RRocket

I always have stuff like that running through my head! Green Pumpkin hasn't been productive for me in the least but it's boss in other parts of the country. Ghost Shrimp? Killer on Smallies here. One of my most productive poop baits is Golden Shiner. I always presumed they thought the poop bait was a clawless crawfish. But a golden sparkly one? Makes my head ache! LOL 😆

The ends of this worm are unique with turn downs. Question: Do you rig with turn downs pointing down or up? Or does it matter? The ends are symmetrically opposite..So one end will always be up and one down. Does it matter which way the fat end goes? I presume no..but have not used this particular worm before and appreciate any insight even if that includes "don't over think this". LOL 😆

Lots of worm discussion today which reminded me of this! Does anyone else use shrink tube in lieu of O-Rings to prolong worm life? As you know, shrink tube is quite tough. I find a shrink tube diameter that fits snugly around the egg sack. I then cut tiny pieces of shrink tube off and put them on the whole bag of worms ahead of time. I do not actually heat and shrink them, I just use It as a sleeve and pass the hook through the worm AND the sleeve. I presume this would also work for Neko rigging.

This is the buried nose hook WRB and Bass Ruten refer to on the Hayabusa hook with a 4" Roboworm Also shown is the exposed hook and a "Texas Rig" of sorts (hook tip exposed for effect) you can do due to the unique hook bend.

If you try either, please report back. I use #1

I went through this and discovered a real gem. It also serves as my wacky hook, so you'll get dual use out of it. Everyone who's tried it loves it. It's the Hayabusa Spin Muscle. Unique design holds the bait in the "V" and also serves to really pin the fish. A truly exceptional hook. Image below. Bonus: this hook can be put on with a Snell knot which is superior to your typical drop shot knots IMO. Barring the Spin Muscle, by all accounts the Nishine DS Hook is supposed to be fantastic and can also be tied in with a Snell. Video on how to tie Snell for drop shot.

Thanks for the encouragement, but I'm done with Senkos. They just don't work here. Or rather, there's much better options that easily outproduce them. I'm curious to see how the Flick Shake does though. As for any "Guarantee", what do I get since it doesn't work? A free bag of Senkos? LOL 😆

I was using a piece of rope to catch fish last week...does that count? LOL 😆

Senkos are REALLY hit or miss here. I mean REALLY. And personally they don't work for me. At all. Waste of time to even rig one. Seems to be stick baits in general though and I have no idea why. Roboworm? Nope. Tried on dropshot and wacky. Zero. Did have plenty of luck with Z-man Big TRD..but I'm guessing it was the Ned presentation rather than the worm itself. For that reason I no longer use worms, just alternatives. OSP Dolive Stick..But it's more fish shaped. And of course poop baits. Was at a pond yesterday and 4 out of 5 guys were fishing Senkos and were skunked. I was the 5th guy and was catching fish on poop baits. I really can't explain it. I'm about to embark on a FlickShake odyssey this week to see if worms fished in that manner will work. Just waiting for the Jackall Flick Shake to arrive.

Excellent! Am an enthusiastic JDM bait user and have not fished this technique. Jackall's wacky jig head is 90 degree line tie. Yours seems less. Any reason? Thanks for the info!

Which jig head and worm? Jackall FlickShake specific? Or just any weighted wacky and any worm?

Free Rig Drop Shot Chatterbait

You can make your own with the Decoy DS-12 Slide Weights. I I use the Texas EyeZ as much as I use swimbait hook. The free hook allows great action! It does fall nose first this way on a pause, but you could add in a Decoy DS-12 weight to tune.

You're very welcome!

Info usually found on package or website. Info at bottom of page for Swing Impact https://www.keitechusa.com/catalog/swing-impact.html Easy Shiner https://www.keitechusa.com/catalog/easy-shiner.html

I only have 2 rods and a small shoulder sling. That's all I carry whether boat or bank. I am a dedicated minimalist via "Okkappari" style fishing. I have a couple of baits and techniques that are my "go to". But my tackle choices (hooks, weights, baits) allow me to fish multiple techniques without requiring additional tackle. Multiuse if you will. That's how I do it...

That's great!! My biggest worry would be how to sort them!! By color? By size? By name? LOL 😆

That's an excellent question, but one I can't answer for you, sadly. Per dermatological studies, it's typically misapplication or insufficient reapplication in a timely manner. Most require a reapplication after a few hours, swimming, heavy sweating, etc I simply cannot answer to your situation. But your situation is known as anecdotal evidence which does not invalidate volumes of scientific research and evidence. And that evidence says they work and work well to prevent sun damage and skin cancer. And yes, not only are we surrounded by questionable/dangerous/carcinogenic chemicals pbut many of us knowingly consume them...daily. Read up on alcohol. Or char on BBQ foods. Or nitrates in processed meats. Or plastics on food storage that makes it into food. Chemicals on produce that has been washed. Heck, there's even a chemical in pizza boxes that's can make its way into pizza! So yes, we knowingly ingest such things daily, let alone put them on our skin. And I'm thrilled you're buying more sun protection gear for yourself. That's means you're mitigating sun damage to yourself....truly a great thing! I'm happy you'll be safer on the water. Stay safe, friends!

