• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

frustrating big barbel

David Gauntlett said:
Martin,

The 'stick' method will not be effective at all in running water. It is designed to hide hook links in lakes, whereby the link is still covered by the stick mix after the PVA has melted, because there is nothing to disturb it.

In a flowing river, the PVA would melt in seconds, allowing the stick mix to be washed away by the current within another few seconds, leaving the link exposed as though the stick had never been there. That does of course depend slightly on the flow and consistency of the mix, but to be honest the mix would have to contain araldite to make it work, it really is a non starter.

Cheers, Dave.
Click to expand...

hi dave thanks for your thoughts. While you have some valid points I believe that with proper testing in water clear enough to see what's going on, I do believe it would be possible to get a version working.

Not all pva dissolves at the same rate as I'm sure you're aware. Combine a slow melting pva with a sturdy mix wetted using an oil based flavour and I think it could work. The rivers I fish are rarely very deep or horrendously rapid which would also work in my favour.

Having seen underwater footage of the effect flows have on bait as well as carrying out my own tests I believe that unless very dry, groundbait and small particles tend to stay in place longer than larger baits, which I imagine is probably down to them having less area for the flow to push against. I've had patches of groundbait stay pretty much intact for over eight hours. Admittedly maybe it would be better if some fish ate it first!

Cheers
m
 
Last edited:
Martin Stevens said:
hi dave thanks for your thoughts. While you have some valid points I believe that with proper testing in water clear enough to see what's going on, I do believe it would be possible to get a version working.

Not all pva dissolves at the same rate as I'm sure you're aware. Combine a slow melting pva with a sturdy mix wetted using an oil based flavour and I think it could work. The rivers I fish are rarely very deep or horrendously rapid which would also work in my favour.

Having seen underwater footage of the effect flows have on bait as well as carrying out my own tests I believe that unless very dry, groundbait and small particles tend to stay in place longer than larger baits, which I imagine is probably down to them having less area for the flow to push against. I've had patches of groundbait stay pretty much intact for over eight hours. Admittedly maybe it would be better if some fish ate it first!

Cheers
m
Click to expand...

Worth remebering that flow rate is very much reduced at the river bed due to the drag effect, on a deep/slow flowing river there can be almost no flow at the river bed! Therefore the stick mix would absolutely work and I have seen people using this with just fine gravel in the stick to bury the hooklength............
 
Mr Crook - you have just solved all my problems! :D Thank you very much for that tip! I'll post the pic when i next get a chance at the tricky big barbel i've been after! ;)
 
Some of the guys fishing Adams Mill in the glory days would walk out and physically bury their hooklink, lead and line in the river bed to stop them spooking.........
 
The bizare thing to most is, it's the rig and not the angler walking out and burying it in the river bed that spooks the fish! ;)
 
Ian Crook said:
Worth remebering that flow rate is very much reduced at the river bed due to the drag effect, on a deep/slow flowing river there can be almost no flow at the river bed! Therefore the stick mix would absolutely work and I have seen people using this with just fine gravel in the stick to bury the hooklength............
Click to expand...

I had heard about this being done but had forgotten all about it. good idea.
 
Simon Haggis said:
I take a different view.

I use the sticks to ensure that the hooklink and hook get through weed without snagging. I can then have the confidence to cast just once (unless I stuff it in a tree :rolleyes:) and leave it out all night which can be a real edge in terms of keeping swim disturbance down

I agree stuff might get washed downstream, but only in as much as bait droppered stuff gets washed down too. I make my stick mix very stodgy so it's not just dust washing quickly away. lots of oil in it to keep it together and a scent trail, er, trailing.
Click to expand...

Hi Simon,

I quite agree that using a stick (in fact any PVA bag, providing the hook is nicked into it) to bomb through weed is a very effective method...but that was not the point of the original post, was it? The original suggested use for the stick was as a long term method for hiding the hook link from spooked fish, and I still dont think that is a viable idea in a river for any useful length of time.

Cheers, Dave.
 
Ian Crook said:
Worth remebering that flow rate is very much reduced at the river bed due to the drag effect, on a deep/slow flowing river there can be almost no flow at the river bed! Therefore the stick mix would absolutely work and I have seen people using this with just fine gravel in the stick to bury the hooklength............
Click to expand...

Again, I agree with all of that. Gravel sticks were used by Nick Heleur in lakes probably seven or eight years ago, to cover the link but not offer any food. It was an ambush thing, to trap wary old fish who had seen it all before (which of course is exactly what is required here)

However, I still maintain that an ordinary stick as first suggested is NOT a viable, long term method for hiding a hook length in a river. The contents of the stick would absolutely need to be gravel, or something of an equally heavy, non edible nature to work for a meaningful period, otherwise minnows, roach etc., etc. would shift it, current or not!

