waveslider
Outdoorsman
I genuinely encourage you to follow that sense of wonder and look it up. The information exists out there, you just have read it yourself and not take mine or others interpretation of it as gospel.
Barbed Hooks...
- Thread starter billiebob
- Start date
I genuinely encourage you to follow that sense of wonder and look it up. The information exists out there, you just have read it yourself and not take mine or others interpretation of it as gospel.
The_Squid
Member
Your assertions are not reasons for removing barbless hook restrictions, but a justification for increased restrictions to make catch and release more effective. You sound like you’re arguing that barbless is useless if everything else isn’t perfect. Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
In my jurisdiction (Region 1 BC, Can.), all streams are single barbless hooks and a bait ban. Which seems to be what you’re arguing for.
Its unfortunate if a jurisdiction bans barbs, but not treble hooks or bait. But that doesn’t negate the fact that barbless hooks kill less fish.
waveslider
Outdoorsman
This is an untrue assertion. The mortality difference - between a barbed vs un-barbed single hook is so miniscule that it is undetectable in the +/- noise of mortality studies.
No, I am arguing that any stream that has a bait/treble hook restriction and requires single hooks has already done all the appreciable things to improve fish mortality rates. The act of mashing the barb of a single hook is performative theater and does virtually nothing to improve fish mortality (but apparently does a lot in terms of self-aggrandizations on behalf of virtue signalling mostly fly-fishermen)
aknightinak
Active member
This coincides with studies I've read: trebles, bait, time out of water are the real killers. One even looked at whether the fish was unhooked with intention or just shaken free of the lure. Spoiler: "shakers" as they were labeled in that study made out worse. Another study looked at the difference between mortality using J-hooks or circle hooks. The circle hooks were deemed better. Lots of variables beyond the barb.
Where I do find barbless hooks make sense is when considering the mouth damage I see in trout on our catch and release streams. Even when you try to back out a barbed hook carefully, it rips more than a barbless one, and a lot of the damage I see doesn't look like anyone tried to back the hook out as much as they ripped it out. I caught a Dolly a few years back with an almost 3 inch slit through its throat that had just missed the gills. I'm not sure how it managed not to flush all its food right back into the river, and the big rainbows I get on the middle Kenai any more have some of the knobbiest scarred mouths I've ever seen.
The_Squid
Member
Well, your assertion is simply incorrect. I guess when you’re working with a faulty starting point, the rest of it won’t be very informed either.
Existence of a barb (average mortality for barbless hook was 8.2%, average mortality for barbed hooks was 14.6%).
THE POINT OF HOOKS — Keep Fish Wet
The point of hooks By Sascha Clark Danylchuk Hooking damage is the the number one cause of mortality for fish that are caught-and-released. That’s not a surprising statement since hooks are the only commonality for all fish caught by recreational anglers. But what that statement doesn’t address
www.keepfishwet.org
A barb also makes it more difficult to release the fish, which means the fish spends more time out of the water, which, as you say, increases mortality.
Disparaging a community that does more for conservation efforts than most is rather…. unnecessary.
Last edited:
As a retired research scientist I couldn't resist looking into this. So, using the Google Scholar search engine I searched for "hooking mortality" and got a number of good hits. The most relevant publication was from 2011, published by the American Fisheries Society, titled: Determinants of Hooking Mortality in Freshwater Recreational Fisheries; a Quantitative Meta-Analysis. For those not familiar with the scientific literature, a meta-analysis is when researchers review multiple prior publications on a specific topic, compile, re-analyze and summarize the data and publish the findings.
This particular study was quite extensive, reviewing 107 prior hooking mortality studies (who woulda thought there were that many?) and extending for 30 pages. I focused on the results for the Salmonidae species (trout and salmon) as that's what I fish for. The relevant conclusions for Salmonidae state: mortality caused by artificial angling baits (11.6%) was significantly lower compared to natural baits (27.0%). Within the salmonid family, hooking mortality did not vary with hook type (single vs. multiple) but average mortality of Salmonidae caught on barbed hooks (15.1%) was was significantly higher than for fish caught on barbless hooks (8.6%).
Regarding Wavesliders assertions we can conclude the following from this publication;
Barbless hooks alone reduce hooking mortality by about half.
Treble hooks are not more deadly than single hooks.
Bait does cause higher mortality than artificial lures, but only by about two-fold, not four-fold.
The publication did not address time out of water.
Regarding time out of water, since it is easier to remove a barbless hook than a barbed hook, it would be reasonable to assume that barbless hooks would reduce time out of water, so this may partly explain the reduced hooking mortality with barbless hooks.
