Posted by postcard on 2002 PM:
Let's ask Doc
I don't know how many of
you get B.A.S.S. TIMES, but Berkley
always takes a two page space to 1. allow Dr. Keith Jones, a fish biologist and
an employee of Berkley, to comment on fish behavior and
environmental effects and, 2. advertise Berkley lures that best achieve the characteristics mentioned or needed to
get fish to bite.
The latest article is about bass's chemoreceptors : skin, mouth, nose. He
states that, " bass use chemoreception, primarily their sense of smell, to
alert them to the presence of potential food".
" Smell awakens inactive bass and stirs them to higher levels of feeding
aggressiveness, (in the form of a more active visual hunt)"
He goes on to say that without the odor component to stimulate aggressiveness,
bass lack the "visual passion", and do not see the object (lure) as
food.
The article beneath the Doc's, suggests that 'worm extract' (found in Berkley
scents and baits), are far more able to trigger a feeding response than salt,
anise, garlic or sugar. And beacuse Jay Yelas won a classic using Berkley products, it must be true!
They even show a jig and trailer leaving a scent-trail thicker than the smoke
from and old Olds, with a bass becoming excited (and maybe turned on!)
'If it doesn't smell right, it won't get bit or held onto', is the message
imparted.
The third artcicle is the clincher. "Fish hold onto Power Bait up to 18
times longer than ordinary plastic baits, giving you more time to set the
hook." Their baits have the highest "retention time of any soft bait
on the market." The Retention-Time graph (in seconds), shows "salted
plastic baits" at 3 seconds versus Power Baits at 19 seconds. (So much for
Senko gut hooking.)
I would like to think that Dr. Jones is more than just a PR pimp for Berkley products, but how do you argue
with a PhD and his other degrees in fish biology?
My guess is that most of his articles suffer from 'the sin of omission' rather
than misinformation and that the ads are pure, unadulterated hype of the worse
kind.
What do you think, fact or fiction or a little of both?
(A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.)
Posted by Gregg on 2002 PM:
PR pimp for Berkley products
and not even worth the time to read. There is no way it will be objective.
__________________
Gregg
Posted by Travis on 2002 PM:
" Dr. Keith Jones, a
fish biologist and an employee of Berkley"
The word employee sticks out to me there. Who pay his paycheck ?
" I would like to think that Dr. Jones is more than just a PR pimp for Berkley products, but how do you argue
with a PhD and his other degrees in fish biology? "
I would like to think so as well, but my common sense says otherwise.
I had a friend of mine call me last week that lives close by that is a pretty
good stick in his own right. The man knows Senkos(among other things) and has
clocked a fish hanging on to a Senko for a minute in clear(we have a lot of
that up here) shallow water. He had his Senko tied on without a hook and his
knot was attached to a split ring which was around the center of the bait. NOW,
if berkley claims fish will hold on to their
bait 18 times longer......?
I don't think even on my first early morning cast while still working the cob
webs out do I need 16 minutes to set a hook...( 3 seconds v. 19 )
Without possibly knowing it this Mr. Jones is giving more than enough credit to
other baits other than Berkley soft plastics. I KNOW for a fact
that I don't need 3 seconds to be aware that it is time to set a hook. I also
doubt that these tests were done anywhere but in a tank, meaning in my mind
that in the REAL world there are more factors with a line/hook attached to the
bait when it isn't being presented as chunks of food or at a regular feeding
time.
I am sure that even if these claims were true that I could take the most
inexperienced fishermen anywhere to be found, put a worm rod in his hand...I
tell him cast right THERE, a fish picks up and drops much quicker than if I had
the rod in my hand on that same fish......too many variables. This guy , with
all the degrees that the world has to offer should either
A) fish more often
B) or just wear a shirt with a big purple and pink P on it to claim his pimp
status.
T
Posted by Todd Miller on 2002 PM:
Check out the headline
above the article in the border at the top it reads advertisement but i do
agree on some things i do not believe that scents attracts fish but i believe
they will hold a bait longer with it just my 2 cents and it plays a part for me
and only me that part is confidence..
Todd Miller
www.snoozersbaits.com
__________________
Snoozers Baits "imagination is your only limitation" for naturally
scented soft plastics. your way!!
Posted by Pete L on 2002 PM:
ADVERTISEMENT!!!! But - I
do think scent makes a difference.
Not so much wether or not the fish strikes . but how long it holds on. In an
instance where a fish is following a bait , the scent MAY
help him make up its mind.
The best example i`ve seen of a fish holding on to a bait happened to me , with
a SNOOZERS TUBE, [ roadkill /garlic.]
I had one texas rigged at croton one afternoon , and get hit by a goodsized
bass. I fought it in about 75 feet , which included one nice jump. This fish
fought every inch of the way. At the last second it finally threw the bait.
When i checked the bait , i noticed the hook point was still comepletely buried
in the side of the tube. I could not even feel the point of the hook.
Either this was just a super aggressive bass or he liked the way that thing
tasted!!!!
Pete
__________________
Pete LaFemina
There is a very fine line between "hobby" and
"mental illness."
