Page 6 of 6 FirstFirst 123456
Results 76 to 80 of 80

Thread: Technical approach to barra fishing.

  1. #76

    Re: Technical approach to barra fishing.

    Attachment 122784Here we go on hard body lures.

    I put up some very basic stuff previously but have expanded it a bit in slack times during the barra closed season up here.

    This stuff I've been putting up is only about barramundi fishing but some of it will spill over into other waterways and species. eg via colours, turbidity and lateral lines.

    I've had more experience with barra than other species over the years and eventually decided to try and put some technical base under the heaps of anecdotal stuff that exists.

    I also settled on barra because of the value to the commercial fishing industry (but not to help the commercial guys).

    My reasons are more basic and probably a bit selfish,

    The reason is that because of the economic value, a fair bit of scientific research has been carried out on barramundi and I can use that info as my own starting point for what I wanted to do. I didn't have to guess about barra eyesight, hearing or lateral lines etc. The scientists had already anchored that side of things for me.

    A feature of any theory is that its hard to prove it wrong. Therefore it must be right (speaking simplistically). Plenty of supporting stories/hearsay can be cherry-picked to support it if the motive is strong enough.

    So the way to handle a theory is to start at the other end. Prove it right. THAT'S the hurdle where a lot of this stuff falls.

    I wanted to see what (if any) base could be put under the sort of knowledge/anecdotes/myths that had been doing the rounds in recreational barra fishing circles. The fact/fiction/theories and stories could be likened to a railway "spaghetti junction".

    Some I could put a technical base under and shared a lot of that. Some I couldn't.

    Those that I could I've locked in. I haven't dismissed those that I couldn't (not all of them although some are/were pretty "out there").

    So I'm still looking to add to the locked-in list but have got to sift through a lot of the myths first.

    The most significant myth that I could dismiss was the incorrect and oft quoted colour/water relationship.

    I still can't understand how/why so many of the experts missed it. Not just in Aus but also overseas.

    A US based lure maker has obviously heard about it and asked to see what/how I uncovered in a bit more detail. He's welcome to the info. So are ALL of you guys if u want to.

    Hard body lure action.pdf

  2. #77

    Re: Technical approach to barra fishing.

    In the articles that I've put up previously, there is one standout fact that you need to understand and it is that different colours penetrate different waters to different depths depending on the dirtiness of the water.

    The age old (and accepted) view of the "experts" over the years is simply not borne out by the facts.

    What I've found may have sounded a bit "out there" to a lot of you who have listened to these same "experts" and the folklore over the years.

    However, facts are facts and folklore is myth.

    If there's one thing that you need to get your head around its contained in this simple diagram.

    Colours turbidity.xlsx
    As the water gets murkier: follow the X in your choice of lure colours.

    Just remember that as the water gets murkier and murkier, ALL colours will penetrate the water to lesser and lesser depths starting with blue. The last ones to fade out are orange and then red as they both have more "punch power" in dirty water.

    Its no good having deep diving red/orange lures (say 4-5metres) because:

    . If in dirty water NO light penetrates to 4 - 5 metres anyway so colour doesn't matter; and

    . if in clear water, the red/orange colours will be fading anyway due to fade reversal while the green/chartreuse colours will be starting to become highly visible.

    There's a lot of explanation about how I arrived at the diagram and there's a very good reason for that.

    During my working life I had to back up/prove any views or opinions with facts (and old habits die hard).

    I discovered these facts via a bit of "citizen science" about 3 years ago.

    Since then I've found that I wasn't the first person to look at this subject.

    The US Navy looked at it in 1967 (not scientifically but practically).

    Aus scientist JT Kirk scientifically researched the matter in 1994.

    Dr Colin Kageyama (doctorate in optics, neurophysiology, colour and vision perception and a fishing "tragic" from Oregon USA) wrote a book about it in 1997..."What fish see".

    European scientist Maayke Stomp looked at it in 2008 .

    NOAA Ocean Explorer looked at it in 2010.

    What they ALL missed (except Kageyama) was the significance of what they found in the fishing world and Kageyama's interest was only related to US fish called Steelheads. These scientists were only interested in the effects of colour penetration in differing water murkiness and its effect on photosynthesis.

