot, is that the artifical lures only reg at Parvin basically served to insure that fishing pressure there is a lot lower than at Dowdy. In some cases, that is really the goal. Set the regulation so people will voluntarily choose to fish there less often.

 

[TroutFishingBear]

do the trout swallow that lure cutthroat?

 

[Cutthroat]

No, but whether a fish swallows a hook or not, their risk of mortality is elevated for a couple weeks after being hooked and captured, even with the most gentle of handling and release. Many fish that swim away with great gusto when released often have a delayed stress response, and become subsequently sluggish and may not feed for some period after being captured. It's especially bad when you are fishing in water that is on the warm end of tolerable temperature for the species you're catching.

In any case, the idea of flies and artificial lure regulations from their inception was to decrease the rate of capture of the fish. In that sense, a scented or flavored artifical bait that actually does trigger more bites, or cause the capture efficiency to increase after the strike, somewhat defeats the purpose of the regulation. An added benefit of artificial lures and flies was later determined to be that they tend to result in less frequent deep hooking, and thus may improve survival of those fish that are captured.