Is WD40 a good idea for fish attractant?

[Mildog]

Thought this might be a topic worth some consideration.
Not to rain on anyone's parade, but using WD40 as a fish attractant is maybe not the best idea. It is a petroleum distillate and could be considered introducing a pollutant in to the water. Technically illegal. For years it has been rumored to have "fish oil" in it, It does not. Many people use it for fishing and it does work. You hear of its use in both fresh and salt water. There are other safer biodegradable/natural oils fish attractants that also work. Maybe better to use those. ( Ask Tube Dude he is master of fishtactular potions and concoctions to appease and entice the olfactory senses of fishy critters) People may say its only just a little squirt here and there. Years ago I was fishing out at bird island on a calm day and there was a boat about a hundred yards away using WD40, we could hear them asking for the can. Every time they cast a bait out a huge circle oil slick would appear. They were catching fish, but not any more than we were, and we were not using it. After an hour or so their was an oil slick covering a few hundred yards. Not sure that is a good thing for the lake.
Years ago a Dr. did some studies on scents for fishing, a conclusion he came to was that fish like things that smell and oils trailing off in many cases it helps. Another thing he concluded was often. it was not the particular smell that worked but just the fact that it smelled. He would clean and "sterilize" a lure, then add something to some and then use the other "clean". In almost all cases the Clean ones underproduced the ones that had 'anything" added to them. Just my two cents worth, but maybe WD40 is not a good idea to put into our waters. Experiment with other safer scents and see what happens. Tons of fish are caught by folks that have never used it. One other note: Berkley is of the leaders in scent research in regards to angling. I was fortunate to tour their test tanks and facility many years ago. In talking to one of the researchers he told me some interesting things. Two widely used scents/additives that anglers use and many seem to think work were Garlic and Salt. In their research they showed they were very ineffective and were not very attractive to fish. He also said the main reason salt got its place in plastic lures was that it was cheaper than the plastisol used to make the baits so they could make more lures with the same amount of plastic and it was cheaper so they made more money. In some cases it could make the bait softer for better action or feel. A good angling buddy always used banana smelly jelly for all fish. I always used shad. crayfish. anchovy. sardine etc. He always caught just as many fish as I did and when I asked him why banana he said my hands and gear smell better and the fish seem to like it to.
Food for thought and just my 2 cents worth ! Would be interested in other thoughts and or opinions.

[TubeDude]

Over the years, you and I have been part of quite a few discussions on this subject.  We have both known folks who swear by the use of WD40 as a fish attractant.  And we both know all of the scienterrific reasons why it ain't a good idea to use it in ANY waterway.  Maybe it does not cause significant harm in small quantities.  But it is still a petroleum distillate product and combined with all the other stuff being dumped in our water it don't do no good.  The argument that the fish that bites it is going to die anyway just ain't a good argument.

I kinda believe it is like the choice of rods, reels, line, hooks, lures and other baits.  We tend to glom onto anything that caught a fish for us...at least once.  And it is forever the best thing to use.  And as we have both come to realize, you will usually do better fishing something with confidence than something new and untried.   In fact, I have known folks to go out of their way to disprove something if they don't want to give up their fave stuff.

I am a firm believer in using some kind of "anointment"...animal, vegetable or mineral...if it attracts more bites and/or at least masks the human odor.  Most fish are olfactory motivated and apply the "smell test" before chomping.  Most fish are also repelled by the human scent "L-serine".  Some folks exude more than others.  Still other folks slather on the sunscreen or mess around with gasoline covered items before fishing...and wonder why their nonsmelly fishing buddies catch more fish.  Bottom line is that even if you aren't just trying to attract the fish, it is a good idea to disguise or cover up the non-attracting odors that might be reducing your success rate.

This is no doubt a response to FastRandy's open admission to using WD-40 as an attractant.  It is in his history.  He was introduced to it by some successful catfish anglers...who he trusted and respected.  No reason to doubt either the effectiveness or the legality.  And in his own side by side comparisons against other attractants since, he still believes WD-40 to be best.  And once a fisherman's mind is made up you best not try to confuse him with facts.

[liketrolling]

And once a fisherman's mind is made up you best not try to confuse him with facts.

I tried it one time about 20 years ago and it did not seem to help me

[Jig-fisher]

I did a YouTube search a year or two ago on using WD-40 for catfish.  One of the results had a guy down in Texas or some other southern spot do a test on using soaked sponge baits for cats with various attractants.  So no other bait, just the attractants soaked into a sponge.  He set baits in various spots tied to tree branches hanging over the water.  WD-40 by itself caught a big fat zero.  Other attractants caught fish, but not WD-40.  

