Shoot Off Of Barbed/De-Barbed Hooks

[long bow]

In light of the conversation about barbed v. de-barbed can anyone fill me in on the reasons why some states and various locations have issued "barbless areas?" More of a 'what is the administration rationalization' behind such a law? A lot of times agencies or legislation have to give their reasons behind decisions and am wondering if its based on science or public policy?

 

[Ard]

Hey there,

I can't answer that but welcome to the forum, I hope you will continue posting and becoming a part of the discussion here. Your post here demonstrates that you may be with us for awhile. Good post,

Ard

 

[woodrivertroutbum]

Barbless areas are usually catch and release only areas, barbless does less damage to the fish.

 

[long bow]

Barbless areas are usually catch and release only areas, barbless does less damage to the fish.

Woodriver,

thanks, I kinda figured that a catch and release only area would definitely have those restrictions. I was wondering though if the FWP/FG had any justifications for that kind of restriction? The previous threads about barb or no barb seem to say that the jury is still out on what is "best" for fish.

 

[baseman1]

In the spring here on the 'chi we have a barbless restriction to give the black salmon a chance to release themselves.

 

[williamhj]

I was wondering though if the FWP/FG had any justifications for that kind of restriction? The previous threads about barb or no barb seem to say that the jury is still out on what is "best" for fish.

As you have seen on other threads, some people believe there is justification for it while others say the justification is sketchy. Some debarb everything, while I've read others who say it makes it worse for the fish, especially with large hooks. Some will likely post links to information on research / writings for both sides of the issue. Often the discussion leads to conflicting experts, though it can be interesting reading. If your question is about the reasons for FWP/FG decisions, you might have some success contacting your local folks and seeing what they say their reasoning is. Different states and provinces may have different reasons and decisions for specific streams may be based more on lobby group's pressure on politicians than on reason.

 

[dillon]

Gill-net shift, barbless hooks, single sturgeon limit approved by Oregon for lower Columbia, tributary angling | OregonLive.com

Here's an article on the non-Tribal gillnet ban from the Lower Columbia. Sports fishers must use barbless hooks for Salmon and Steelhead as part of the agreement.

 

[fredaevans]

Barbless areas are usually catch and release only areas, barbless does less damage to the fish.

Exactly. Or to expand just a bit (thinking Steelhead and Salmon) you may not be able to keep a 'Native fish' so the barbless allows for a quick/clean get-away at release.

What 'ticks me off' is save for very large (1/0 to 4/0 for salmon) or very small (10's and 12's) they're damned near impossible to find. 'Allenfly' just posted up barbless size 10 and 12 and put a note over to Justin asking if he was going to carry size 4 to 8's for Steelhead sized flies.

He's looking into that.

 

[Guest1]

The biggest factor in mortality with barbed vs. barbless in Salmonoids is probably the time it takes to get a barbed hook out vs. barbless. These are fish that do not do well if held out of water for a surprisingly small amount of time. In most fly size hooks, the damage done is hardly worth mentioning the difference. Once you get up to bigger hooks like you would have on a big spey fly or something there can be a reasonably detectable damage amount difference. If you can unhook the fish while in the net and it's head in the water you will do more for saving the fish than going barbless. In the best study I ever saw on it, the mortality rate difference was probably within the margin of error. You have to keep in mind there a large number of factors involved in survival rates.

 

[wjc]

The biggest factor in mortality with barbed vs. barbless in Salmonoids is probably the time it takes to get a barbed hook out vs. barbless. These are fish that do not do well if held out of water for a surprisingly small amount of time.

I agree with your second sentence above completely, Dan - especially as the water warms. And the first makes sense too.

But I wonder if a study were done where those using barbless hooks switched with all those using barbed hooks (assuming a difference in mortality rate) whether the mortality rate would follow the angler group and not the type of hook used. Personally, I suspect that mortality rates would follow the group, not the hook type.

I say this because I think the majority of anglers (edit) voluntarily using barbless do so primarily for exactly the reason you said - they want to get the fish back on its way quickly, and are generally acutely aware of the proper ways to handle (and indeed, fight) fish as well.

Whereas the barbed hook group may not universally hold those tenets formost on its priority list. For sure there are lots of exceptions, Silver.

Just a thought to ponder.

