The reader hook was attached directly to the meter probe, and only acts as an extension of the meter probe, but it is the same metal as the hook that is attached to the lure. This is how I achieve my 'zero base line'. If I used a copper wire, as an example, the voltage reading would have been different, and inaccurate. There is no other voltage source used except for the anode interacting with the lure metals. My tuned spoons are designed to give off a .6 or greater voltage in sea water. I use a different alloy for my fresh water spoons, and end up with a range of .35 to .55 volts depending again upon the mineral content. In fresh water, cutthroat trout respond to voltages starting at .17 volts. When I initially did my chinook testing over a 5 day period, I had recorded 78% of the fish took the tuned lure over a plain identical one when trolled side by side. I then pushed the voltage as high as I could, to see if the fish would be spooked away. I was up to 1.2 volts and the fish still favored that lure. The one factor that I do not have the equipment for, is to measure the amperage. Saying that, the higher voltage that I had may be equivalent to a lower hull voltage with greater amperage (milliamps). I need to find some talking fish, and ask them questions.
I think I mentioned that earlier about Daniel Nomura and his master's thesis. Reading it might make one vomit trying to make sense of the data. His findings are interesting, but flawed. He is applying different voltages to different lines at the same time, and all in close proximity, and not accounting at all for the boat's signature. The one for sure conclusion was that, anytime there was a negative voltage present, no fish were caught on those lines.
I'm just reading through the fine print now. They did cover the boats voltage in the methodology. AND did paired trolls not charging 1 line and using that as a control. Switching up which was the control and changing voltages for different effects. Also in the methodology.
I have had lots of anglers consider voltage to be the same as magnetism. You can use a magnet to make electricity, and you can use electricity to make a magnet, but without the rotational motion within the components of armatures, magnets, and commutators, they are really different animals.
I agree my friend!
Thanks for the comment. I actually posted earlier that the amperage (current, milliwatts) is the one variable that I do not have the equipment to measure, and that it may make the results differ from boat to boat. My lures would be quite a low wattage, where a black box powering the stainless wire may have different, stronger effects on fish. As far as creating voltage between your cannonball and the stainless wire, I have tested this theory all one winter and concluded that - NO CONTACT - NO VOLTAGE. I did this by using a stainless 1/2 inch bolt, 3 inches long and in salt water. I also used a magnesium wire and progressively moved the magnesium closer to the bolt to see if there was any visible reaction happening. I started with a spread of 2 ft, and each time I moved them closer, I left them sit for up to 2 weeks at a time. There was no obvious reaction at all until I eventually laid the magnesium on top of the ss bolt. Within 15 minutes, there was an island of bubbles on the surface as well as on the magnesium. I used magnesium because it is way more reactive in salt water than zinc. Before we start debating this, you should all pick up the next issue of Island Fisherman magazine and read my downrigger article. It is very closely related to your statement.
I doubt anyone on the forum has equipment to measure this; values are too low. You need to trust the science and act accordingly.
Your thought process is appreciated. I like it when people are diggers.
I`m not sure what you are referring to, but, as in my lures that seem to require about a 5 to 1 surface area in order to increase the catch rate, boat owners should strive to achieve the same ratio or greater on their boats. The 5 to 1 being 5 parts cathode surface area and 1 part anode surface area. The galvanic rating of both anode and cathode will partially dictate the voltage, as will the amounts of each, the conductivity of the electrolyte, and to some degree, the water temperature. A galvanic corrosion cell with virtually any ratio, one sided or not, is still a galvanic corrosion cell. If the anode`s galvanic rating is not high enough, or the surface area is to small relative to that of the cathode, the cathode will also corrode away. I am trying to achieve a balance of cathodic protection, yet still having the boat or lure give off enough current to entice the fish, as opposed to repelling them. I looked at the link, and it seems to say exactly what I am saying.
I think we have strayed off of the intended path here. But, any electrical current generated by a boat at trolling speed would be minuscule. If voltage were accumulated in a hull, even at high speeds, there would be grounding straps at the docks to connect to before stepping off the boat, kinda like helicopters becoming charged with static electricity.
I appreciate your comments. I find that the best way to get a message across, is through relaying experiences, mine or other anglers. Here is another. When I bought my second troller, it had a wooden mast. After the first year with it, I upgraded to an aluminum one. My main house batteries started going dead, and there was a continuous draw of.06 amps. Not a lot, but significant enough. I was on a silvaculture charter with a father & son team in the central coast that winter, so had lots of time to hunt this down. It turned out to be that my old spacecraft looking tv antenna was wired backwards, and had been for many years. The positive power was going directly through the ground (mounting bracket), which didn't matter while it had a wooden mast. I was glad to find that before I fished the boat next season.
