The Hair Rig - Should it be allowed?

Some years ago I read an article, it may have been in a South African magazine, that the hair rig contravened all that was supposed to be considered as sportsmanship in what we term as fair angling with rod and line.

Now before we go any further, I myself have used the hair rig on and off for over 25 years. In the 70s I was hair rigging maize grains. I even tied a fly on a length of wire and attatched a bare hook behind it, so I claim no moral high ground here.

But when a large organisation such as IGFA state that no record fish can be allowed that was caught on a bait or lure that wasn't mounted on the hook, then there must be a reason for it.

The reason is that many believe that to use the hair rig contravenes fair angling with rod and line.

Certainly Chris Yates believes that, but what about you?

I really don't see how it contravenes owt.

Lures often have two hooks on them, deadbaits are mounted on two sets of trebles (more often than not). Is this also unfair angling?

The bait is, to my mind, mounted on the hook - it is attached to the hook by a short peice of braid or mono.

Beaurocracy gone mad says I.

Ron The Hat Clay said:

Some years ago I read an article, it may have been in a South African magazine, that the hair rig contravened all that was supposed to be considered as sportsmanship in what we term as fair angling with rod and line.

Now before we go any further, I myself have used the hair rig on and off for over 25 years. In the 70s I was hair rigging maize grains. I even tied a fly on a length of wire and attatched a bare hook behind it, so I claim no moral high ground here.

But when a large organisation such as IGFA state that no record fish can be allowed that was caught on a bait or lure that wasn't mounted on the hook, then there must be a reason for it.

The reason is that many believe that to use the hair rig contravenes fair angling with rod and line.

Certainly Chris Yates believes that, but what about you?

Click to expand...

And what makes Chris Yates' opinion so important?? Just because he thinks old tackle and methods are the way you should fish ,doesn't make it right.

If it's a legal method it's OK ......

Nonsense. A fish can't be caught fairly on rod and line unless it takes the hook into its mouth, so the bait/lure has to be positioned close enough to the hook (consistent with the species sought) for that to happen. Using a three foot hair of one pound mono with a single maggot on the end would be highly ineffective. That being so, why should it matter whether the bait is on the hook or close to it? After all, a cube of luncheon meat is commonly mounted so as to encapsulate the whole hook with just the point exposed, whereas a single maggot is only nicked on. One bait is therefore more centrally positioned on the hook than the other, yet that is acceptable.

So should the rule be the bait must actually be in contact with the hook at all times? If so, a hair rig would still be valid, so long as it was tied short enough. But then we'd be in a situation where the length of hair was critical, not the principle, and the argument starts to look weak. Besides, a hundred years ago quill minnows were often used with flying trebles that were not in contact with the lure itself - should all fish caught that way be retrospectively discounted? I imagine a few notable Thames trout might have to be re-classified as unfairly taken if so.

Suppose hair rigs were banned? What next? Should semi-fixed lead rigs be outlawed as they cause the fish to get hooked without the active participation of the angler? But wait - what if a fish hooks itself against the rod tip when legering a river (we've all had it happen I'm sure) or even against the resistance of a float? What about the trout that hooks itself against the angler's retrieve? The pike that takes a spoon? Both methods are deemed sporting, yet they offer endless opportunity for a fish to hook itself.

The sooner we start to realise there's more to successful angling than the mechanism involved in hooking the fish, the sooner we'll be able to see things clearly. No-one can catch a carp if there are none where they put their bait, regardless of hair rigs, bolt rigs, oil rigs or barley rigs. Location, understanding the fishes habits, luring them to feed by judicious groundbaiting - all play a vital part.

I'm very relaxed about this.It is a baited hook albeit the bait is attached to the hook not actually on it. Its fair angling.

I'm perfectly OK with hair rigs....hair pieces however are an entirely different matter.

ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one) said:

And what makes Chris Yates' opinion so important?? Just because he thinks old tackle and methods are the way you should fish ,doesn't make it right.

Click to expand...

I agree with you there Ed.

But remember Mr. Yates has lots of followers and sycophants. There are those who believe that the sun shines out of his fundamental orifice!

:wh

Should not be allowed World wide, ban it I say! It does not count, it's wrong, lets all go back to honey paste, bread flake and a spud in the edge on a treble hook, and if, and only if you do hook one, then it must be gaffed and not netted!

Nice thread Ron, get a life!

noknot said:

Should not be allowed World wide, ban it I say! It does not count, it's wrong, lets all go back to honey paste, bread flake and a spud in the edge on a treble hook, and if, and only if you do hook one, then it must be gaffed and not netted!

