bigkingie

On 14/09/2023 at 12:42 AM, Jeremy_Z said:

Hi guys,

I have a few question about drag setting and rod, reel selection. Hope someone can help me.

I know we need to set drag at 25% of breaking point of braid line. But why? Can some one example to me?
 

And , I want to buy a 5-10 kg rod as my heavier gear set up. And it should pair with a 10kg drag reel right? Maybe 4000 or 5000 reel for targeting bigger fish. But some 5000 size reel recommend PE2.5 for 300m. And some good brand PE 2.5is about 19kg test. I’m so confused. Is this right setup?

and the break point of 5-10kg rod is 10kg? Is that means if my drag set as 10kg and mine line is 40kg, the rod will not break?

 

im so confused. Hopefully  some one can help me.

 

Well, it's 25% of the breaking strain of any line. That's off the reel. If you are setting through a loaded rod, then it is 33%. This is to give you safety margin. You lose some strength through knots. Also the pressure can increase if a fish takes a lot of line. For example if it is dragging a belly through the water. Also the drag increases at the reel as the line load drops and the diameter on the spool gets smaller. 

The rod rating is just a guide to the strength of line that is suitable. If you overload it then you will not exert enough pressure to utilise the line strength.

Remember it is an orphan - not being made anymore. Parts might get hard to get, as well as finding someone experienced in servicing. PS: they do seem to have more than their fair share of reliability issues. 

15 hours ago, Phil712z said:

They went pretty close to it with the collapse of the Atlantic cod fishery in the Grand Banks in Canada in the early 90's. In 1992 the cod population fell to 1% of historical levels, due mainly to decades of overfishing. Despite a ban on cod fishing being put in place, thirty years later the cod population has still nor recovered to a level where it can be sustainably fished.

I don't think the numbers of dusky flathead were even dropping as you suggested. The latest restriction were actually the result of lobbying by anglers. 

I think Inox is petroleum based - like WD40. It can affect some plastics and rubber. The Lanox and silicon spray you mentioned are a safer bet. 

I think the 115 hp Evinrude is a V4.

7 minutes ago, AUS-BNE-FISHO said:

My Abu Garcia Ambassador is probably one of my favourite reels, and in the 6500 size is big enough to use for heavier bait fishing but also could be used for flicking larger lures too.  

I have the whole range - from 2500C to 10,000C. The Chrome Rocket 6500C is one of my favourites - use it for beach fishing and it is still available I believe. I also have a 7500C which is a chrome brass side plate model as well. 

As to lures spinnerbaits work well on freshwater fish like cod, yellowbelly and also bass. A selection of deep diving minnows should be in your kit. I would also invest in some sort of lure retriever to get them back from snags.

I just got an outfit myself for $160. The reel is an Omoto 5000. It's similar to an ABU (the company used to make them under licence in Taiwan). An Australian distributor is advertising them on ebay. The rod is a Shimano Raider Cod 641 for $111. Like the rod's name implies it would be a good outfit for murray cod. I'll be using it for saltwater fishing including spinning for jewfish and slow jigging offshore. 

On 01/12/2022 at 8:06 AM, Thorbjorn Hale said:

Thanks, if i do look into buying a senator i would certainly be interested in using one for a few weeks. 

 

Nothing wrong with the Senator if you want to cast a bit. Most lever drag have the drag components attached to the spool which makes the spool very heavy, and you get poor casting (the flywheel effect). 

On 20/10/2022 at 7:15 AM, djpalmer88 said:

That's great thanks for that, really useful. I have done some rock fishing lately (snapper, trev etc.) But my current setup is too light.

 

Cheers!

The Pfluger Salt Spin is a good cheapy. I have seen the 080 advertised for $120. it has a simple but rugged design with a very good drag. I got a cheap Gladiator popper rod a one of the Boat Shows, but they don't seem to be available anymore. Daiwa and Shimano sell some heavy popper style rods at around the $300 mark. 

Fights won't be long for kingfish off the rocks. They are very dirty fighters - if you can't stop them then it will be all over. An 8000 size reel will have more drag power. You won't need all the line on a kingfish - though you might if you hook a northern bluefin tuna. Casting distance is not a priority as kingfish are likely to be hooked in close. 

I wouldn't go for a long rod as you will give away too much leverage and won't be able to put much pressure on the fish. 8 - 9" is a good compromise (a GT popper style rod). As kingfish frequent deep water platforms you don't need a long rod - it's like fishing off a wharf. 

1 hour ago, Ed. said:

What budget do you have for the complete outfit and what size fish are you hoping to target? This is because there is a huge variation in getting a high end setup and a lower spec'ed one. They range from "yes I can afford that,.........  to how many kidneys do I have to sell).

Often a lower spec'ed one will be completely adequate and you won't need to sell your kidneys! So just need to know your price range and what size/species you are targeting.

He already said he would be targeting kingfish off the rocks. I think it would be safe to assume he would be running into some sizeable ones which will require considerable stopping power. 

OK, I assume ocean rocks then. I would go for a threadline reel around 8000 size that has a strong drag and a gear ratio of at least 5:1, with 50-60lb braid and a GT style popping rod around the 8-9'' length with a similar line rating. There is a big price range but there is no need to go high end - might be best to get something modestly priced and see if it's your thing. I would need to know your budget to be more specific. 

Live-baiting or spinning? Also do you mean ocean rocks - and whereabouts? 

