Does UV on salmon lures really work?

searun

searun

Well-Known Member
I've been spending a fair bit of time experimenting with various paints and ways to repair my older beat up spoons, given the darn things have become so expensive these days. Been hearing variety of views about how painting over existing UV coatings might damage the effectiveness of the spoon, so spent a bit of time researching the effects of UV on fishing lures given the UV craze tackle manufacturers have been on for a while now.

Surprisingly what I'm starting to see is UV light may not penetrate very far, if at all, down to depths we would be fishing. I found another interesting article on the subject:

https://www.in-fisherman.com/editorial/uv-light-on-ice-and-open-water/369755#replay

Going to do some further research to try to better understand the benefits (or not) of finding a UV clear paint I could add to my spoons. Anyone out there have anything more concrete on the merits or not of UV?
 
If visual confirmation is a strong factor in a fish striking or not it definitely makes a difference. I could write a several page response backed up by my findings over the past 18 months making plugs, however the simple answer is yes. As always fishing in the right place in the right time is far more important though!
 
searun said:
finding a UV clear paint I could add to my spoons. Anyone out there have anything more concrete on the merits or not of UV?
Click to expand...
PN&T & Harbour Chandler both sell a transparent lure tape made by WTP that is Very Effective.

harbourchandler.ca

WTP Flasher/Lure Tape

Marine & Fishing Experts since 1985! Largest chandlery on Vancouver Island. Boating & fishing products along with friendly staff for a pleasant experience. 🌊⚓🎣
harbourchandler.ca harbourchandler.ca

I can remember seeing a transparent UV paint on shelves it smelled really strong but haven't seen it for a while.
 
Jack James of Radiant Lures in Victoria BC back in the day when I was a kid as far as I know was one of the earliest purponents and advocates and promoters of UV colour properties on the substrates of his lure ranges. Everyone I ever discused this topic with at that time (over 40 years ago) said Jack was a quack and that fish don't react to it. I 100% agree with Jack's findings and many of the long historic authors that have written about it and from my very own experience in lure development of my own products and for many numerous other manufactures over the years. The product in reality is called Optical Brightener and comes in a powder form. I have been using it since 2004. When combined in colour tones and clear coats there is a huge difference from that of the flat tones. If you want to keep it simple use UV Blast. It is available in a semi perminant spray or a stronger finish coat that can be brushed on or thinned to spray. Don't let anyone fool you into beleiving that they have a proprietary finish, as that would be a misleading statement, especially when all the components are common shelf products sold to anyone who wishes to purchace.

If you are curious about the top two colours that attract fish most, they are white and black. The top two enhancers are glow and Optical Brightner. That's all folks. The rest is all up to you. Cheers.
 
Dogbreath said:
PN&T & Harbour Chandler both sell a transparent lure tape made by WTP that is Very Effective.

harbourchandler.ca

WTP Flasher/Lure Tape

Marine & Fishing Experts since 1985! Largest chandlery on Vancouver Island. Boating & fishing products along with friendly staff for a pleasant experience. 🌊⚓🎣
harbourchandler.ca harbourchandler.ca

I can remember seeing a transparent UV paint on shelves it smelled really strong but haven't seen it for a while.
Click to expand...
Yes its very effective, but I don't think this is because of UV. The kinetic tape is super reflective and adds a great deal of flash in multi colour. Because it is clear, that allows the underlying lure or flasher colour to show through. Its this feature that makes it deadly IMO. I've been having custom flashers made using the clear kinetic tape for several years now, and also been adding tape to just about everything from spoons to chovie teaser heads.

The more I research the science behind this, it is becoming increasingly apparent there isn't enough UV that makes it down to the depths (and water) we usually fish to be a factor. Water - there's too much algae and other biological particles in our water, which effectively blocks transmission of UV light. UV when passed under a black light will of course light up, but there's no black lights down below our vessels.

Been having a lot of fun bringing back some of my beat up old spoons back to life, and would jump on the UV paint band wagon if I can see some solid evidence its going to be a game changer. So far only finding stuff that questions the merits of UV paint on lures.