Nice thread Ron, get a life!

Click to expand...

And bow fishing should be allowed as long as you have a hair on the barbs of the bolt .....

noknot said:

Nice thread Ron, get a life!

Click to expand...

Not that I think Ron would take the slightest bit of notice (other than to reset his bite alarm) but...

What the hell is wrong with the question he posted?
It's a fishing site, we discuss fishing from technique and tackle to (fishing related) politics.
Why shouldn't he post the question for those who are interested to digest and debate?

ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one) said:

And bow fishing should be allowed as long as you have a hair on the barbs of the bolt .....

Click to expand...

Indeed, at least 3!

---------- Post added at 13:43 ---------- Previous post was at 13:38 ----------

Paul H said:

Not that I think Ron would take the slightest bit of notice (other than to reset his bite alarm) but...

What the hell is wrong with the question he posted?
It's a fishing site, we discuss fishing from technique and tackle to (fishing related) politics.
Why shouldn't he post the question for those who are interested to digest and debate?

Click to expand...

Come on Paul,

The hair rig in it's very many styles has been used now for over 30 years!

It's Just another wind up thread!

noknot said:

Come on Paul,

The hair rig in it's very many styles has been used now for over 30 years!

It's Just another wind up thread!

Click to expand...

Which is why we're replying in the way we are ....

Ron The Hat Clay said:

But when a large organisation such as IGFA state that no record fish can be allowed that was caught on a bait or lure that wasn't mounted on the hook, then there must be a reason for it.

Click to expand...

Another reason other than the fact that they are a bunch of analy-retentive blockheads that is?

PS, methinks it is time to change the batteries in your Herons Ron . . . . . .

I tend to agree with Ron, hair rigs are not proper fishing and they should be banned! One of my chums would like to see a bye-law brought in tomorrow to see that happen and all records of fish caught on them scrapped.

And I think the bolt rig should also be banned and the silly person who introduced it to this country should be shot!
:wh



(Well, if I'm going to be labelled 'anti-carp' I might as well come clean out of the cupboard)

Nice on Ron

You are the master

Has anyone tried using a pubic hair rig?

I find it confuses the fish.

Ron The Hat Clay said:

I agree with you there Ed.

But remember Mr. Yates has lots of followers and sycophants. There are those who believe that the sun shines out of his fundamental orifice!

:wh

Click to expand...

That can be said of Walker also Ron..:wh

There is nothing in the rules regarding hair rigs when claiming a record that I know of, The rule states rod and line.

If you want to get very silly about it, take a look at the Fluff chuckers.

The hair has been one of, if not the best way of catching wise old fish for years.

While Yates is being talked about, isn't it time he got a landing net that didn't damage fish, before he starts going off on one. Whats good for the Goose and all that.

If you believe that I think that the sun shone out of Walker's fundamental orifice, then you don't really know me.

I was an admirer of Walker, but certainly no sycophant!

One thing I cannot understand about these traditional anglers is why they use modern monofilaments on their sick looking reels and equally hideous cane rods.

And non-lead shot, and modern hooks!!!!

---------- Post added at 07:47 ---------- Previous post was at 07:44 ----------

Ray Daywalker Clarke said:

There is nothing in the rules regarding hair rigs when claiming a record that I know of, The rule states rod and line.

Click to expand...

Have a look at international IGFA rules.

Now before you start with snide remarks, I disagree with IGFA's ideals totally.

Ron The Hat Clay said:

and modern hooks!!!!

Click to expand...

I once fashioned a bone hook copied from a Mustad photo of one found from the stoneage. I made it out of a cow's bone and it was strong and it was sharp. Couldn't hook maggots on it though!!!

True that!

noknot said:

Come on Paul, The hair rig in it's very many styles has been used now for over 30 years! It's Just another wind up thread!

Click to expand...

Which I would assume is why Ron included the lines:

Ron The Hat Clay said:

Now before we go any further, I myself have used the hair rig on and off for over 25 years. In the 70s I was hair rigging maize grains. I even tied a fly on a length of wire and attatched a bare hook behind it, so I claim no moral high ground here.

Click to expand...

Poor bloke can't post owt without being labelled as a wind up merchant, even when he gives clear reasons why he doesn't support that way of thinking himself!

Maybe you should be accusing Mr Yates and the IGFA of the winding up.

And besides, even if it were a wind up, which many of us are guilty of, so what if a reasonable debate grows out of it?

Mr Cholmondeley-Corker (PaSC) said:

Has anyone tried using a pubic hair rig?

Click to expand...

I believe Brazilians wax lyrical over this technique Matt