4 hours ago, GregN70 said:

Come for a dive with me smart mouth. Perhaps stop being a know-it-all keyboard warrior and come for a real see for yourself look. I’m guessing you’ve never actually been anywhere near this area, and you just like being a troll. 

I told you what was wrong with dive observations - which you ignored. You extended it to 'everywhere' so would that include my home waters, anywhere I have visited? I have been to Cairns for instance. On a charter the boat bagged out (reached the boat limit) - we filled a huge fish box with small-mouthed nannygai and other reef fish in a few hours. It wasn't far from port either. 

1 hour ago, Bob9863 said:

Which is the point, if places that have been completely destroyed of fish life can bounce back using this minimalist methods, then they can do so much more here without banning fishing for the weekend punter. 

Sounds like a magic pudding theory. For a start Asian fisheries are typically fished down to levels we would not find acceptable. In the case of WA fisheries scientists had calculated a 50% reduction in catch is needed. The rec effort is open entry and has been increasing each year - so that's why closed seasons are proposed. 

11 hours ago, Bob9863 said:

Those measures, not the total closures but safe zones and limits on both minimum and maximum size have worked in the Amazon and areas in Asia that have otherwise been wiped out due to dynamite fishing ect. 

If it works everywhere else in the world it's been tried it will work here. Not total closures or massive marine parks but a balanced number of measures that give the fish a break and a chance to breed, and allow both recreational and commercial fishing to take place. 

Without a, doubt commercial fishing does the lions share of damage, but there's room for it if it's done responsibly. 

Something does need to be done, but it can't be some knee jerk over reaction. We need a moderate balanced change, not some scorched earth policy like this. 

They can't have had much in the way of fisheries management if they were resorting to dynamite fishing. In that case marine parks would have some positive affect. I made that point before. These countries you say we should learn from have fishing pressures orders of magnitude higher than we do.

11 hours ago, GregN70 said:

All I can attest is areas that I fish and dive (Coastal and offshore waters off Yeppoon) are in my experience, based on current observations and catches compared with that which I experienced 30yrs ago when I first visited here are merely a shadow of what there once were. If you can’t see we’ve completely ruined it your either delusional or have a vested interest (eg pro-fisherman).
 

Apologies for not producing a statistical analysis data plot research paper. 30yrs ago I didn’t think we’d end up this rooted. 

The problem I have with that is that before you said "Especially along the Southern Great Barrier Reef from about Mackay to Bundy" was 'flogged to death', 'barren' etc. This is a range of 520 km (that's just as the crow flies).  This was on the basis of you recently taking up diving. Then you doubled down and said "Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there". 

All this shape shifting doesn't do much for your credibility and doesn't give any justification for disregarding official assessments and scientific data. 

5 hours ago, Bob9863 said:

I've fished a lot of places next to exclusion zones and definitely caught a lot more fish. 

A few exclusion zones will definitely help improve fish numbers and size. But you don't need massive areas or large numbers of them, and you definitely don't need to close entire areas off to all fishermen. 

Not really - not in Australian waters anyway. There is a lot of magical thinking on this You need something a lot more rigorous than your personal experience to draw any conclusions. You won't have a big enough sample size or an adequate timeline of before and after the green zone were established. Bet you haven't considered that the green zones are often chosen in highly productive areas and this would influence adjacent areas.  And to assess a management initiative you have to compare it to other methods and their cost effectiveness. It costs almost nothing to slightly adjust bag and size limits, closed seasons, quotas for professional etc, and these cover the whole fishery and not just one area. It's telling that marine parks were not an initiative of any of our fisheries departments. 

24 minutes ago, Bob9863 said:

Breading zones and off limits areas are hugely successful at increased fish populations. 

Blanket bans especially on recreational fishing do bugger all that's beneficial. 

Stopping all fishing will work brilliantly but at a huge cost to the public, what's needed is a balanced approach. 

Another really good measure is minimum and maximum legal sizes, it's had a huge impact on cod numbers around here. Building habitat and artificial reefs work really well to. A balanced approach is what's required. 

 

There aren't any known 'breeding zones' for saltwater fish. Also green or sanctuary zones aren't shown to increase overall fish no's when there is effective fisheries management in place - as is the case with Australian fisheries. They only work in poorly regulated fisheries where any management initiative would give some positive affect. 

1 hour ago, GregN70 said:

Plus there's FA to catch anywhere aslo, like an absolute barren wasteland out there.

Rubbish.

8 hours ago, GregN70 said:

I've taken up diving recently and have been taking a look what's actually down there, and I can tell you i was shocked at just how barren many places really are, Including these "godly" green zones. And to be honest I woulnt believe a word Dr Ayling said about anything,

Well, no wonder you are getting a few laughs. There is no way you could have covered a significant area by yourself and given you have only recently taken up diving. You have no baseline of what healthy stocks look like. If that's not enough even properly done diver surveys tend to significantly underestimate fish stocks:

 Reef fish communities are spooked by scuba surveys and may take hours to recover - PMC (nih.gov)

3 hours ago, GregN70 said:

Observation 

Well, that is your own opinion. And it flies in the face of all the official assessments. Stocks of coral trout - the most heavily fished species are well above what is considered maximum sustainable yield. Dr Ayling described them as 'extremely robust' and seem to be increasing in number before the green zones were introduced and there have been reductions in commercial effort since then as well. 

24 minutes ago, GregN70 said:

Not in my area, I would call stocks somewhere between scarce & extinct 

On what basis - apart from your own opinion?