Delayed Harvest - Define??

[ryansheehan]

I used to use powerbait grubs for smallies when I was young, in no way did I think that was bait. The brand I preferred was the gary yamamoto grub which was impregnated with salt, a scent? I guess I have a little different definition of bait from others, I always thought powerbait was playdo with scent on it. It wasn't food, it wasn't meat or ever living. Anyway, how this has not been clarified in PA is pretty astounding.

 

[ryansheehan]

Scents are bait to me. Their only purpose is to attract fish to something they would have otherwise ignored. It doesnt really matter if it is manufactured with a scent or you spray it on.


So this leads me to another question, do you think the scent on your flies(from your hands, tying material, etc) has an effect on trout taking it? I never really considered this as part of the equation. Sorry for high jacking the thread....

 

[phiendWMD]

ryansheehan wrote:
Scents are bait to me. Their only purpose is to attract fish to something they would have otherwise ignored. It doesnt really matter if it is manufactured with a scent or you spray it on.


So this leads me to another question, do you think the scent on your flies(from your hands, tying material, etc) has an effect on trout taking it? I never really considered this as part of the equation. Sorry for high jacking the thread....

I've often wondered how scents encourage or dissuade fish. I'm pretty sure I posted a thread here asking if catching fish with a fly left a smell behind other fish went after. I was asking about dries mostly. The consensus was on a streamer imitating a fish it could be helpful.

I've fished with all kinds of scents transferred to flies by my hands. Everything from tobacco, burger king, and gummy bears to grease for my reel...dog, cat, antibacterial soap, iced tea, dish soap, laundry detergent, etc... Scent may make some difference. I don't think odd smells alone are enough to spook all fish. Most likely some are braver or hungrier than others and more willing to take risks. I don't believe weird smells would attract many fish though either.

 

[wbranch]

ryansheehan wrote;

(c) Except for artificial lures, may not possess or use any natural bait, live bait, or any device enhanced with a scent capable of catching fish in these areas

I think this definition is quite clear and one PA should consider including in the DH rules.

 

[wbranch]

Just to clarify the product that I was referring to in my OP here is an image of it. It comes in various colors and the worm comes in one long length and you pinch off how much one might want to impale on their hook.

Note the packaging; "Proven scent and flavor" If it looks like bait, smells like bait, and tasted like bait, I guess it must be BAIT!!

 

[ryansheehan]

That's not really what I thought was being discussed, I thought they were berkleys power worm. I might have a different opinion if it's basically rolled up power bait.

This is what I was thinking they were

 

[salmonoid]

allan_s wrote:
Can you please post the video? It can be forwarded to the Southeast Region Law Enforcement office. It is illegal!

Powerbait is illlegal... it is edible. If it looks like a worm, fished liked a worm, baited on a hook like a worm, it is a worm. That is like saying fake grubs could be used or fake eggs... this guy can argue his point in court as far as I am concerned.

By your argument, all tied flies should be illegal too. A rubber worm may be edible to a toddler, but that's about it. The opinion of the WCO enforcing the regulations is what matters first. There is enough wiggle room in the definition to allow rubber worms. A few years ago, the PFBC removed language that prohibited molded facsimiles of bait.

 

[PennKev]

ryansheehan wrote:
Anyway, how this has not been clarified in PA is pretty astounding.

I think some on this forum may be the only people who even care to think about the topic for more than 10 seconds.

 

[Nymph-wristed]

Good post. I saw this video last year maybe and thought the same thing :-x Definitely a gray area that VA has addressed. I would not use Power anything on a DHALO, but I don't think the dudes thought they were "cheating."

As a bass fisherman too, I concur that it is hard to avoid scent on any plastics these days, especially if that includes salt. I definitely use salt impregnated plastics like Yamamoto products. Contrary to what some believe, it does not attract fish like bait, but it makes them hold it a bit longer, allowing a bit longer for hooksets. Powerbait scented plastics are the same principle, I think, though I am not a chemist. Powerbait and something like Gulp, for example, which is biodegradable, are two different things in my opinion. I don't see the PA law even addressing Gulp, which it should!

 

[JeffK]

I'm surprised PA doesn't clarify the Power Bait thing. Most states I fish have a prohibition against scented lures/baits. I use Senkos a lot for smallies and find trout love them too. IMHO, the salt is in the plastic as much for density as taste. Lures like Senkos need to sink at just the right speed to flutter and getting the right salt content is important to weight them properly.

Finally, back in the Dr Juice days I tried putting scent on my flies to get a little more edge. I was way more competitive back then and tried to rack up big numbers of fish. Didn't seem to help, and putting scented flies back in the box caused the hooks of the rest to rust out. Ruined my favorite fly box! That and an unfortunate incident with a bottle of scent that leaked in the back of my station wagon when I was on a trip with the wife and kids led me to go away from scents on flies.

 

[tomgamber]

They removed (not sure when) a line in the regs that read something about molded plastic facsimiles being specifically prohibited.

