Does it really matter what's on your hook?

It could be argued.. If fish are stupid then we should all use artificial baits, baits with little or no nutritional value. If that really was the case we could use artificial ground bait and loose feed as well.

Clearly we need some form of real-food bait to attract them proper (fly and lure anglers aside) so do the fish know the difference between what is real and what is not?

I think they do.

Some anglers think fish are stupid, as do I, but I don't think its because they cant tell the difference between what is real and what is not. So how do we account for them taking an artificial bait such as a plastic grub or the anglers fly given that their senses far exceed our own?
Its obvious to me that instinct drives them to feed and snatch in an instant whatever falls their way, its the classic opportunistic behavioural trait of a wild creature.

Given the opportunity to inspect the bait up close, or when they're cruising around looking for certain nutrients, the angler will do well to use real food on the hook, you know, the real unadulterated kind! To increase our chances of catching a cruiser it pays to use a natural smelly bait to get their attentions, as visual is less important than scent.

Cheese is the best example of a real scenty food, bread too though possibly not so much from afar but it still works and works well due to the yeast present - fish love bacteria, certain species can't resist. Cheese may seem overpowering but it works because its natural. You cant beat natural real-food... it works everywhere and it never blows unless you put a flavour on it.

Final thought.. if it looks and smells artificial it probably is, it might smell nice too but don't worry about it, the fish will know the difference and decide for you.

I'm not sure if I'm jumping onto the right train of thought here Chris but I think from my own experiences that fish know the difference between real and artificial only too well.

I've had it when trotting in fast flows where you would think the fish would be easier fooled due to the reduced time to inspect a bait in addition to the competition from other fish nearby yet when I use a rubber maggot my bite rates almost invariably drop... I still catch but nowhere near the amount when using real maggots.

My three theories for fish taking artificials are:

1) Curiosity, especially where an artificial is a bright colour

2) Auto-Pilot... For example when fish are freely taking something like free offerings of sweetcorn with a fake placed amongst them

3) An artificial is the only thing left when smaller fish have mullered everything in sight and tastes are still left in the area from the feed that was initially there, a bit like the aroma of cooked bacon lingering well after it has been scoffed

But on the other hand...

Same train, same mystery destination, 1st class carriage Steve

I watched a documentary a few year ago where trout were successfully feeding, rarely did they take an anglers fly and invariably missed the tiniest food particles in a fast flow. truly remarkable creatures.

I'll see you in the buffet bar!:w

Does it really matter - most definately. Not just the actual type of bait but changing the size, flavour or colour can make all the difference.

Example: if roach fishing, changing to a bigger (or smaller) piece of bread can result in more bites. Many times I have used two rods with the same end tackle but with different flavoured baits and one bait has easily out fished the other, and then next session the other bait works better - no wonder I've gone grey!

peterjg said:

Does it really matter - most definately. Not just the actual type of bait but changing the size, flavour or colour can make all the difference.

Example: if roach fishing, changing to a bigger (or smaller) piece of bread can result in more bites. Many times I have used two rods with the same end tackle but with different flavoured baits and one bait has easily out fished the other, and then next session the other bait works better - no wonder I've gone grey!

Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly, strange though isnt it, also you test a bait on one water, fantastic results, complete failure on another, is it to do with th PH of the lake, big puzzler.

wanderer said:

Agree wholeheartedly, strange though isnt it, also you test a bait on one water, fantastic results, complete failure on another, is it to do with th PH of the lake, big puzzler.

Click to expand...

Is it sometimes down to what the fish expect to see at any give time in the same environment. A lightly fished pool I know in Wales, generally produces fish (mainly Roach) on bread (and slugs if available). In the summer when tourists go after the few Carp present and fish with pellet, I've seen decent fish caught on these (never personally caught on them in the winter). In summer, maggot will attract hoards of small Perch (hopefully some of these are now increasing in size) but I suspect the larger ones feed exclusively on the shoals of small Roach and Perch present. If they're not used to seeing a specific bait, my feeling is it's tricky to tempt them. On a river, fish could be feeding on anything that flows through, so may be less choosy.

I attribute a bait working one day and not the next down to the need for a varied diet. I think we've all experienced the sudden 'switch off' for no apparent reason?
I also agree that the exact same bait will work differently on another lake as well as different areas of the same lake and depths. (possibly due to pH levels affecting it in different ways, temperature dependant)... no definitive answer on that one but its a reasonable assumption.

I guess fish are similar to humans, there are bright ones and not so bright ones. The difference is fish don't have health and safety to stop the dumb ones being caught



Perhaps the fish who take a bright pink fake corn are the equivalent of the people who need to read the label on a hair dryer that says you shouldn't use it under water :wh

itsfishingnotcatching said:

Is it sometimes down to what the fish expect to see at any give time in the same environment. A lightly fished pool I know in Wales, generally produces fish (mainly Roach) on bread (and slugs if available). In the summer when tourists go after the few Carp present and fish with pellet, I've seen decent fish caught on these (never personally caught on them in the winter). In summer, maggot will attract hoards of small Perch (hopefully some of these are now increasing in size) but I suspect the larger ones feed exclusively on the shoals of small Roach and Perch present. If they're not used to seeing a specific bait, my feeling is it's tricky to tempt them. On a river, fish could be feeding on anything that flows through, so may be less choosy.

