I am leaving on a 5 day in August and was wondering if I should use a fluro leader?
I have an Avet MXL w 50 LB Spectra and 100 yds of 25lb mono top shot. I would welcome your suggestions. I have been away from fishing for a while and all this braid and fluoro is new to me.

I would definitely use floro. Sometimes it's better, sometimes it doesn't matter-but it never works worse than mono.

I've gotten into numerous debates over fluorocarbon, and I am still not convinced it matters. About the best I've heard in its defense is that it does not transmit light. I do not how how true this is, and if it is, of its significance in the fish catching equation.

Fish are not smart animals. In fact, fish are dumb. They do not have a damn clue of what line is, and if they did they are wholly unable of connecting line to danger. If fish were so smart, they would not hit bait, which by definition is artificial. And if fish could discriminate line, why can't they apply that same intelligence to a big 2/0 hook dangling from a 'dine?

Floro, to my way of thinking, is just another why manufacturers hook fishermen.

Its almost humorous to hear fishermen ascribe mystical intelligence to fish when they school around huge fishing boats with anglers peering overboard. And what the hell do fish think when they see their buddies hooked and pulled toward boats where they are gaffed and hauled on board??? And all they while they continue to hit bait...and others want me to think they're smart???

Fish have brains the size of peas. They are incapable of thinking. They are purely instinctual. They have not a clue of line. They cannot connect line to danger. They hit bait out of hunger or predatory instinct. They lack higher order thinking skills that would allow them to discriminate. Fish are not intelligent species. They occupy a position on the evolutionary scale just above insects.

I would love to peruse an experiment that proves fish can link line to danger, that fluorocarbon has any role in catching fish. But I know such knowledge does not exist, because fish are incapable of thinking. If they could, they would not hit bait!!!



Good luck,

Tommy

Another advantage with Fluro is higher abrasion resistance.

BTW, fish are not "smart" but they will react to "odd" things in their environment. If they didn't they would not survive to breed.

Does Fluro "help"? I don't know, but if I'm fishing extremely clear water I use it. Under 25lb I use 20yd Fluro topshots on my trolling rods and 10' on the others. Over 25 lbs I use short (10') Fluro tied on to my mono.

Keta,

I think fish will react by instinct to danger such as sharks. But the are not smart enough to link huge fishing boats, fishermen peering overboard, trolling lures, LINE, hooks, bait, etc to danger.

I have heard fishermen ascribe mystical intelligence to fish. Fish are completely incapable of thinking. If they were, they'd run once they saw one of their buddies being yanked & gaffed aboard a 100 ton boat.



Good fishin'

TT

Fish "react" to food, feer or whatever, they aren't "smart". Some times they are picky/spooky sometimes they aren't. Does Fluro help? Probably not allways but in tough fishing conditions any "edge" can help get bit. In low light or off color water your wasting your money.

Keta,

Sounds like you summed it up perfectly.


Take care,

Tommy

fish primarily react with their mouths because they have no hands. They spend their entire lives finding food and evading predators. The more natural the presentation, the more likely that it will get "Sniffed"

BTW the price of floro is insignificant compared to the other costs of a 5-day. I say go for it!

quote:

Originally posted by Agate D:
fish primarily react with their mouths because they have no hands. They spend their entire lives finding food and evading predators. The more natural the presentation, the more likely that it will get "Sniffed"

What is natural presentation to a fish? A 'dine with a 2/0 through it's nose? A hunk of iron trailing a huge treble hook?

Ain't no such thing as "natural" presentation to a fish...and a fish, thankfully, wouldn't know natural from anything else! Such a distinction would require thinking ability which fish certainly do not have!

I can flatly write that fish don't have the ability to think. They do not know the difference between Izorline and fluorocarbon. In fact, they haven't a clue of what line is, whether it's natural or not! If fish were that smart they'd never strike bait, which is as "unnatural" as anything in its environment!

There may be very few animals on Earth dumber than fish! As far as intelligence, they don't have it!



Good fishin',

Tommy

You know, I thought about not writing. I have a buddy like you. tommy. He doesn't fish-he just antagonizes people on boards. Either you are the luckiest person on earth-or youre just another Brad!

Agate D,

OK.


Good fishin',

Tommy

There is such a thing as natural presentation. Animals know their environment a whole lot better than we do and while they don't have the ability to reason they do have instinct. It's instint that tells them when something doesn't look natural. That's what keeps them alive.

As for fluoro, I've heard far too many people tell of how switching to it has led to them getting more fish to right this off. IMO, this is all that matters.

no no no, these flouro people are all liars, they get off seeing your hopes of catching fish dased away with the incoming tide like a sand castle at high tide, save yourself the embarassment and just go dig up some old line from the tackle shops trash can after they close and just remember , I no know nada !!!

Thank you all for your thoughts and suggestions. It is nice to get to know a new bunch of friends.

Tight lines,

Sam