I haven't read on the board one person mentioning the enviornmental impact of Flourocarbon tippet material. Yes, I agree it's expensive, hides very well in the water and thus is thought of as a better answer to our nylon stuff (which is still very debatable), but the nylon stuff will break down. And that alone should force us to think twice about introducing Flourocarbon into environment. The stuff (and there are recently many articles in various FF mags about this topic) is impervious to anything mother nature can throw at it, and therefore we have mammals and birds at greater risk of entanglement. With the advent of rods that can now cast a mile, flies that can fool even the swallows that come down and pick up our dries, increased knowledge of food forms and how they act in relation to the trout, it might be time to step back and re-evaluate the true "need" of flourocarbon. Let's just say we can catch a few more trout on flourocarbon--but probably just a few more. Does this outweigh the enviornmental risk? Just wondering.
Give us a try!
Welcome back to the new NEFF. Take a break from Twitter and Facebook. You don't go to Dicks for your fly fishing gear, you go to your local fly fishing store. Enjoy!
flourocarbon
- Thread starter UlrichsM
- Start date
NJFred
Trout Hunter
A very Good Point Mike.
I for one do not use Fluorcarbon leaders but only the tippet so at least the damage I do is limited. I do believe that flurocargon is more effective but wonder if in a good downstream presentation maybe only the last 6 to 12 inches of the tippet would need to be Flurocarbon for improved takes? Also, have you heard of anyother material which does break down with similar properties to Flurocarbon? Sounds like a commercially viable R&D project!
I for one do not use Fluorcarbon leaders but only the tippet so at least the damage I do is limited. I do believe that flurocargon is more effective but wonder if in a good downstream presentation maybe only the last 6 to 12 inches of the tippet would need to be Flurocarbon for improved takes? Also, have you heard of anyother material which does break down with similar properties to Flurocarbon? Sounds like a commercially viable R&D project!
NJFred,
Yeah, that's a good point. If we could create some stuff with flourocarbon's properties, but have it able to break down--well, now you're on to something. Get an answer to that, and watch the money flow down to us while we are merely fly fishing our lives away, the only way to go.
Yeah, that's a good point. If we could create some stuff with flourocarbon's properties, but have it able to break down--well, now you're on to something. Get an answer to that, and watch the money flow down to us while we are merely fly fishing our lives away, the only way to go.
JOE.T
Dry Flies Only
After reading the posts from Ulrichs and fred,I read an article this past sunday in flyfisherman magazine about this very topic.
I agree with Fred about not be concerned with fish or animals being tangled,but this stuff can last for thousands of years!
Now that is something to think about.Of course we dont know what adverse affects it will have on the ecosystem but do we really want to find out or should I say our great grand children!
I for one use flourocarbom in certain situations.Do I catch more fish because of it.I dought it.Anyhoo Im sold.Thanks guys.
I agree with Fred about not be concerned with fish or animals being tangled,but this stuff can last for thousands of years!
Now that is something to think about.Of course we dont know what adverse affects it will have on the ecosystem but do we really want to find out or should I say our great grand children!
I for one use flourocarbom in certain situations.Do I catch more fish because of it.I dought it.Anyhoo Im sold.Thanks guys.
I also only use it on my tippet. I see a lot of peole going out and making the entire leader out of fluorocarbon for dry fly fishing due to the light factors and lower visibility. What I don't think that many people realize is the fluoro does not lay on top of the water well at all. It's actually heavier than mono in comparable size. For that reason alone is why I only use it on my tippet even when I am nymphing.
JasonM,
That's another good point. Not many fly fishers (that I know anyway) realize that flourocarbon sinks, and thus "wants" to drag our dry flies beneath the surface--defeating the purpose. Thus it is probably best for subsurface stuff.
Also, I might say that it is not the fly fishermen who concern me (all you guys on this forum and beyond seem to be quite enviornmentally concious), but now look into any fishing catalog and see spools of 2-5 hundred yards of flourocarbon for spinning and baitcasting outfits. That in itself spells T-R-O-U-B-L-E.
That's another good point. Not many fly fishers (that I know anyway) realize that flourocarbon sinks, and thus "wants" to drag our dry flies beneath the surface--defeating the purpose. Thus it is probably best for subsurface stuff.
Also, I might say that it is not the fly fishermen who concern me (all you guys on this forum and beyond seem to be quite enviornmentally concious), but now look into any fishing catalog and see spools of 2-5 hundred yards of flourocarbon for spinning and baitcasting outfits. That in itself spells T-R-O-U-B-L-E.
Doubletaper
Just finished a River Runs Through it!
I can buy a 25 meter spool of Seagar, Orvis or Umpqua florocarbon tippet material for $15.00 or buy a 250 yard spool of Berkley vanish florocarbon for $10.00. Does anybody know what the difference is between the two? The Berkley package states it is 100% florocarbon. I've tried all of the top brands and have found that at times the line just breaks about 3" from the knot. I lube all of my knots before I tighten them down, and check for any nicks along the length of line I pull of the leader wheel.I'm ready to give up on this stuff and go back to regular mono.
Last edited:
Corndog
Ephemerella Subvaria
DT,
For steelies and big brownies I've always liked Seagar the best. It's actual florocarbon line unlike Vanish which is florocarbon coated line. But, this winter a buddy got me to try Drennan Florocarbon and this stuff is great, tough and invisible. We caught big fish on 3# line. Plus, for 15 bucks you get 50 meters instead of the usual 25 meters.
For regular stream trout fishing I've gone back to mono tippet like Umpqua and Orvis mainly cause I use it up so fast and don't like spending all my hard earned cash on florocarbon.
Cdog
I was using the Seagar Grand Max which was good, but I like Drennen floro much better. I do a lot of nymphing for steelies and I think Drennen is just much more limp and I get a better drift. One thing I did notice, 10 pound Grand Max seems to have a smaller diameter then 6 pound Drennen. It dosen't seem to make any differance when fishing, just something I noticed.
Randyflycaster
New member
When fishing dry flies I now use flouro tippets. I find that it doesn't cause the fly to sink, especially if I use a floatant.
If the bass pros are using flouro it must mean something.
Randy
If the bass pros are using flouro it must mean something.
Randy