Click to expand...

A seasonally varied diet might well account for why some baits will work and others don't, but its not impossible to get them used to feeding on something they wouldn't normally find in their environment. As anglers we exploit that by prebaiting, fishing with pellets and boilies, though I do think after a belly full all summer, they make the switch to something more nutritious and feed less often once they've put the pounds on. Ive always made the switch to carbs and natural food-baits in winter (by natural I include bread and cheese for chub and barbel), and mostly only use high protein baits throughout the summer.

It had also occurred to me that certain fish either refuse or switch off if they eat too much of something thats detrimental to their health. Many fish have short digestive tract and they expend great energy trying to digest poor quality nutrients. They are born (as are all living creatures) with a limited amount of digestive enzymes in the pancreas. These enzymes reduce over time from eating processed anglers baits, fewer enzymes means they cannot obtain the necessary nutrients from the food and will die prematurely.
Uncooked and raw natural foods contain all the necessary enzymes for proper digestion whereas processed foods require additional 'limited reserve' enzymes. The good news is; these kinds of baits will work all year round!

laguna said:

....These enzymes reduce over time from eating processed anglers baits, fewer enzymes means they cannot obtain the necessary nutrients from the food and will die prematurely.
Uncooked and raw natural foods contain all the necessary enzymes for proper digestion whereas processed foods require additional 'limited reserve' enzymes. The good news is; these kinds of baits will work all year round!

Click to expand...

Hi Chris - some interesting points here that raise a question -
Where does tinned sweetcorn fit in this? Is the canning process destroying enzymes?
Cheers!

greenie62 said:

Hi Chris - some interesting points here that raise a question -
Where does tinned sweetcorn fit in this? Is the canning process destroying enzymes?
Cheers!

Click to expand...

Yes but only to a small extent. The processing of sweet corn is actually beneficial as the enzymes are activated with lye solution prior to canning, this greatly increases digestability imo though the husk is still largely indigestible... have a 'look' before flushing!

Apparently Sweet corn isnt corn with added sugar Though some canneries do add sugar as preservative, its actually a variety of corn separate to maize. GG is my preferred brand.

Are fish stupid ?

I have watched Big carp sit off pop-up bait and blow a stream of water at them, if they do not move in the same way as the freebies the carp in question would bolt from the scene.

This was a very large carp that lived in the Relief Channel at Fishers Green and I watched it many times examine baits before fleeing !!

So I don't thing every fish is stupid, anyone who has fished for Chub, will know how stupid they can be when young, but when they get older you can watch them picking up baits in their lips and pulling it to feel for resistance.

If they feel that resistance they drop the baits, that is why they can be the most frustrating of all coarse fish to catch at times.

HNV boilies certainly give you a degree of faith (I believe) in the bait you are using, but presentation is properly just as important.

Artificial baits such as lures and fly's trigger completely different responses in fish, often it's annoyance !!

As for Plastic baits, I had great success with them when Tench fishing, I put it down to the oils in the extruding process ?

Bob

laguna said:

Yes but only to a small extent. The processing of sweet corn is actually beneficial as the enzymes are activated with lye solution prior to canning, this greatly increases digestability imo though the husk is still largely indigestible... have a 'look' before flushing! ....

Click to expand...

Thanks Chris,
The 'evident' indigestibility of the husks was what prompted the thought! I guess this is why it's always reckoned to be better to use a bit of kernel that has 'split' so that the yummy bit is exhibited - cf. split hemp where you again have an indigestible husk.

It might also explain why artificial corn is successful - in that fish expect that there will be no yumminess from the husk - it's what's inside the packaging that's nutritious!

Sometimes I think it might just come down to fish that are feeding as opposed to fish that are not actively feeding but that can be persuaded to pick up a bait. Certainly there are times at Bury Hill when the zander will have virtually anything you throw at them...other times they will have only a particular bait ....and to the exclusion of all other baits. There are other times when you can sometimes "con" them into picking something up.....a few years back tiny slivers of mackerel could get you a fish or two when nothinh else would. Big Dave called this "peanut in the pub" feeding. You're not hungry but you see a bowl of peanuts and just have to have one. This, I guess, is equivalent to fish reacting instinctively to the stimulus/availibility of food in the form of bait.

One thing was clear. When "peanutting" was going on the bait had to be absolute top quality for it to work so in that respect...yes it did matter what was on the hook.

I have only limited experience of artificials [caster/corn/maggot] but they work well enough for me to carry them having been very sceptical for years. One advantage they clearly do offer is that they cannot get ragged by bits which is a big plus so far as I'm concerned.