    That's what most of the "other stuff" in those articles is. Proof and maybe useful information as a reference point should you wish later.

    FOLLOW THE.... X if you're fishing for barramundi.

  3. #78

    Re: Technical approach to barra fishing.

    A cat fish can detect a signiture from a guppy that has pasted 50seconds early and track it down to eat it so were dose colour come into things in that situation ,that's a quote from Saltwater flyfishing mag science articile US issue, forget the year but have the mag ,so colour dose not matter when a fish has the ability to pick up on vibes from what has moved passed weither it be lateral line or whiskers.

    Question why dosen't Bomber lures make a orange and Red lures then, they made there name here on metalic gold in dirty water which you don't mention only orange and red.

  4. #79

    Re: Technical approach to barra fishing.

    A cat fish can detect a signiture from a guppy that has pasted 50seconds early and track it down to eat it

    Where did you get that from Chris? Done a lot of work on guppies and catfish have we? Have catfish got the same eye characteristics as barramundi (which is what we're talking about here)?

    Question: why dosen't Bomber lures make a orange and Red lures then, they made there name here on metalic gold in dirty water which you don't mention only orange and red.

    They don't have to, Chris.

    Gold bombers are renowned fish-taking lures and the reason falls straight into what I've been talking about. Guns & Roses Classic lures are also renowned fish-taking lures in most types of waters (and there's a good reason for that as well).

    Gold is a natural combination of red and green and red is the best colour with "punch" in dirty water. So any colour with predominantly red and the other mix colour of green will stand out in dirty water (and also not quite so dirty water like dams). Only problem is that its hard to find a gold bomber that dives to 2-3 metres.

    You appear to have missed the previous discussion about gold bombers? Would you like me to show you again?

    Got a lot of examples about how the use of the X colour scheme has been put successfully to work in catching barramundi.

  5. #80

    Re: Technical approach to barra fishing.

    Back to work.

    Based on the amount of work that I've done on this (and shared with you guys), I now take particular note of the water that I'm about to fish in and .................follow the X.

    If downstream towards Fitzroy mouth or Port Alma with big tides or lots of wind and I know the water is going to be dirty ( 1 - 1.5 metres of colour penetration). I use predominantly red/orange for shallow water. If I'm fishing deep, then colour doesn't matter.

    What you usually find is that the water becomes a bit clearer as the run drops towards low tide, a change to a red/green combination of fluoro colours is useful.

    If fishing in town reaches (40km from mouth) its going to be a bit clearer so red/green (guns and roses.....G&R). Red is good for murky component and green for the clearer component (bit of an "all-rounder" selection). I estimate that colour choice will be useful for up to 2 metres.

    One other colour that's a must for the tackle box is white. White has high visibility in most types of water. Another "all rounder" choice.

    I've sanded off the colours of most of the lures of types that I wanted to test and replaced the manufacturers colours with el-cheapo fluorescent spray paint colours based on the X principle.

    I used heaps of shallow Rapalas and heaps of 3 metre Squirrels (probably 20 of each).

    I also modified B52s, Bombers and others.

    I USED FLUORESCENT PAINT ON ALL OF THEM TO ENHANCE VISIBILITY. I also changed paint patterns away from the manufacturers' dab of paint here and there.

    Like using banded and spiral paint patterns that I've never seen in tackle shops.

    Here are examples of the hardbody lures that I use now.

    I've caught barramundi on ALL of these lures.

    Normal daylight.


    Bit of UV added.

    There are 2 lures in these pics that are stock standard (untouched).

    The Guns and Roses 3m Classic (no. 7) and the Gold Bomber (no. 5).

    The Classic ticks ALL of the boxes that I believe need to be ticked for colour.

    Note that both No. 5 (bomber) and No.1 (Jnr B52) have gold manufacturer paint. They are NOT fluoro so won't enhance under UV light (as you can see see from the pics.).

    Because gold is a mixture of red and green in the right proportions, it has the colour attributes of both (with a leaning towards red).

    But its not fluoro and is the same as applying normal paint. I'm now on the hunt for fluoro gold. Maybe its made now. I'll find out.

    Meanwhile........................................F OLLOW THE X

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Join us