Flourocarbon tippet worth it?

[Bob Loblaw]

Two things come to mind:

1: If the guy who developed the stuff says one of the main marketing features of the line is a flat out misrepresention of the truth, why is the marketing allowed to continue? My guess would be it's not worth litigating?

2: If flouro lasts 4,000 years, how long does mono last? Because if both their degredation is measured in thousands of years, I don't see it as an issue. Another ice age will be, or starting to occurr, and line in rivers will be the least of our worries as a civilization. If one really cares about the environment, they wouldn't use either. To be honest, I find this argument rather silly. We all use products everyday that adversely effects the environment and lasts hundreds if not thousands of years. Heck, driving our vehicles is partially blamed for global warming. Global warming! An actual changing of our global environment. But I don't see a bunch of flyfishers walking along the highways and backroads to thier favorite fishing venues. And there's concern about small pieces of practically invisible broken tippet left in trees and river rock?

Mono starts to breakdown if left in the sun as little as 24 hours. Thats why mono tippet has a sell by date and fluoro does not. If you're not concerned about "invisible broken tippet in trees and river rock" for 4000 years, then i guess we just have different values and there's not much else to discuss. And nobody is claiming to have a zero impact, a zero carbon footprint on this earth, we all do. All Im saying is that I try to make choices to limit any needless and permanent impacts...not using fluoro being just one small one. I

[TyV]

As a rule of thumb nylon loses 25% of it's strength under every 100 hours of sunlight. Thin monofilament likely degrades faster than that. Find any year old nylon mono on the river bank and it will shatter when you tug on it. Fluoro is insert and does not degrade. Fluorocarbon is used to line toxic waste drums and carries a minimum shelf life of several hundred years.
Both products make equally good fishing line and while the benefits of one over the other are debatable (and largely based on urban legend), the potential consequences are not.

Sanity, knowledge and common sense, what novel concepts! Thanks Ralph for always seeming to bring the needed perspective and knowledge to most discussions!

[WinterrunRon]

Bob,

Not attempting to shut down conversation at all, just the opposite. Trying desperately to steer it away from all this publishing talk! )

I value your opinion as I would any other. I think our values are the same, it's just where we choose to focus them. I honestly don't see the longevity of tippet material as a factor in deciding whether I use it or not. Simple as that. I know we disagree and there's thousands of others that surely agree with you. But it doesn't change my opinion... yet.

"potential consequences". I guess that's where I'm at regarding this longevity thing, Ralph. What is the "potential consequence"? I don't see a consequence at all, and too further describe it as "potential", well, I'm back to "what's all the fuss about" mentality.

I know you're much more of a naturalist and protector of the environment and all than I am, no disrepect. But my feeling is there will be a lot more "stuff" here on earth a hundred years from now that our future generations will be dealing with and and I'm quite certain whatever is here in 3013, the focus of discussion won't be regarding the 5X piece of flourocarbon some flyfisher broke off a hundered years ago. The way things are headed, the discussion will more likely be, what is a fish?

I'm keeping an open mind...

[wineslob]

I'm more worried about all the wads of mono from spin casters.