Yeah I believe so Greenie, we have test tanks we use at uni and they are usually full of husk in the bottom when cleaning out, it inspired me to put the post up earlier regards dehulled hemp being potentially better... must bite the bullet and buy some for when I'm out next! Actually it did occur to me to try the dehulling process ourselves as we always have hemp here, maybe not a hot lye solution though due to the oil saponification.

One of the most successful baits are ordinary uncooked garden peas.... with the skin removed.

laguna said:

..... usually full of husk in the bottom when cleaning out, ....

Click to expand...

- too much detail Chris! mg:

S-Kippy said:

I have only limited experience of artificials [caster/corn/maggot] but they work well enough for me to carry them having been very sceptical for years. One advantage they clearly do offer is that they cannot get ragged by bits which is a big plus so far as I'm concerned.

Click to expand...

Durable they are Skip, I managed to get up to 30 Rudd on one mineral pellet before it needed changing! In and amongst regular feed the fish will have a go at almost anything that resembles food.

Does it really matter what's on your hook?

Click to expand...

The short answer would be to answer these question: what species are you fishing for, what time of year and which body of water?

The following is JMHO, so don't hold it against me because bait selection is usually a personal thing, very controversial and the reasons for it based on far too many factors to be listed here. In any case, here goes....

1. Fish have unique senses that allow them to track and evaluate in an instant moving objects, whether on the surface or subsurface. The lateral line and ear detect a wide range of frequencies; vision may be limited by water clarity or available light, but is still important to view baits up close and attack a moving object.

2. I believe that fish rely on their senses that prompt voluntary or involuntary choices (you chose), whether to strike or not. Their brains are very small and unlike the more evolved brains of land animals, are prone to zero analysis of a lure as to its nutritional value.

3. There a hundreds of lure types and designs that prompt fish to bite regardless of species.

Should a lure imitate any particular thing such as a forage animal (fish, craw, insect)? Is the real thing always more effective?

A lure crafter/ designer /tester such as myself must say NO. If a lure does imitate something, it may still not get struck if lure action (inherent and applied) isn't adequate to 1. get a fish's attention, 2. keep it and, 3. entice the fish into an aggressive state.

Ever play with a cat using a target attached to a string such as a toy mouse? The cat could care less what the object represents but can not help itself when goaded into a sequence of small movements resulting in an attack.
Isn't that what anglers do - goad a fish into attacking an object a fish has no idea the true nature of the object?

More often than not, anglers have reasons fish strike lures - most having to do with a fish's ability to correlate a lure to a specific live animal. I won't presume they are wrong, but would suggest that it really doesn't matter. Lures that work do so for the following reason - none that have anything to do with living things:

A lure's action speaks louder than words. In other words, if the wobble, flutter, shimmy and vibration are key to getting a fish to bite, who cares what something represents? Curl tail grubs are a prime example of a lure component stimulus responsible for the thousands of fish caught every year. Shad thumper tails are another, as are spinner blades, hair flutter or a soft plastic worm's slink.

Take the lure shown below as an example:


Thin flat tail, visual contrast using black flake and glitter in a translucent plastic and lure size most species can not ignore. The combo represents elements found in many lures : visual and vibration cues that set a fish up to making the wrong choice.

Here are a few others based on the same theme:






Believe it or not, most of the above are capable of catching six or more species of fish, the reasons having nothing to with a thought process and everything to do with sense stimulation.

We provoke fish - that's it - via a lure's action and the action we impart. Realism is for painters; abstractions of life or fish toys (versus cat toys) are an angler's best friend. Lure companies bank on it.

I've mentioned it here before. I used to fish a Colne Valley lake (50 acres) for carp. I had my own rowing boat moored there permanently, the lake was usually very clear and you could in most swims see the bottom easily.

Sometimes I would bait up with a mixture of different baits: tiger nuts, sweetcorn, wheat, bits of garlic sausage, etc. Sometimes I would row out to my baited spots the next day and the carp would have cleared all the tigers or maybe all the bits of sausage, etc - the point I am making is that they could be very picky.

I rarely used boilies (I got fed up making them and didn't like shop boughts) but sometimes other anglers' boilies would be seen on the lake bed for days before disappearing (probably coots?).

The other thing that was particularly interesting is that I used to do a three or four day and night session each week. So over a period of several years I got to know the lake very well. There were several definate spots where it was easier to get a run but in other areas of the lake I would see carp but could not get any action at all? The best spots were at the back of bars or lumps of gravel so that the line was on the bottom. If I could find a clean bit of gravel with broken mussel shells within accurate casting range that was great.

Sorry if I have gone a bit off subject but there is a connection.

Good thread this.

I have had days when artificial baits have out fished natural baits, and other times the over way around.

I think its all down to how the fish are feeding on the day.

If the fish are not in a feeding frenzy, natural baits seem to work better, however when the fish are on the feed, then artificial baits seem to work very well.

As for colour and flavours i think the same applies as to the how the fish are feeding.

Put it this way, if we ever found out just what turns the fish on to feed every time, fishing would become very boring, very quickly.