I went through a period many years ago when I would carry some with me, but never thought it worked any better than the regular bait I was using.  So, to each their own.  If they want to use it, go ahead.  Just as there are preferences for powerbait, or to use it or not.  Fly fishers sometimes scorn bait chuckers or lure throwers because they think their way is best.   If you believe it works and you catch fish, have fun.  I just use other things.  

For me, fresh cut bait works the best for cats.

[muirco]

There are so many good attractants out there, I just have to ask a question that doesn't need an answer...WHY?!

[fast_randy]

Pat if you are thinking it was the Mortensens that showed me WD-40, then you are wrong. The years I fished with Glen and LeRoy they only used fresh shrimp. I can't remember where I got the idea to use it, only the results. The first time me and my friend Kelly used it at Bird Island there were lots of boats. And me and Kelly were the only ones catching anything. We had started adding half a night crawler to the shrimp.

The boats were crowding closer and closer as everyone was seeing us bring in cat after cat. And when we had our 16 cat limit we left and watched the other boats race to get our spot. And I have used it with great results ever since. I have all the other scents on the market. Even the Gulp recharge you recommend. Not a bite on it. I only use WD for cats, not other fish.
I could bring up the argument that oil and water do not mix. I remember back years ago when they first started coming out with 4 stroke because they were cleaner on the water then the 2 stroke. And reading that oil will float on water and not mix. And it gets washed up on the bank and does not pollute the water. And if it was in fact a problem, the weeds along the edge would die. But the water is not mixing with the oil. But even my 4 stroke gives out a constant oil slick. So until the officially out law it, I will probably use it.
WHY???? Because it works.

[RockyRaab2]

Randy, it IS illegal to deliberately introduce pollutants into the water. As a petroleum product, it is also defined legally as a pollutant. If you were caught doing it, the fines might be huge.

Worth the risk? That's your call.

[fast_randy]

And a note on my WD chicken. When I first tried it last week at Bird, I checked. I hooked it up and put it in the water and did not see any oil coming off it. This and other things have always convinced me it is the smell and not the slick that attract the cats. I love you Pat, and the rest the of BFT'ers I feel are like family to me. But I will always stick up for what I believe. No offense taking and I hope I don't offend anyone for what I believe.
Pat, remember me talking about: finding something like Vaseline, something that doesn't smell that I could mix with WD to make it stay on your bait better? Well now WD-40 has a new sticky formula. I didn't buy any because you have to shake it at least 30 seconds before each squirt. I do wonder if the smell is the same????

[Tin-Can]

I have used WD40 in years past, many years past. Never noticed it doing any better than other attractant solutions that are sold in every tackle shop. So I stopped using it. I will admit, I do carry a can in my boat, but it isn't for use on the bait or lures. It is there to lube some of the mechanical devises like hitch ball latch, bow stand crank, and tow landing gear. None of which ever get in the water.

[TubeDude]

And a note on my WD chicken. When I first tried it last week at Bird, I checked. I hooked it up and put it in the water and did not see any oil coming off it. This and other things have always convinced me it is the smell and not the slick that attract the cats. I love you Pat, and the rest the of BFT'ers I feel are like family to me. But I will always stick up for what I believe. No offense taking and I hope I don't offend anyone for what I believe.
Pat, remember me talking about: finding something like Vaseline, something that doesn't smell that I could mix with WD to make it stay on your bait better? Well now WD-40 has a new sticky formula. I didn't buy any because you have to shake it at least 30 seconds before each squirt. I do wonder if the smell is the same????

No harm, no foul.  No offense given or taken.  You and I have had our own discussions.   We good.

Anglers in Utah have been using WD40 for decades...for trout, cats and other species.  I have seen that it does work very well at times.  DWR has not specifically outlawed it but they do frown on it.  I do not know of any citations issued to anyone using it...but technically it is a pollutant.  Howsomever...live bait is not a pollutant and it IS outlawed in Utah...except for worms and bugs.  And until recently, corn was also outlawed...because theoretically it was a pollutant.  Chummers (also illegal) were covering the bottom of the lake with corn...which decomposed and added pollutants to the water.  Theoretically.