Here's another link I just came across - https://doclures.com/facts-about-uv-paint-fishing-lures/ .... and a few quotes:

  • Confusing the issue is the phenomenon of UV fluorescence, which is when UV light striking a lure is not reflected, but is absorbed and then re-emitted at a lower wavelength in the visible light range. This is what happens when so called UV lures are placed under a “black light” (UVA).
  • The theory that UV fluorescence makes lures easier for fish to see at depth is usually based on the mistaken belief that UVA penetrates deeper in water than other wavelengths. This is repeated numerous times in the fishing literature, but the scientific literature suggests otherwise. In reality, UVA does not penetrate to anywhere near the depths that some visible wavelengths do (especially those associated with blue, green and purple colours). Paints that glow under a UVA light are therefore very unlikely to have much, if any, benefit to lure fishers, especially when fished deep.
  • It is important to note that penetration of UVA is drastically reduced when the sun is not directly overhead, when there is cloud cover or haziness in the air, when there is any kind of plankton, silt, colour or particulate material in the water, when there is shade or when there is a ripple on the water surface. Low levels of UV mean low excitation of molecules and less fluorescence.
  • My advice? If you love lures with UV paint and are convinced they make a difference, keep using them. Having confidence in your lures is massively important. But if you’re on the fence about UV paints (or you’re a flat-out sceptic like me), focus on the things that really matter like sound, shape, action, vibration, flash, diving depth and so on. Either way, you’ll catch fish.
 

Penetration of UV Light in Ocean Water​

UV light penetrates the ocean water column differently based on its wavelength, with shorter wavelengths being absorbed more quickly by water and organic materials. The absorption of UV light in seawater occurs primarily due to:

  • Water itself: UV light is absorbed quite efficiently by water, particularly UVC and UVB.
  • Dissolved organic matter (DOM): In coastal waters, DOM absorbs UV light, reducing penetration.
  • Suspended particles: Particles in the water can also scatter and absorb UV radiation.
In general, UV light penetration in ocean waters is limited, with significant reduction occurring at depths greater than a few meters, depending on the water's clarity and the concentration of dissolved and suspended materials.

Fish Vision and Prey Detection​

Many fish possess the ability to see into the ultraviolet spectrum. This capability is advantageous for several reasons:

  1. Enhanced Contrast: UV light can enhance the contrast of prey against their background, making them more visible, especially in murky waters where visible light attenuation is high.
  2. Detection of Urine and Mucus: Some fish, like those in the trout and salmon families, have sensitivity to UV light, which helps them detect the UV-reflective substances such as the urine or mucus of potential prey.
  3. Finding Mates: In some species, UV-reflective patterns on fin and body surfaces may play a role in mate selection, as individuals within species can reflect different amounts of UV light.
  4. Predation and Hunting: Fish that hunt near the water's surface can benefit from UV vision, as UV light can reflect off the bodies of organisms, including zooplankton and smaller fish, assisting in locating them more easily.
Overall, the combined factors of UV light's limited penetration in water and specific adaptations of certain fish species allow for specialized hunting and ecological roles that depend on their ability to perceive UV light.

In short the UV properties are not set for the depths however in combination of methods such as combining substrates that offer light refraction, combined with flat and uv colour tones and glow. The offer becomes effective at all depths. Cheers

*Edit to add: Always remember in many cases when finishing lures with various paints and coatings that "Less is More". ;)
 
Last edited:
Yup, exactly same research I'm finding. Given our water conditions here on west coast, UV doesn't likely penetrate far below the initial surface layers.
 