 

[long bow]

Hey everyone,

thanks for the responses! Reading the post about wardens running cotton balls through barb tips basically leaves me with one remedy; even though I crimp my flies (unless fishing for dinner) I'll just tie and use ones debarbed out of the package when fishing in those regulated areas.

 

[rockriver]

Another study on hooks: https://research.idfg.idaho.gov/Fis...d-Release Trout Fisheries--A Social Issue.pdf

 

[Guest1]

In the best study I ever saw on it, the mortality rate difference was probably within the margin of error.

Thanks for posting the link Rockriver. It shows a difference in mortality of 0.3%. As I said, that is probably well within the margin of error. Which is why the paper says "Restricting barbed hooks appears to be a social issue."

In my post I had also mentioned that Salmonids do not do well being held out of water for any amount of time. The survival rate drops significantly in Salmonids when the time held out of water goes from 30 seconds to 60 seconds. Which is why I said in my previous post that the time out of water for unhooking a fish with a barbed vs. debarbed hook has more to do with mortality than damage from the hook.

I have always looked at debarbed hooks as politics and not science. Unfortunately there is now days more politics in science than science in politics.

 

[mikel]

I have always looked at debarbed hooks as politics and not science. Unfortunately there is now days more politics in science than science in politics.

There was another thread not long ago about this stuff. I don't particularly doubt the science in an overall look at mortality...but I know that when I fish barbless:

I am able to release fish faster and with less stress for BOTH of us
When I hook myself, the results are less awful

I also play fish aggressively and land them quickly with constant pressure, so I have never felt I "lost fish" because I was barbless.

These are my anecdotal findings and they lead me to fish barbless.

 

[FlyFlinger2421]

I agree that the way the fish is handled while removing the hook is the most important factor. My personal experience is that hooks of around size 14 and smaller are quite easy to remove with a hemostat and do little if any damage to the fish. Larger size hooks can do considerable damage to mandibles, maxillary and premaxillary bones, in some cases actually removing the bones entirely! I have seen many fish in catch and release areas with these bones missing and they seem to be doing fine, so perhaps even seemingly serious damage done by larger barbed hooks is not significant.
It is imperative for rapid hook removal to use a hemostat especially for small hooks.

 

[Guest1]

There was another thread not long ago about this stuff. I don't particularly doubt the science in an overall look at mortality...but I know that when I fish barbless:

I am able to release fish faster and with less stress for BOTH of us
When I hook myself, the results are less awful

I also play fish aggressively and land them quickly with constant pressure, so I have never felt I "lost fish" because I was barbless.

These are my anecdotal findings and they lead me to fish barbless.

The science has the mortality within the margin of error. Almost always it is very close but there is at least one study where barbless scored less well than barbed. (Hunsaker et.al. 1970) I doubt barbless is worse but as I said there are a lot of factors involved in the survival of a fish. Where you said you can unhook them faster, that is if anything the only factor that will end with higher survival rates. Even at that, if you are a person who is fast at it in the first place you are not really gaining anything. There are tons of studies out there and none show a real increase in survival.

If you want to fish barbless that is up to you, but as a law forcing people to do it and fine the snot out of you if you snag a tiny bit of wool, that's politics and fund raising.

 

[long bow]

...but as a law forcing people to do it and fine the snot out of you if you snag a tiny bit of wool, that's politics and fund raising.

I couldn't agree with you more. Reading that article left me pretty blow away and concluding that we can simply chalk up the barbed and using a net all to personal preference.

Next step is to enact a no-hook region? Please no...

 

[wt bash]

Hell if for no other reason I pinch the barb just to save my hackle!

 

[fredaevans]

The really odd part of this is how hard it is to find barbless hook right off the shelf. Where do I get mine? Fly size, have to order them out of the UK.

 

[dean_mt]

Exactly. Or to expand just a bit (thinking Steelhead and Salmon) you may not be able to keep a 'Native fish' so the barbless allows for a quick/clean get-away at release.

What 'ticks me off' is save for very large (1/0 to 4/0 for salmon) or very small (10's and 12's) they're damned near impossible to find. 'Allenfly' just posted up barbless size 10 and 12 and put a note over to Justin asking if he was going to carry size 4 to 8's for Steelhead sized flies.

He's looking into that.

Fred, the Daiichi 1190 goes down to 8 for sure (and all the up to 24, but if you consider 12 very small then forget about it!) and I've never looked for anything larger. Might be worth a search, they are nice hooks.