[fast_randy]

Rocky, I ask almost every Fish $ Game I see about it. I asked all the ones checking the boats at LB this year. And I told them when I got back how many fish I had caught, and shared my methods. And they all have said they don't care. Some said they use it. Do you actually think it is worse than any boat on the water and the almost constant slick coming off them?
I fail to see the problem.

---

If I actually thought any of the oil from all the boats, or all my WD-40, was hurting the catfish at Utah Lake, then I would be ok with going electric motors only. I would just need a pontoon big enough for me and my dog.

[Tin-Can]

Randy, just be glad this isn't California where many if not all by now, lakes and rivers have outlawed most 2 stroke marine motors.

[Anglinarcher]

Great discussion, but it only goes on to prove that we don't all know as much as we think and we agree on even less.

The problem with being a science geek, and an ex-engineer, is that we have this problem of thinking that all of the science and education we have acquired during the 40+ years of work and 25+ years of schooling has taught us something.  So, being guilty of that, I am going to interject here.  Still, I am not sure you will be able to predict what side I am coming down on in the end!

First item to note that that few of our "teachers" have the intellect they claim.  If they were as smart we would want them to be, they would have gone to work for someone that pays better.  Second item to note is that when a company tells us something they are like politicians, we are getting only part of the truth, the truth as they want us to see it.  So, I will provide you what I have learned through my own resources, and through verification with multiple sources.  I encourage you to do the same.  What you will get is a lifetime summary so no footnotes this time.  I actually learn more when I find I am wrong.

1) Mildog, your information is good, but it does have some issues as I see it.  

"Berkley is of the leaders in scent research in regards to angling. I was fortunate to tour their test tanks and facility many years ago. In talking to one of the researchers he told me some interesting things. Two widely used scents/additives that anglers use and many seem to think work were Garlic and Salt. In their research they showed they were very ineffective and were not very attractive to fish. He also said the main reason salt got its place in plastic lures was that it was cheaper than the plastisol used to make the baits so they could make more lures with the same amount of plastic and it was cheaper so they made more money. In some cases it could make the bait softer for better action or feel."

You were in part misled on Garlic and Salt.  

Salt was indeed added to plastics to replace plastic, but if you ever tried molding with salt you would find that first and foremost, it makes plastic harder, not softer; a softener must also now be added.  It is in itself cheaper than plastisol, but it is a serious pain in the back side to add, mix, and suspend for molding.  Gary Yamamato made the salted bait famous but he added it to make plastisol heavier.  Without salt, plastisol floats and only a heavy hook will sink it; with salt, it sinks more reliably.  Actually, the added cost in time and equipment is more expensive than the replaced plastisol.  I am sure that Berkley left that part out because they were not willing to pay royalties for the process (Patent), a process that Gary had to pay for as well.  The fact that marketers figured that salt taste good to humans sure did not help any.  In my observations, two identical baits, one with and one without, salt will cause fish to hold on longer to the salted bait, but I see no actual increase in the attractiveness of it.  PS, yes, I do inject many of my own soft plastics and PM me for the best ratios and types of salt for more details.

As for Garlic, I mention to my customers that I have never ever seen a garlic clove growing in water, or a marshmallow, or ........  Nevertheless, the same company, Berkley, makes Powerbait flavored with Garlic or corn or marshmallow, or .......  So, if it does not work, why ad it and advertise it?  So many customers claim it has proven more effective then the other flavors in the exact same color, used side by side, that it leads one to question if they are all wrong.  Berkley has claimed to have spent millions of dollars to find the best scent/scents, and they are now one of the biggest producers of garlic scented baits.  It leads me to either invalidate all Berkley claims, or at least believe they found their test were invalid and have revised their opinion.

2) Water does not mix with oil!  Wrong!  In fact, that is like telling us that you must have clouds for it to rain.  Any of us with a little age and experience in the outdoors knows that we have been rained on with sunny skies.  The truth is that the rain may have blown miles from the clouds, so in part it is true.  

Oil and water seem to not mix, but that is not completely true.  It looks like they don't but if you go to any good handbook of physics and chemistry you can find that rate that specific oils dissolve in water, disperse in water, an dilute in water.  You can also find the rates that water will do the same in oil.  It IS true that oil does not dissolve a lot in water, and that it can take a long time, but it will.  So, the argument that fish cannot detect an oil based scent is incorrect, but the statement that water based scents will be stronger is also true.  Nevertheless, the effectiveness of a scent may not be related to the strength, but to the quality of the scent.  Claims to the contrary are marketing hype at best.