Posted by Travis on 2002 PM:
I am by no means a color
monger. I throw smoke, green or pumpkin without care of any of the three as to
what's tied on. I am not a scent person either, if it is on my baits from the
factory...fine by me. If a bait doesn't come with built in scent, fine by me. I
choose baits that give me ....confidence. I'm not good enough to have the same
amount of confidence in a dozen different offerings. Can I throw them ? yes. but
that isn't confidence in the truest sense of the word.
Todd brought up the golden word . If one feels that colors, scents, heck their
lucky shirt makes a difference. It DOES. I agree.
T
Posted by quantumman29 on 2002 PM:
i told
you................
i actually posted a
thread about this topic not too long ago,while there were then,and there will
be now controversy about the use of scents and the duration a fish will hold
onto a fake offering,also anytime a fish is monitored in any type of false enviroment(tank,holding
pool,) i believe there is no comparison to that of a fish living in the wild! i
have conducted tests of my own and found to the most part that a bass will hold
onto a scented product longer then a non scented product,according to these
highly paid "fish scientists" a bass has the sense of smell far more
superior to that of a human and close to that of a dog,while we can actually
never prove this to ourselves until we come up with a way to allow us to
breathe underwater while actually inhaling water into our lungs to allow our
sense of smell to dtermine what it smells like under water,many a test has been
done on the bass that proclaims to us that the bass has a great sense of smell,this
is basically like a scientist telling me that my dog only sees black and white,i
dont believe that test either,i dont believe there is any way of any human
being ever being able to determine the amount of sense of smell a fish has!with
this said and done,i shall continue to use all my rattlesnake aerosol scents
until they are gone and either 1 of 2 things happens,,rattlesnake begins
marketing the product again,,or i find another product that works as good or
better then the rattlesnake product!
quantumman
Posted by postcard on 2002 AM:
Did I mention that Berkley takes out a 2 page space to
present 3 articles, most of which are promotional? The space may be paid for by
Berkley, but the treatise by the Doc
comes across as 'facts-based-on-science', as 'researched' by the Doc.
The facts that support the products are from some unknown source. So in
a sense, Berkley, by association, is leading you
to believe that the facts are substantiated in their labs and field
tests by PhD biologists.
When I mentioned omission, I meant omitting quite a bit of statistics and
exceptions - less than the whole truth, is not the truth, but only a segment.
My personal exceptions:
1. Senkos are taken in deep and carried a distance. Is it the salt and
softness? Who knows? Are Senkos more effective than Power Baits? They are for
thousands of users.
2. I don't use scents, ever ! I catch large numbers of fish every
season, as do thousands of other non-sense using anglers.
Travis is right - belief breeds confidence from experience, and who can argue
with anyone's experiences? Scientific - no.
How many scientific studies have shown that certain foods prevent
cancer, only to be refuted years later? You never hear of the thousands that
died eating right .
3. There shouldn't be controversy over something that is so easily disproven
especially when the exception to using scents, is the rule! Controlled
experiments concerning fish, are flawed because:
1. Successful artificial-lure anglers, throughout history, have caught fish in
huge numbers by techniques that only depended on finding them and hooking them.
2. Fish react differently to stimuli in the wild. They are not programed or
influenced by man to yield answers to questions that aren't relevant because of
the enormous amount of 'natural' variables that are not taken into
consideration. Basic senses may be tested accurately, but predicting reactions
for even most fish is going a little too far. An experiment's conclusion is
only accurate if it can be repeated by others, without exceptions.
When I'm on the throne , the BASS Times is on my lap. It's a good read,
but I'd prefer toilet paper as being more useful and reliable, especially when
I'm finished! 
Posted by JOHN G on 2002 AM:
Berkely is no stranger to
the Hype game, a perfect example is the incredible play they gave to their
Frenzy line, with all the lab and water tests and all that, and has anyone here
found those cranks, a classic reaction bait if there ever was one, to be any
different from any others that Have worked for you in the past?
I was using a power worm when I caught the 9 pounder...but then, I have been
using their worms all along and for years.....I really don't believe a bass
spits out any good quality plastic worm right away, I do believe that they
might hold onto a power worm a little longer, as well as any quality scented
lure....Pete's story about the Snoozer tube, I have confirmed too many times to
talk about....
The Good Doc is mostly doing his job that he was paid to do on there....however,
they do have a quality product as we all know..... JOHN G
__________________
"and a new Commandment I shall give you.....that you shall love one
another"
---------------------------------
> email
- DrBass2@aol.com
> Forum Moderator aka: Head Honcho
---------------------------------
Quote: "coming
soon"
---------------------------------
Posted by Steve_IA on 2002 AM:
Find a copy of Keith Jones' book, Knowing Bass, and give it a read. It discusses bass behaviour from both a biological and physiological perspective. I found it a very interesting and informative read. I haven't read the Bass Times but I'm confident the background premise in each ad is Keith's opinion while the bait examples are influenced by the marketing dept. To those of you that would dismiss the body of Dr. Jones' work solely on the grounds of his employment I suggest you are a bit too jaded. Much of what he reports is based not only on his research but also upon the research of others (some of whom many of you have claimed adoration of). I do know Keith and respect him for his intelegence and honesty as well as his very good sense of humor. Theories have been disproven in the past, but I'm confident those that Keith writes about today are what he truely believes today.