searun said:
Yup, exactly same research I'm finding. Given our water conditions here on west coast, UV doesn't likely penetrate far below the initial surface layers.
Click to expand...
That is not exactly correct. It certainly can and does get depreciated depending upon what's in the water and the depth targetted. It's not that it will ever be as bright as a black light and it never will be, to which I have always stated when selling in a retail environment. A black light is the perfect tool to help indentify whether or not a product carries any optical brightning enhancers or not. It will also show the flat tone layers that were applied to the substrate of the lure. What optical brightners do for salmon and trout is offer a closer to real presentation of your lure or bait as the closest representation of food they may strike because of the slight illusion that it offers that similar to the creatures they eat which have a natural type of brightening that can be shown through the optical luminesence of many creatures and phosphorescence. Salmon and trout along with other species can see this. So in a lure that combines numerous optical techniques can be a greater trigger than that of flat colour tones at variuos depths. We also know at certain times of year, some flashers out perform based upon high light refraction, strong UV(Optical Brightners) and glow. For instance the Hot Spot Plaid 690 flasher was a game changer in the indusry at certain times of the year, particularly in the summer months when migratory salmon were close to home. The flasher at the time was coined "Disco Ball". I was the first rep to run with it and no store wanted it because at the time it looked so silly and gimmicky. Hot Spot did not even know that the clear blade had optical brightner in the plastic untill the following year. When combined with the super high light refractive tape it truly lit up in the water. Ya I know, no big deal accept that was when I dicovered that salmon hit flashers. Everyone I ever talked to at that time said "Oh BS Rob! Your full of it." I was fishing Alberi Inlet near Dunsmere. I was running hot pink coyote spoons on all four rods and all four had the Hot Spot 690 flasher. I ran 5 foot tails at that time. We got about four or five savage hit and runs and then off. My hooks never not bite a fish, they are sticky sharp. It wasn't until I figured out the damage to the blades was caused by fish teeth. My depths were 30, 50, 75, 90 all depths had fish that day. we were limited within two hours on that bite after shortening the tail to 24 inches. Because of this my fishing was changed forever. A friend of mine never believed that the fish were hammering the flasher until a few years later when he had a similar event happen. Five years later was the start of the RVP Tomic plug series. It started with a Plaid clear UV finish and a silver standard underbelly. In the second season of plug pattern recipe designs I ended up buiding the final recipe that the same friend not believing me about salmon hitting flashers, had introduced me to a new tape called clear Jellyfish back then, which is actually now known as iridescent. The recipe now has glow underbelly. The basic recipe changed the game for TOMIC. All three components to the recipe are what made it successful. TOMIC's action was already a strong attraction, but adding high light refraction, optical brightner and glow to almost any colour pattern made them irresistable. We did similarly to flashers from both Hot Spot and Oki. The colaborations were flying for a number of years.

Anyway I don't care how anyone fishes, it's all up to the individual and what they feel confident in. Keep your lines wet. I won't be limiting myself anytime soon, ever. :)
 
Last edited:
Here's one of my custom flashers along with the Lure Jensen Anchovie Roll lure we worked with the Rapala team to design. Clear kinetic tape over a solid coloured blade. I have them in a variety of colours to match the water. They get nailed from time to time by fish also.

IMG_1932.jpeg
 
searun said:
Here's one of my custom flashers along with the Lure Jensen Anchovie Roll lure we worked with the Rapala team to design. Clear kinetic tape over a solid coloured blade. I have them in a variety of colours to match the water. They get nailed from time to time by fish also.

View attachment 113735
Click to expand...
Yes, on HOT Spot, that is a combination that PNT ordered for you. Brian at OKi had it on his flashers before anyone else. Don at Oki was at the forefront of innovation for Brian's company when it came down to finishing. Derek Krefting was a huge influence in the area of flasher colour combinations with numerous companies. Lots of other anglers have also had a ton of input into forming the colours available in the market. I on the other hand am saving all my thoughts on product finishing for the gear that I will be producing in Victoria.

Needless to say many of us in the industry have had quite a lot of input to help direct local and markets abroad. Be proud of that.
 
from what i can tell if you were trying to make the ideal lure, say to match a herring it would reflect all the spectrums of light that a herring would.

Why just a plane silver spoon works too is it would just reflect all spectrums including uv, depending on the depth it would reflect the visible light at that depth.

the standout is glow as it seems some bait has bioluminescence or the movement the bait though plancton or what emits bioluminescence. so more visible at depth.

From what i can tell uv seems more important in freshwater and in shallower water.


anyways it seems that UV does not deter bites, so at worst it's doing nothing and at best its helping
 
searun said:
I've been spending a fair bit of time experimenting with various paints and ways to repair my older beat up spoons, given the darn things have become so expensive these days. Been hearing variety of views about how painting over existing UV coatings might damage the effectiveness of the spoon, so spent a bit of time researching the effects of UV on fishing lures given the UV craze tackle manufacturers have been on for a while now.

Surprisingly what I'm starting to see is UV light may not penetrate very far, if at all, down to depths we would be fishing. I found another interesting article on the subject:

https://www.in-fisherman.com/editorial/uv-light-on-ice-and-open-water/369755#replay

Going to do some further research to try to better understand the benefits (or not) of finding a UV clear paint I could add to my spoons. Anyone out there have anything more concrete on the merits or not of UV?
Click to expand...

I just spent some time looking, besides fishing in a clear lake or the tropics the uv spectrum does not penetrate that far. This is assuming it’s sunny day.