3) Is WD-40 a pollutant?  Methane is a pollutant, as is Carbon Dioxide, so you must go kill yourself, because I know you fart and breath.  But, wait, the body decomposes and the gasses it creates are Methane and Carbon Dioxide, so DON'T KILL yourself, just don't fart and don't breath!

Most of everything we do creates pollutants and most pollutants are recycled by nature.  The same is true for every living creature on earth, human or otherwise; only the amount and intent, if any, is in question.  The whole issue of how much is to much, and is our impact too great, is a tough one.  I would say that we should leave it to smarter minds, but in reality, the Politicians we vote for seldom have IQ's greater than below normal (IMHO)!

I have seen WD-40 used for fishing.  Most of the time I do not find it overly persistent, and indeed less than the surplus oils from boat trailers and motors.  I have seen shad oil slicks that were far more extensive and persistent.  Is there a difference in oil derived from shad, sardines, chub, or dinosaurs?  I know that we can refine and purify dino oil and it is called gas, but it is actually quite natural.  Biologics eat/consume it, UV light destroys it, and plants utilize the degraded components.  Nevertheless, too much is too much.  Too much water will kill you.  Too much oxygen can kill you.  To much fishing can kill you.  Never mind, no it won't and if it did I still would not/could not stop.

I do not advocate giving citations for using WD-40 as a fish attractant, just as I don't advocate giving citations for using commercially based, biologically sourced, oil based attractants!  Nevertheless, I do advocate personal responsibility in using WD-40.  I would encourage personally restricting the amount of it, and I would discourage promoting it in public (call it your own personal secret weapon).  I also do not advocate making personal attacks against anyone using it.  To much of what we do, our rights, are being eroded by self proclaimed experts based on overreaching group think.  Let's use a little respect for personal rights, a little real science, a little common sense.  Let's prove the old adage wrong, the one that says "common sense ain't so common anymore"!

[fishalot13]

The best and only WD-40 that I use is a loop wing WD-40 fly with the barb pinched! Great emerger pattern and environmentally friendly!

[Mildog]

And a note on my WD chicken. When I first tried it last week at Bird, I checked. I hooked it up and put it in the water and did not see any oil coming off it. This and other things have always convinced me it is the smell and not the slick that attract the cats. I love you Pat, and the rest the of BFT'ers I feel are like family to me. But I will always stick up for what I believe. No offense taking and I hope I don't offend anyone for what I believe.
Pat, remember me talking about: finding something like Vaseline, something that doesn't smell that I could mix with WD to make it stay on your bait better? Well now WD-40 has a new sticky formula. I didn't buy any because you have to shake it at least 30 seconds before each squirt. I do wonder if the smell is the same????

No harm, no foul.  No offense given or taken.  You and I have had our own discussions.   We good.

Anglers in Utah have been using WD40 for decades...for trout, cats and other species.  I have seen that it does work very well at times.  DWR has not specifically outlawed it but they do frown on it.  I do not know of any citations issued to anyone using it...but technically it is a pollutant.  Howsomever...live bait is not a pollutant and it IS outlawed in Utah...except for worms and bugs.  And until recently, corn was also outlawed...because theoretically it was a pollutant.  Chummers (also illegal) were covering the bottom of the lake with corn...which decomposed and added pollutants to the water.  Theoretically.

One reason on corn being outlawed due to chumming and misuse was that fish would gorge up on it and it would not digest in its whole kernel form and could kill the fish. Not sure if any of that is true (some fish chows have corn in them, but they are processed)

---

Reply From Mildog:
Great points from all and a civil discussion, from all which is good. No offense meant or taken from any posts. I agree with much of what you said as well. I agree with what the other Pat said (tube Dude)The one part I forgot to mention on the Berkley researcher. I then asked him why they sell garlic flavored stuff. His answer was simple people BUY it so we make it. If they think it works great we get the sale and make money!!
I am not sure but I don't think any patents in regards to salt would still be in effect. So I don't think it would be an issue to Berkley even if they did have to pay they could afford it if they had to. I think it was Gene Larue company that used it first commercially probably 40 plus years ago, custom pourers used it prior to that. Yes. salt is added to affect the sink rate, (not all salted plastics sink) many companies now use it for that and also because it sells. Another reason to add salt is the lures fall apart quicker as the salt dissipates in water, so you have to buy more luReply From Mildog:res!! Like with Yamamoto grubs Senkos etc. So with the high salt content to get the sink rate and softeners used they often fly off a lot when fishing. A drop of super glue helps keep them on the hook. Sometimes one fish per bait when they fly off as the fish fights or jumps, a good profit model. Like in many things follow the money... LOL
One other fun fact A famous bass pro once said you can dump gasoline in my tackle box and I will still out-fish everybody!!! So what was he saying? Scents don't mater or better to smell like gas than a human or predator ? Or just that they have some scent on them??? You decide. As far as WD 40 plenty of people use it and think it makes a difference. I won't argue either way. Just not sure it should be promoted. There are rules about intentionally putting "pollutants" in the water. Boat exhausts and such are part of boating as exhaust and drips from vehicles are to driving, so not considered intentional.
Just an FYI California has made efforts to outlaw plastic lures if they are not made from Bio-degradable plastics. That could come to pass some day and then spread to other places.
Mildog out