The point here is not to be "right" but to dispel the falsehood that sunscreens "don't work". That's patently false. They work. And that's supported by large, peer reviewed data. Both here and around the world. Are there chemicals one might want to avoid for personal reasons? Just as I pointed out earlier, we are surrounded by a myriad of chemicals (or ingredients) on a daily basis that may be questionable, unethical, toxic or downright carcinogenic. And despite that, we make choices to use and/or consume these....or avoid them altogether. We look at the ingredients list, assess the risk and use (or avoid) as needed. Such is the case here. As you point out, if you find Oxybenzone or Octinoxate personally objectionable (study below, more conclusive research needed) they can be avoided by merely looking at the ingredient list, such as we do with food ingredients we choose to avoid. Not every sunscreen contains these chemicals. One needs to perform personal risk management to determine if the risk (in this case skin cancer) outweighs other potential risk. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7648445/ But that is definitely not the same as "they don't work" which is what I was objecting to.

That's definitely not what the "study" said to me. Did you read the "study" by chance or just the headline? This "study" tested a grand total of 51 products BTW. I'll Cliff Notes this so people can decide for themselves if this "study" is relevant and applies to them. The "study" tested 51 products that were formulated to meet the US sun protection standards. And those products met the US standard to the tune of 94 percent. That is the opposite of "they don't work" IMO. However, when testing the products designed under the US standard to meet the European standard only 35 percent met that standard; hardly a surprising result given they were not made to meet the European standard. Nor are some of the ingredients used to meet the European standard LEGAL for use/sale in the USA. Over 50 percent of the approved European chemicals (18 of 34) ARE NOT approved for use or sale in the US. FWIW, the products I use meet/exceed both standards, but are not legal for sale in the USA because of those ingredients. One has Japan origins, the other European. So in effect, some US products that easily meet/exceed the US standard are being pilloried because they don't meet a standard they were never made for using chemicals that are not allowed in US sunscreens. European sunscreens are classified as "cosmetics" with more lax regulation whereas US sunscreens are classified as "non prescription drugs" and subject to stricter regulations. Oh..And the group that did the "study" will gladly put you on their approved sunscreen list if you send them your sunscreen to test with a nice cheque. I have emailed them to see how much this privilege costs. To see what the great difference is between the 2 standards, it appears that how the UVA standard is measured is what differs the most. And that led me to another study (I fell down the sunscreen rabbit hole!! ). The lead author of the study, Dr. Steven Wang, formerly of Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and now Director of Dermatologic Surgery and Dermatology at MSK Basking Ridge is an expert (to say the least) in skin cancer. And in no uncertain terms says: "I work with melanoma patients every day, and I’m a big believer in sunscreen use. When used correctly, daily use decreases skin cancer and prevents signs of early aging." Enough said. I know this is long winded, but there are people on this forum affected by skin cancer and, IMO, more information on the topic is better than less information. So yes! Cover up! Use sunscreen! Stay safe!

Link to said "study", so I may be further educated.

We run into that on a daily basis, actually. And we consume many, many of these. Among our favorites are caffeine, alcohol, nicotine. And a char on a steak? Yep..carcinogenic. Virtually everything in a multi vitamin (or medicine) could harm (or kill you) consumed in enough quantity. Even drinking perfectly clean, safe drinking water could kill you. And that's the caveat. We typically see this stuff if minute (or safe) levels. And as pointed out, you run a greater risk pumping gas than you do wearing sunscreen...and I have a feeling you won't be gasoline free moving forward. The American Cancer Society as well as the American Medical Association both recommend sunscreen to mitigate the risk of skin cancer. And that's based on significant studies, statistics and data. IMO, you'd have to be an enthusiastic conspiracy theorist to think both of those organizations would be advocating the use of something cancer-causing to otherwise healthy adults and children. Once again, YMMV. I do agree with you in that some of these don't feel great on the skin. I am glad I've found one that feels darn near like water going on. Much more pleasant than the ones that feel like paste.

I forwarded this post to a dermatologist this evening. He said the following: "If that person knew how to interpret data, they'd know that you are many, many, many MANY times more likely to get cancer from the sun rather than actual sunscreens. The data is conclusive. And, as far as I'm aware, there has been no large peer reviewed study that suggests sunscreens are a statistically significant cause of cancer. And, in fact, most cancer societies and dermatologists suggest the use of sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk." "And if they are avoiding using sunscreens to mitigate cancer risk, I would suggest they stop putting gas/oil into their car/truck/boat IMMEDIATELY as the data is conclusive that the cancer risk from this is magnitudes worse than any sunscreen devised by man." After the fact, he sent this link: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1447210/ As with all things, YMMV.

The hoodies I like have a built in buff. I still put some sunscreen on my face, however.

The Imo Kamushi gets bit too! You can make your own by threading skirt strands into Cover Scat, Yamatanuki, etc