Off the coast of ice land I read there was a report that measured it penetrating less then a meter

It also seems like the benefits of UV in shallow water/clear wateris noy hat it attracts the fish but rather blinds it from your lure. Similar to bait fish in shallow water with its bright scales blinding predators.
 
PEETZcanada said:
Yes, on HOT Spot, that is a combination that PNT ordered for you. Brian at OKi had it on his flashers before anyone else. Don at Oki was at the forefront of innovation for Brian's company when it came down to finishing. Derek Krefting was a huge influence in the area of flasher colour combinations with numerous companies. Lots of other anglers have also had a ton of input into forming the colours available in the market. I on the other hand am saving all my thoughts on product finishing for the gear that I will be producing in Victoria.

Needless to say many of us in the industry have had quite a lot of input to help direct local and markets abroad. Be proud of that.
Click to expand...
Actually other way around, I asked Deryk to get the custom kinetic flashers built for me as a special order. A few back and forth attempts before OKi got it right. My custom order was through Deryk as he had the relationship with Brian. Its still a custom run even today, not that it really matters because many of us have great ideas on tackle.
 
i seen this online and i think this is the study the author is talking about https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cne.20879

"Most research indicates that salmonids have cones to detect UV light when small, but as the fish grow these cones gradually disappear. Their diet in their early period of life consists of zooplankton and other small creatures that reflect UV light, but as the fish get larger they can no longer filter such food with their gillrakers. This is given as the main reason why no UV receptors are found in fish above 2 years old.

Other studies, however, have shown that new temporary UV receptors are created annually to coincide with the spawning migration and that these are used to detect polarised light as a navigational aid.

This would mean that returning seatrout and salmon do have some ability to see UV but I have yet to see any evidence that would lead me to believe that this is used for prey detection. It would seem unlikely, both because this is the time when their appetite is suppressed and, if it was a useful tool for finding food, it is logical that they would retain it throughout their life."



"The retinas of many vertebrates have cone photoreceptors that express multiple visual pigments. In many of these animals, including humans, the original cones to appear in the retina (which express UV or blue opsin) may change opsin types, giving rise to new spectral phenotypes. Here we used microspectrophotometry and in situ hybridization with cDNA probes to study the distribution of UV and blue cones in the retinas of four species of Pacific salmon (coho, chum, chinook, and pink salmon), in the Atlantic salmon, and in the rainbow/steelhead trout. In Pacific salmon and in the trout, all single cones express a UV opsin at hatching (λmax of the visual pigment ∼365 nm), and these cones later transform into blue cones by opsin changeover (λmax of the blue visual pigment ∼434 nm). Cones undergoing UV opsin downregulation exhibit either of two spectral absorbance profiles. The first is characterized by UV and blue absorbance peaks, with blue absorbance dominating the base of the outer segment. The second shows UV absorbance diminishing from the outer segment tip to the base, with no sign of blue absorbance. The first absorbance profile indicates a transformation from UV to blue phenotype by opsin changeover, while the second type suggests that the cone is undergoing apoptosis. These two events (transformation and loss of corner cones) are closely associated in time and progress from ventral to dorsal retina. Each double cone member contains green (λmax ∼510 nm) or red (λmax ∼565 nm) visual pigment (double cones are green/red pairs), and, like the rods (λmax ∼508 nm), do not exhibit opsin changeover. Unlike Pacific salmonids, the Atlantic salmon shows a mixture of UV and blue cones and a partial loss of corner cones at hatching. This study establishes the UV-to-blue cone transformation as a general feature of retinal growth in Pacific salmonids (genus Oncorhynchus). J. Comp. Neurol. 495:213–235, 2006. © 2006 Wiley-Liss, Inc."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Dogbreath
Len Thompson Tackle Buys Hot Spot & Apex-Still to be Produced in Canada
Replies
4
Views
738
Steplift
Steplift
C
Stinky old tackle boxes - how to clean up?
Replies
28
Views
4K
chille51
C
-Jim-
Chasing Pinks in Indian Arm - Guidance Please
Replies
40
Views
7K
-Jim-
-Jim-
acrowe
Jigging or Drift Fishing for Salmon
Replies
122
Views
22K
acrowe
acrowe
B
Stolen from Facebook !!!! Sun Derby Fraud
Replies
4
Views
2K
Clint r
Clint r
Back
Top