Great discussion, but it only goes on to prove that we don't all know as much as we think and we agree on even less.

The problem with being a science geek, and an ex-engineer, is that we have this problem of thinking that all of the science and education we have acquired during the 40+ years of work and 25+ years of schooling has taught us something.  So, being guilty of that, I am going to interject here.  Still, I am not sure you will be able to predict what side I am coming down on in the end!

First item to note that that few of our "teachers" have the intellect they claim.  If they were as smart we would want them to be, they would have gone to work for someone that pays better.  Second item to note is that when a company tells us something they are like politicians, we are getting only part of the truth, the truth as they want us to see it.  So, I will provide you what I have learned through my own resources, and through verification with multiple sources.  I encourage you to do the same.  What you will get is a lifetime summary so no footnotes this time.  I actually learn more when I find I am wrong.

1) Mildog, your information is good, but it does have some issues as I see it.  

"Berkley is of the leaders in scent research in regards to angling. I was fortunate to tour their test tanks and facility many years ago. In talking to one of the researchers he told me some interesting things. Two widely used scents/additives that anglers use and many seem to think work were Garlic and Salt. In their research they showed they were very ineffective and were not very attractive to fish. He also said the main reason salt got its place in plastic lures was that it was cheaper than the plastisol used to make the baits so they could make more lures with the same amount of plastic and it was cheaper so they made more money. In some cases it could make the bait softer for better action or feel."

You were in part misled on Garlic and Salt.  

Salt was indeed added to plastics to replace plastic, but if you ever tried molding with salt you would find that first and foremost, it makes plastic harder, not softer; a softener must also now be added.  It is in itself cheaper than plastisol, but it is a serious pain in the back side to add, mix, and suspend for molding.  Gary Yamamato made the salted bait famous but he added it to make plastisol heavier.  Without salt, plastisol floats and only a heavy hook will sink it; with salt, it sinks more reliably.  Actually, the added cost in time and equipment is more expensive than the replaced plastisol.  I am sure that Berkley left that part out because they were not willing to pay royalties for the process (Patent), a process that Gary had to pay for as well.  The fact that marketers figured that salt taste good to humans sure did not help any.  In my observations, two identical baits, one with and one without, salt will cause fish to hold on longer to the salted bait, but I see no actual increase in the attractiveness of it.  PS, yes, I do inject many of my own soft plastics and PM me for the best ratios and types of salt for more details.

As for Garlic, I mention to my customers that I have never ever seen a garlic clove growing in water, or a marshmallow, or ........  Nevertheless, the same company, Berkley, makes Powerbait flavored with Garlic or corn or marshmallow, or .......  So, if it does not work, why ad it and advertise it?  So many customers claim it has proven more effective then the other flavors in the exact same color, used side by side, that it leads one to question if they are all wrong.  Berkley has claimed to have spent millions of dollars to find the best scent/scents, and they are now one of the biggest producers of garlic scented baits.  It leads me to either invalidate all Berkley claims, or at least believe they found their test were invalid and have revised their opinion.

2) Water does not mix with oil!  Wrong!  In fact, that is like telling us that you must have clouds for it to rain.  Any of us with a little age and experience in the outdoors knows that we have been rained on with sunny skies.  The truth is that the rain may have blown miles from the clouds, so in part it is true.  

Oil and water seem to not mix, but that is not completely true.  It looks like they don't but if you go to any good handbook of physics and chemistry you can find that rate that specific oils dissolve in water, disperse in water, an dilute in water.  You can also find the rates that water will do the same in oil.  It IS true that oil does not dissolve a lot in water, and that it can take a long time, but it will.  So, the argument that fish cannot detect an oil based scent is incorrect, but the statement that water based scents will be stronger is also true.  Nevertheless, the effectiveness of a scent may not be related to the strength, but to the quality of the scent.  Claims to the contrary are marketing hype at best.