Posted by Greg Hill on 2002 AM:
The good Dr. would soon find himself looking for another job were his views on scent not what they are,dont you think?I use smelly jelly in colder water but its mostly a confidence booster,cant hurt thing than any definative belief in its effectiveness.I know dang well though, that when you run a spinnerbait past a smallmouth sitting in a current break in fast water,it'll hit the lure scent or no because it doesnt have time to take a whiff before deciding to eat it.The idea of fish not recognizing a lure as food becauase its not scented is too much,even for this dumb ole West Virginian.I dont know how much if any, scent helps ,but i know I'd take Dick Bengraff's word that it doesnt over an employee of Berkley with the opposite view.I'll probaly have that little orange jar next to me come late Sept though,just in case.
Posted by postcard on 2002 PM:
I can't refute anything
the Doc says because I'm not even close to being qualified. If anything, I want
to believe that what the Doc has written is just another, good and interesting,
source of reliable information. I would like to know, because he is a fellow
angler, if his theories are backed up on the water.
But, as the saying goes, "you lay down with dogs, you wake up with
fleas". Two promotional articles, that in themselves are extremely biased,
cast a shadow on parts of his dissertation that is meant to convince people
that smell and sight senses go hand in hand, and are never independent of one
another. Give a dumb s.o.b. like me a few fallacies, and I suspect there's a
validity issue concerning other 'facts'.
As I said, a little knowledge peppered with a few well-placed falsehoods, is a
dangerous thing and usually not worth the paper it's was written on. The only
way to keep an open mind concerning tainted information, is to find other
sources that support and maybe confirm the info or do your own tests.
Frank M
Posted by Bassin Dude on 2002 AM:
To quote one part of
the "AD"....
... Smell awakens inactive bass and stirs them to higher levels of feeding
aggressiveness.
That line alone, presented in the way it was is so ridiculous that I dismiss
the entire ad as hyperbolical in function.
Some years ago, a friend and I were fishing Silver Lake in Wyoming county. Fishing was very slow with only a few bass being
found on the outside weed edge of the typical huge weedbed at the south end of
the lake. My friend had recently purchased a bottle of that Berkley Power Bait
attractant. We knew that the bass were there but they just weren't feeding
readily on this sunny bluebird day. So, we attached the bottle to a marker
buoy, cut a couple holes in it and lowered it down to the bottom at the edge of
the weedbed allowing the stuff to ooze out. Of course, we were hoping that the
stuff would affect the bass by "stirring them to higher levels of feeding
aggressiveness". We left for about 45 minutes, returned and fished the
area again. Unfortunately, nothing changed. We pulled the bottle out to find
90% of the contents were released. We dumped the rest in the water and
continued fishing. We moved all about the lake with limited success everywhere,
including that weedbed where the "attractant" was released.
I admit that my experience outlined here with Power Bait Scent was a one time
thing and far from scientific or clinical but over the years I did my own on
water testing and read everything I could. I've corresponded with fisheries
biologists on the subject and my conclusions drawn from this ever-going
learning process is that scent is not effective, for me, when fishing for black
bass.
Notice that I said "for me". If it gives you confidence when tossing
YOUR bait, then you're a better fisherman using it therefore, by all means, use
it.
I'm not going to reiterate any of my scent and bass determinations here as I
have mentioned them ad nauseam over the past couple years (plus, the site does
have a handy "Search" feature if anyone cares to read anything
again).
__________________
Tony
"As my own fishing seasons wind down to a
precious few, it's nice to know I'll be there, be there as long as I can. As
long as I can bait a hook and make a cast, as long as I am living, I intend to
be fishing."
-Ron Schara
Posted by earthworm77 on 2002 AM:
Let me ask you this question......do you think that all that research means anything??? I don't. It is not objective. Berkley stuff works. So does all other scented stuff or anything for that matter. Look at Snoozer's, I don't think Todd breaks out his lab coat and petri dishes to test the pheromone or chemoreceptors or whatever....but he still makes a great bait. He knows a few basic principles about what fish like and has designed a line of baits based on those successful characteristics. Berkley gives the appearance that science has been considered in their product line, it is an interesting take but I'm not sure you can trust it soley because it is not an independant study. I will tell you that I've surely caught more fish on Snoozer, Green Eyes, Northern Handpour and Yamamoto baits than I ever did with Berkley bait. I used Berkley exclusively for a few years before I got into any f the other stuff. I pour my own stuff now and feel I can pretty much match anything out on the market today. No tremendous research there!
__________________
www.micromunchtackle.com
Posted by postcard on 2002 PM:
Hyperbolical
- I got to look that one up! 
But what disappoints me more is the statement that garlic and anise don't work
nearly as well as Power Bait worm extract. Guess I'll just have to dump all
those bottles of Fish Formula.