 

[tomgamber]

§ 65.6. Delayed harvest artificial lures only areas.

* * * * *
(b) It is unlawful to fish in designated and posted delayed-harvest, artificial lures only areas except in compliance with the following requirements:

(1) Fishing may be done with artificial lures only constructed of metal, plastic, rubber or wood or with flies or streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials. Lures may be used with spinning or fly fishing gear. Use of gear not described in this section is prohibited. Specifically prohibited are the use of molded facsimiles or replicas of insects, earthworms, fish eggs, fish or any invertebrate or vertebrate either singly or in combination with the other materials, except during the period, June 15 through Labor Day.

(2) The use or possession of a natural bait, baitfish or fishbait and the use of fishing devices other than artificial lures, flies or streamers is prohibited in these areas, except during the period, June 15 through Labor Day.

 

[ryansheehan]

PennKev wrote:

ryansheehan wrote:
Anyway, how this has not been clarified in PA is pretty astounding.

I think some on this forum may be the only people who even care to think about the topic for more than 10 seconds.

Pretty sure someone who gets a big fat fine is going to care alot more than me.

 

[PennKev]

ryansheehan wrote:

PennKev wrote:

ryansheehan wrote:
Anyway, how this has not been clarified in PA is pretty astounding.

I think some on this forum may be the only people who even care to think about the topic for more than 10 seconds.

Pretty sure someone who gets a big fat fine is going to care alot more than me.

Yeah, you're right. After all, the PAFBC really breathes down our necks.

 

[TwoDogs]

Last year, I asked two different WCOs whether any power bait worms or lures were legal for use in DHALO waters. Both said they were not legal.

And no, I wasn't using them - just was curious ... haha

 

[salmonoid]

TwoDogs wrote:
Last year, I asked two different WCOs whether any power bait worms or lures were legal for use in DHALO waters. Both said they were not legal.

And no, I wasn't using them - just was curious ... haha

This is why I said first, it depends on how the WCO interprets the regulation. That will ultimately decide whether the WCO opts to give an angler a citation or not. But just because a citation is given doesn't mean it is a violation of a regulation. An angler still has the chance to argue their case. And there is nothing in the regulation that prohibits the use of scent infused molded worms. A WCO's prejudice or opinion may still get you a citation, or they may be more aligned (or familiar) with the previous prohibition of molded facsimiles when they hand out the citation, but it would ultimately come down to whether an angler could convince a magistrate that using a PowerBait worm was against the regulations or not.

 

[salmonoid]

tomgamber wrote:
§ 65.6. Delayed harvest artificial lures only areas.

* * * * *
(b) It is unlawful to fish in designated and posted delayed-harvest, artificial lures only areas except in compliance with the following requirements:

(1) Fishing may be done with artificial lures only constructed of metal, plastic, rubber or wood or with flies or streamers constructed of natural or synthetic materials. Lures may be used with spinning or fly fishing gear. Use of gear not described in this section is prohibited. Specifically prohibited are the use of molded facsimiles or replicas of insects, earthworms, fish eggs, fish or any invertebrate or vertebrate either singly or in combination with the other materials, except during the period, June 15 through Labor Day.

(2) The use or possession of a natural bait, baitfish or fishbait and the use of fishing devices other than artificial lures, flies or streamers is prohibited in these areas, except during the period, June 15 through Labor Day.

Just to be clear, so it does not get interpreted as the current regulation, this is the old regulation that prohibited the use of molded facsimiles.

Current regulation prohibits the use of bait paste and eggs (molded or natural), so PowerBait (of the paste variety) and PowerEggs are out explicitly.

You could probably cut and paste pieces from this discussion from a few years ago too..

I believe the "molded facsimile" change occurred in 2005, based on this publication, which includes the PFBC rationale for the wording change.

 

[TwoDogs]

You're right Salmonoid, it does depend on the WCO's interpretation ... which is why I asked two separate times. It would be best if it was specifically addressed in the regs, but ...

 

[Maurice]

It is the spirit of the law to not allow bait scent or " lifelike" bait or lures during the non harvest period to reduce mortality from deep hooking further extending the use of the stocked fish.

 

[ryansheehan]

PennKev wrote:

ryansheehan wrote:

PennKev wrote:

ryansheehan wrote:
Anyway, how this has not been clarified in PA is pretty astounding.

I think some on this forum may be the only people who even care to think about the topic for more than 10 seconds.

Pretty sure someone who gets a big fat fine is going to care alot more than me.

Yeah, you're right. After all, the PAFBC really breathes down our necks.

So what's your point? Because there's not as much enforcement as we would like to see that the laws should be ambiguous? If that's your point let's do away with all regs, really what's the point, not enough officers to enforce the law, why have it all? I know I go break every law I can when there are no officers around. It's inconceivable that there are people out there who follow the rules even though enforcement may be lacking, just because it's the right thing to do!

Anyway, now that I got that out of my system, my point is first it's obviously an issue because it is clear in other states. Second, it's an easy fix.