3) Is WD-40 a pollutant?  Methane is a pollutant, as is Carbon Dioxide, so you must go kill yourself, because I know you fart and breath.  But, wait, the body decomposes and the gasses it creates are Methane and Carbon Dioxide, so DON'T KILL yourself, just don't fart and don't breath!

Most of everything we do creates pollutants and most pollutants are recycled by nature.  The same is true for every living creature on earth, human or otherwise; only the amount and intent, if any, is in question.  The whole issue of how much is to much, and is our impact too great, is a tough one.  I would say that we should leave it to smarter minds, but in reality, the Politicians we vote for seldom have IQ's greater than below normal (IMHO)!

I have seen WD-40 used for fishing.  Most of the time I do not find it overly persistent, and indeed less than the surplus oils from boat trailers and motors.  I have seen shad oil slicks that were far more extensive and persistent.  Is there a difference in oil derived from shad, sardines, chub, or dinosaurs?  I know that we can refine and purify dino oil and it is called gas, but it is actually quite natural.  Biologics eat/consume it, UV light destroys it, and plants utilize the degraded components.  Nevertheless, too much is too much.  Too much water will kill you.  Too much oxygen can kill you.  To much fishing can kill you.  Never mind, no it won't and if it did I still would not/could not stop.

I do not advocate giving citations for using WD-40 as a fish attractant, just as I don't advocate giving citations for using commercially based, biologically sourced, oil based attractants!  Nevertheless, I do advocate personal responsibility in using WD-40.  I would encourage personally restricting the amount of it, and I would discourage promoting it in public (call it your own personal secret weapon).  I also do not advocate making personal attacks against anyone using it.  To much of what we do, our rights, are being eroded by self proclaimed experts based on overreaching group think.  Let's use a little respect for personal rights, a little real science, a little common sense.  Let's prove the old adage wrong, the one that says "common sense ain't so common anymore"!

---

Reply From Mildog:
Great points from all and a civil discussion, from all which is good. No offense meant or taken from any posts. I agree with much of what you said as well. I agree with what the other Pat said (tube Dude)The one part I forgot to mention on the Berkley researcher. I then asked him why they sell garlic flavored stuff. His answer was simple people BUY it so we make it. If they think it works great we get the sale and make money!!
I am not sure but I don't think any patents in regards to salt would still be in effect. So I don't think it would be an issue to Berkley even if they did have to pay they could afford it if they had to. I think it was Gene Larue company that used it first commercially probably 40 plus years ago, custom pourers used it prior to that. Yes. salt is added to affect the sink rate, (not all salted plastics sink) many companies now use it for that and also because it sells. Another reason to add salt is the lures fall apart quicker as the salt dissipates in water, so you have to buy more lures!! Like with Yamamoto grubs Senkos etc. So with the high salt content to get the sink rate and softeners used they often fly off a lot when fishing. A drop of super glue helps keep them on the hook. Sometimes one fish per bait when they fly off as the fish fights or jumps, a good profit model. Like in many things follow the money... LOL
One other fun fact A famous bass pro once said you can dump gasoline in my tackle box and I will still out-fish everybody!!! So what was he saying? Scents don't mater or better to smell like gas than a human or predator ? Or just that they have some scent on them??? You decide. As far as WD 40 plenty of people use it and think it makes a difference. I won't argue either way. Just not sure it should be promoted. There are rules about intentionally putting "pollutants" in the water. Boat exhausts and such are part of boating as exhaust and drips from vehicles are to driving, so not considered intentional.
Just an FYI California has made efforts to outlaw plastic lures if they are not made from Bio-degradable plastics. That could come to pass some day and then spread to other places.
Mildog out

[Anglinarcher]

The patents are indeed off on the Salt.  In fact, one judge finally tossed it out saying it was not a unique idea and anyone could have done it.  Still, Gary said one time that he kept Gene in business with all of his payments.  LOL

Adding salt to a bait does weaken it.  I often suggest that the wacky ring/washer was invented to make the salted stick bait last longer.  Nevertheless, we catch a lot of fish on that rig.

The whole thing about scent, color, etc., etc., is controversial.  Indeed when the fish are hot putting gas on a lure won't impact the catch rate, but when the fish are off, touching the bait with a human hand seems to end your day.  I once did the gas demonstration and I have a friend that wont fish for King Salmon without nitrile gloves.

