Giant Squid Rig

[zippyFX]

The giant squid has always been an interest to me.... i have a passing interesting in cryptozoology (not the bigfoot, chubacabra, nessy type of cryptozoology). I came across this diagram this morning and thought it would be useful for someone planing a fishing trip on the North Pacific off the coast of Japan.



See details at: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/...index.html

Though not a good quality fishing report the rig may be useful to someone

Though I don't understand why the pair of boots in diagram b is useful

My two cents:
- They obviously did not play the giant squid enough....
- They likely would have been better off using a a large reel (think Wicked Tuna) rather than trying to catch it on a Jug Line; Is there such a thing as Red Neck Japanese? From the culture that brought us advance fishing techniques for pressured waters like tengo rods and super cool floats for carp this seems like they have tried brain surgery with a sledge hammer.
- If they had used a reel they could have set the drag properly and played the fish for as long as it took. Like what are the odds it's break for cover and snaging the line at 1000 meters?
- Likely the biggest chance of a break off (the line not the tentacle) would be another tentacle cutting the line with the toothy part of a sucker from another tentacle.

I toyed with putting this under Article and Resources but I will leave that to MAs discretion.



Watching Wicked Tuna and Wicked Tuna North vs South is no substitute for real/reel fishing. sigh.....

[MuskieBait]

Squids, from speaking with friend who have caught Humboldt Squid on rod and reel, are very strong animal. They do pull hard. However, I'm not sure if a feisty squid was the reason the arm broke off.

At least one reported squid species is known for its ability to willingly break off arms. In the case of the Giant Squid, it is possible that the squid broke off its tentacle to escape capture.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/notroc...NI8F8a0xek

Regarding your question on jug line vs rod and reel, you have to consider the odds of catching a giant squid. Using only rod and reel on even a large research vessel, it is difficult to increase the odd of catching if the lines only centered around the vessel. Using jug lines, lines can be deployed over a much wider area with less resource requirement. Lines can be left "unattended" for a few days as well to give enough time for the squid to encounter a bait.

If you use heavy enough lines or ropes, you really don't need any drag at all. There is no need to play an animal if the line can handle the stress and the winch has enough torque to simply winch the creature in. When you watch commercial fishing videos, do those vessels use any reel with drags to pull in a thousand tonne catch of fish?

Rods and reels are really only used to give the fish a fighting chance to break free. If you were fishing with an intent to keep, there is no need for rods and reels.

The reason the boats in Wicked Tuna use rods and reels is due to the Bluefin Tuna fishing regulations there. Those licenses owned by those boats are given out with restriction on gear. You've also seen harpoons used on the show. Was there a rod and reel involved? Were they not able to bring an harpooned tuna in BY HAND?

By the way, here's something interesting...it's called "jack pole" and it has been used for a very long time. Good to see it is still in practice somewhere today.

http://youtu.be/YsfLkGqNPTw

Also, Hawaiian tuna fisherman had used jug lines for YEARS to fish for tuna. They are known for their superior handlining skills, bring in 100-200lb tuna on by hand on those jug lines.

[Eli]

No comment on targeting squid with rod and reel...
...but as someone with an interest in cryptozoology, you'd probably be interested in knowing that there is far more evidence for the present existence of North American forest apes (big foot, sasqautch, etc.) than there is for the past existence of numerous species of dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals for which there is scientific strong scientific consensus.

[OldTimer]

(02-04-2015 01:36 PM)Eli Wrote:  No comment on targeting squid with rod and reel...
...but as someone with an interest in cryptozoology, you'd probably be interested in knowing that there is far more evidence for the present existence of North American forest apes (big foot, sasqautch, etc.) than there is for the past existence of numerous species of dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals for which there is scientific strong scientific consensus.

Cool.......... please provide links or reference points/sources - for apparent massive quantity of info re tangible skeletal remains and fossils of sasquatch..

... smile.

[Eli]

OT, there are hundreds of "accepted" species of prehistoric animals for which the collective evidence amounts to nothing more than a few teeth or a hip bone or a verabrae. The total sum of evidence for many of these beasts would fit very neatly in a shoe box...and based on said evidence, palaeontologists are quite comfortable extrapolating what these creatures looked like, how they behaved, etc. etc.

Contrast that with the hundreds of eye witness accounts, foot prints, hair samples, photo and videographic evidence, as well as indigenous knowledge (west coast First Nations consider the Sasquatch as real as the wolf and the bear) regarding 'bigfoot'.
As with dinos, there is a lot of evidence for the past existence of forest apes (http://www.macroevolution.net/prehistori...uF53F9ic). I along with many others believe that populations of creatures similar to these exist today.

[OldTimer]

(02-05-2015 12:51 AM)Eli Wrote:  OT, there are hundreds of "accepted" species of prehistoric animals for which the collective evidence amounts to nothing more than a few teeth or a hip bone or a verabrae. The total sum of evidence for many of these beasts would fit very neatly in a shoe box...and based on said evidence, palaeontologists are quite comfortable extrapolating what these creatures looked like, how they behaved, etc. etc.

Contrast that with the hundreds of eye witness accounts, foot prints, hair samples, photo and videographic evidence, as well as indigenous knowledge (west coast First Nations consider the Sasquatch as real as the wolf and the bear) regarding 'bigfoot'.
As with dinos, there is a lot of evidence for the past existence of forest apes (http://www.macroevolution.net/prehistori...uF53F9ic). I along with many others believe that populations of creatures similar to these exist today.

Opinions may vary.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/07/01/big...a-analysis

   

Cheers,

OldTimer

[Eli]

Sure, they 'vary' as to the existence of mountain lions in Ontario.

[OldTimer]

(02-05-2015 02:55 PM)Eli Wrote:  Sure, they 'vary' as to the existence of mountain lions in Ontario.

Only with those not reading the news:

http://toronto.ctvnews.ca/big-cat-caught...-1.1910607

   

Cheers,

OldTimer

[Eli]

Yeah I heard about that last year and the overall speculation (spin) from those in know was that this was either someone's escaped pet or a zoo escapee. The MNR's official position is that these animals do not exist in Ontario; no established population (despite, you know, having caught a live one...).

It is what it is, OT. The coelacanth was thought extinct without a doubt until it was found out that it was very much alive.

A new species of primate was discovered in Colombia in 2010. Also in 2010, a new primate species was discovered in Burma. It's rare, but it happens.
Believe what you want.

[OldTimer]

When the MNR (as most of the Ontario ministries) redesigned and revised all of their website last year - cougars were recognized (in multiple documents) as currently living in Ontario due to new evidence and a capture – yet classified as “endangered” (previously was extirpated).

https://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-e...ion-cougar

https://www.ontario.ca/environment-and-e...nd-cougars

Hey – I’d be thrilled to see totally undisputable proof re sasquatch existence in North America………. But as you say – “it is what it is”.

Cheers,

OldTimer