Cheers, Dave.
 
Martin Stevens said:
hi dave thanks for your thoughts. While you have some valid points I believe that with proper testing in water clear enough to see what's going on, I do believe it would be possible to get a version working.

Not all pva dissolves at the same rate as I'm sure you're aware. Combine a slow melting pva with a sturdy mix wetted using an oil based flavour and I think it could work. The rivers I fish are rarely very deep or horrendously rapid which would also work in my favour.

Having seen underwater footage of the effect flows have on bait as well as carrying out my own tests I believe that unless very dry, groundbait and small particles tend to stay in place longer than larger baits, which I imagine is probably down to them having less area for the flow to push against. I've had patches of groundbait stay pretty much intact for over eight hours. Admittedly maybe it would be better if some fish ate it first!

Cheers
m
Click to expand...

Hi Martin,

Certainly the way to go is to test your theories...but while I agree that there ARE differences in PVA melt times, those differences in average water temperatures are measured in seconds, or a few minutes at best...they are really not going to affect the outcome too much.

There have of course been rogue batches of PVA, with anecdotal evidence of anglers reeling in after eight or ten hours to find them still attached :D, but that is not the point. You can also extend the melt time of any PVA by soaking it in oil based flavours etc., and extend it BIG time by soking in pure oil...but at the end of the day, do you really want the barbel to be confronted by an intact sausage of mesh covered bait?

I would think that you would need to look at the gravel sticks suggested by Ian, and forget the grounbait Idea all together. But that is just my slant on things, and I would be interested in the results of your tests.

Groundbait patches uneaten for eight hours :eek: Tell me what rivers you fish....so that I can avoid them :D

Only kidding fella, best of luck with the tests,

Cheers, Dave.
 
shy barbel

1) Try and ascertain if when you put loose feed in the swim, if the wary barbel is first in? Quite often of late I have seen the biggest barbel come into the swim, eat a small amount and leave, not to return (well not for a very long time). Loose feed just attracts more barbel, and won't necessary encourage THE barbel to keep eating.
If it is often the first fish in you can try two things that have worked for me.
A) no loose feed at all, just a single paste bait and give the fish only one choice

B) Make the fish think it is being clever, loose feed in the swim you have seen it in but fish a single bait in an area 10m or so downstream, preferably not on open gravel. This can mean fishing it in the weed or on a patch of cruddy looking bottom, just off the main flow.

The pop up rig works well if you think the fish is actually testing the bait, but not hooking up.
 
David Gauntlett said:
Hi Martin,

Certainly the way to go is to test your theories...but while I agree that there ARE differences in PVA melt times, those differences in average water temperatures are measured in seconds, or a few minutes at best...they are really not going to affect the outcome too much.

There have of course been rogue batches of PVA, with anecdotal evidence of anglers reeling in after eight or ten hours to find them still attached :D, but that is not the point. You can also extend the melt time of any PVA by soaking it in oil based flavours etc., and extend it BIG time by soking in pure oil...but at the end of the day, do you really want the barbel to be confronted by an intact sausage of mesh covered bait?

I would think that you would need to look at the gravel sticks suggested by Ian, and forget the grounbait Idea all together. But that is just my slant on things, and I would be interested in the results of your tests.

Groundbait patches uneaten for eight hours :eek: Tell me what rivers you fish....so that I can avoid them :D

Only kidding fella, best of luck with the tests,

Cheers, Dave.
Click to expand...

No worries.

Unfortunately for one reason or another, for quite a few years now the Kennet has been pretty murky. As a result my tests were carried out in relatively shallow water, albeit pretty fast flowing shallow water. They were also carried out in bright sunshine so the likelihood of anything bar waterfowl eating it was remote. Having said that, the stretch in question can be pretty tough at times!

I can appreciate that this method is not necessarily one that would hide the hookbait for a predictably lengthy amount of time. Number of small fish and crays present alone could effect that quite drastically. However the original post indicated that Craig could see the fish feeding, and while the nuisance (2lb Roach!) could cause problems in clearing the trap, I think it would be worth a crack. Obviously the gravel would solve that completely.

My choice of PVA would not be down to it lasting minutes or longer, just long enough to ensure that the bait has settled in position and the line has been straightened out if using a back lead. I have seen pictures of pva melting too soon and depositing the bait downstream, this is what we obviously don't want.

Cheers
M
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top