About 20 years ago there was a poll on a lure making web site called tackleunderground.com.  They are the premier group of lure designers from around the world (and a lot of beginners also) that collaborate on lure designs.  Great group of guys.  I have looked for it, but with changing servers and pages it appears to have been lost.  Nevertheless, I remember that the poll was something like "what is the top 10 things you look for in a lure?"

I don't think we came to a definitive conclusion, but I do remember that color was way down at number 9 and scent was at 10 or below.  Number one was more about action or size.  I think that the more you know about how light penetrates water the more color becomes important, and the more we change how we buy lures.  But this is a discussion on scent, and that one is even more controversial.

I will use one experience I had several years ago.  I was fishing in a little honey hole of a lake in Washington State that had huge Browns, both in size and numbers.  At the time, a Black with gold blade Panther Marten Spinner was the key, and had been for weeks.  One trip the fish would follow the lure back to the boat on every cast, often two or three fish at a time, but not take it.  We tried different spinners, different colors, different lures, and they would only follow the black and would not hit it.  About 3 hours of complete frustration left me with a final idea.  I had a bottle of Mikes Glow Scent in Nightcrawler in my tackle box that I bought in the early 80's (ACTUALLY PUT A PIECE OF REAL NIGHTCRAWLER ON FIRST AND THEY WOULD NOT TOUCH IT).  It was old, very old, and had never worked.  I put a couple of drops on the spinner and the first cast, and every cast for the next few hours, was FISH ON!  My partner fought the urge to put the scent on his lure for only so long then added it as well.  We got fishing flu and skipped work the next day and went back.  This time the fish were hitting the spinner like normal but when we put on the same scent they would not touch it at all.

I do not push scents, in fact I seldom use scents for myself.  I prefer to use cut bait, natural worms, a grasshopper or cricket, something natural if I resort to bait fishing.  I almost never add scent to lures.  BUT, for those times when nothing seems to work, I have a couple of bottles/tubes of a generic scent to add.  I suggest that a pair of good latex or nitrile gloves would make a better fisherman than most scents.  Still, as I have seen on those rare times, scent can make the fishing better, or make it worse.

I have learned on thing for sure.  Confidence often is more important than science.  I bet if I asked this site if red and white were any good for a lure that a huge percentage would mention how good it is.  I personally hate it, have caught less then 2 dozen fish on that color.  My wife loves it and has caught hundreds on it.  If the two of us are fishing together, and both have it on, she will catch fish and I get the skunk, so I take it off and find something else.  In all probability, if I left it on, I would do better, but I HAVE NO CONFIDENCE IN IT.  I like white, I like red, both work well for me, just don't combine them on me.  LOL

I hate bait fishing, hate powerbait in general, but, and I do mean but, a scientific comparison of two identical colors with different scents (one garlic of course) is merited.  Powerbait works, and works well (is it the color, the facts it floats, the scent, the combination of those factors?), but I still contest that just because Berkley says something does not make it so.  In fact, in my personal experience, their soft plastics with their proprietary scent/plastic seldom works as well as a salted bait or a regular bait with oil added to stop the baits from sticking together in the package.  

What I don't want to see is someone imposing my opinion on others.  I also refuse to have others impose their opinion on me.  I guess, in the end, I am just a flat out advocate of personal rights.

[Mildog]

Amen, Good stuff !! To each his own. I actually hate the Berkley gulp "plastics" (actually not plastic) but I have seen it out fish live bait a few times and have been told many times by anglers that it has for them as well. I use scents but not all the time. I have to admit I won't fish Kokes without Gulp Maggots, or other to tip my hooks....and for walleye, I sure like to tip with worms. In fishing there are no absolutes so one thing may or may not work from time to time that's the fun of fishing and trying to figure it out. One thing for sure, you catch fish on what you use !!!
Two quick stories,
#1 years ago at Lake Powell my father was using anchovies for Stripers, is there anything more smelly? He was hammering the stripers
his old buddy in the same boat ZERO, May dad started looking everything over, and set up was the same. Then he remembered how his buddy had splashed on the Old Spice after shaving in the morning (Quite heavy LOL) So pop cut off his leader retied it and baited his buddies hook for him, game on he started catching fish. They both could hardly believe it, something as smelly as a frozen anchovy made unattractive to the fish because he had some aftershave on his hands. TRUE STORY
#2 Forget the name but a "researcher" did some studies and had video to document. He put "clean'/ sterile lures out and they did not work as well. Then just to try something different on the other end of the spectrum, he dunked them in the sludge of his bilge all kinds of oils crud etc. Guess what ? The fish hit them much better and you could see it all on video. Go Figure !!
Mildog out