The discussion about single vs treble and bait vs lure is moot for me as I live in Nevada. Nevada regulations for catch and release waters state: artificial flies and lures with single barbless hooks only so that pretty much covers everything.
waveslider
Outdoorsman
If you say so. But Shill and Scarpella answered this years ago.
" For flies and lures combined, mean hooking mortality was 4.5% for barbed hooks and 4.2% for barbless hooks. Combination of test statistics from individual studies by gear type via meta-analysis yielded nonsignificant results for barbed versus barbless flies, lures, or flies and lures combined. We conclude that the use of barbed or barbless flies or lures plays no role in subsequent mortality of trout caught and released by anglers. Because natural mortality rates for wild trout in streams commonly range from 30% to 65% annually, a 0.3% mean difference in hooking mortality for the two hook types is irrelevant at the population level, even when fish are subjected to repeated capture. "
Unnecessary and Truthful are not mutually exclusive. For the record, I have never as far as I know, ever held a spinning rod in my hands to fish. I started fly fishing at about age 4 and although an accredited wester river fishing guide, I only fish recreationally (but extensively). That being said, I obviously have no problem calling my fellow anglers out on their idiocy when I see it. And there's plenty of virtue signalling free roaming in the fly fishing world and the internet about the perceived benefits of barbless midge nymphs. Which - for the record - anyone with a brain and critical thinking skills should realize is an amazingly ridiculous assertion.
I thought this was going to be a civil discussion among intelligent individuals... until I read the last line in Wavesliders post #19. Performative theater? Virtue signaling? That is beneath contempt. I guess he lashes out when he's proven wrong.
I've blocked him, I don't need to see any more of his garbage.
I've blocked him, I don't need to see any more of his garbage.
waveslider
Outdoorsman
Those aren't the only factors covered in the (various) studies though, were they?
waveslider
Outdoorsman
Damn, that must have stung. You didn't prove me wrong, you proved to me you either wouldn't (or couldn't) fess up to the original assertion. Which was - and still is - there are so many factors that contribute to fish mortality to a greater extent than barbless hooks. Which for the record even your meta-analysis states plainly but you chose to not include in your comments.
The fact that people - mostly fly fishermen - have simply begun to cling to barbless hooks as a way to claim some strange moral high ground is counter productive. Case in point - water temps have far more to do with fish mortality than a barbless hook - yet you don't hear many people extolling the virtues of stopping fishing midday do you?
Hell, even keepemwet propaganda doesn't even list barbless hooks as a key factor. SImply a component of one of the key principles.
The_Squid
Member
It’s not me that says so.
Science doesn’t stop 30 years ago with the study that happens to agree with your opinion.
A more recent meta-analysis of several studies shows different.
waveslider
Outdoorsman
And by the same notion, you don't get to disregard previous studies that don't agree with yours.
So, one says it matters and the other doesn't. Or does it?
What are the key takeaways from your study? I'm curious if you even read it.
So, one says it matters and the other doesn't. Or does it?
What are the key takeaways from your study? I'm curious if you even read it.
Joker
Adventurer
To each theirs own but I started crushing my barbs down a few years ago, yea I've lost a few fish over it but so what I mostly catch and release anyway. My son caught a couple of bonnet head sharks a few weeks ago and one completely swallowed the hook, reached in with a long set of pliers and it easily came out and away he went.
IdaSHO
IDACAMPER
Definitely an interesting discussion.
And reading and commenting already, honestly treble hooks and bated hooks were not even on my radar.
Just because we never use either, ever. But everyone's needs are going to be a bit different.
Light test line, small bobber and #10 barbless fly (typically mosquito) has proven to be the go-to for most backcountry lakes.
Which is what we fish, 99% of the time. And by "we" I mean the wife. She's the one that loves to fish!
And how the heck could we have a fishing topic without photos???
And reading and commenting already, honestly treble hooks and bated hooks were not even on my radar.
Just because we never use either, ever. But everyone's needs are going to be a bit different.
Light test line, small bobber and #10 barbless fly (typically mosquito) has proven to be the go-to for most backcountry lakes.
Which is what we fish, 99% of the time. And by "we" I mean the wife. She's the one that loves to fish!
And how the heck could we have a fishing topic without photos???
The_Squid
Member
1 - It’s not my study…. I had nothing to do with it. But, generally, it’s better to look at the more recent analyses that build upon the work of the older studies, or show that the older studies are not valid any longer. Science doesn’t stop.
2 - No. The older sing study says the difference is negligible and the other is a meta-analysis, which analyzes the results of several studies.
3 - The results show that barbed hooks are roughly twice as likely to result in mortality.
4 - ok. If you think I’m dishonest, move on.