[Anglinarcher]

Amen, Good stuff !! To each his own. I actually hate the Berkley gulp "plastics" (actually not plastic) but I have seen it out fish live bait a few times and have been told many times by anglers that it has for them as well. I use scents but not all the time. I have to admit I won't fish Kokes without Gulp Maggots, or other to tip my hooks....and for walleye, I sure like to tip with worms. In fishing there are no absolutes so one thing may or may not work from time to time that's the fun of fishing and trying to figure it out. One thing for sure, you catch fish on what you use !!!
Two quick stories,
#1 years ago at Lake Powell my father was using anchovies for Stripers, is there anything more smelly? He was hammering the stripers
his old buddy in the same boat ZERO, May dad started looking everything over, and set up was the same. Then he remembered how his buddy had splashed on the Old Spice after shaving in the morning (Quite heavy LOL) So pop cut off his leader retied it and baited his buddies hook for him, game on he started catching fish. They both could hardly believe it, something as smelly as a frozen anchovy made unattractive to the fish because he had some aftershave on his hands. TRUE STORY
#2 Forget the name but a "researcher" did some studies and had video to document. He put "clean'/ sterile lures out and they did not work as well. Then just to try something different on the other end of the spectrum, he dunked them in the sludge of his bilge all kinds of oils crud etc. Guess what ? The fish hit them much better and you could see it all on video. Go Figure !!
Mildog out

Good stuff.  I had an uncle that could not catch fish if he had to, but he smoked so much he stunk from it.  We had to bait his hooks for him as well.  Had a friend that always spit on his catfish bait, claimed it made it better; actually did seem to work for him.

I'm sure Pat would have some clever comments here, but I am fresh out.

See you on the water.

[TubeDude]

Amen, Good stuff !! To each his own. I actually hate the Berkley gulp "plastics" (actually not plastic) but I have seen it out fish live bait a few times and have been told many times by anglers that it has for them as well. I use scents but not all the time. I have to admit I won't fish Kokes without Gulp Maggots, or other to tip my hooks....and for walleye, I sure like to tip with worms. In fishing there are no absolutes so one thing may or may not work from time to time that's the fun of fishing and trying to figure it out. One thing for sure, you catch fish on what you use !!!
Two quick stories,
#1 years ago at Lake Powell my father was using anchovies for Stripers, is there anything more smelly? He was hammering the stripers
his old buddy in the same boat ZERO, May dad started looking everything over, and set up was the same. Then he remembered how his buddy had splashed on the Old Spice after shaving in the morning (Quite heavy LOL) So pop cut off his leader retied it and baited his buddies hook for him, game on he started catching fish. They both could hardly believe it, something as smelly as a frozen anchovy made unattractive to the fish because he had some aftershave on his hands. TRUE STORY
#2 Forget the name but a "researcher" did some studies and had video to document. He put "clean'/ sterile lures out and they did not work as well. Then just to try something different on the other end of the spectrum, he dunked them in the sludge of his bilge all kinds of oils crud etc. Guess what ? The fish hit them much better and you could see it all on video. Go Figure !!
Mildog out

One of my all-time favorite gibes at anglers and their choice of baits was an old BC cartoon from the early 1980's.  In fact, it was cut out and hanging on the wall of the old Anglers' Inn in Sandy.  In it, one caveman was fishing and hauling fish out right and left.  Another caveman type who was also fishing...but catching nothing...asks the first one what he was using for bait.  The answer?  "Buzzard puke."  That was an inside joke with several of us old timers from that era.  We lived for the moments when some doofus asked the magic question..."Whatcha usin'?"  If we could avoid choking we blasted out the answer..."Buzzard puke."  Remember that?

[Kent]

Once I was sturgeon fishing and we couldn't get a bite on pickled herring (our usual go-to bait). We decided to see if we could catch some crappie (which has worked occasionally). Between the three of us, we managed to catch one crappie. We went back to the same hole, where we had already been skunked, and each of us took 1/3 of the crappie and cast out. In just a few minutes we each caught a sturgeon. I figured if they would hit crappie that surely they would like trout morts. So, the next morning I picked up a bag of rainbow morts, from the convenience store, at the gas station on the way. We fished morts, and as I recall, we got one or two bites all day long.