bye-bye-barbless

[Fishmyster]

I have sportfished for 50 years and it has always been about the experience, not sustenance. Its called Sport fishing for a reason. Sport is about the experience. I've never killed a steelhead, yet spent countless hours pursuing them knowing I would put them back. The reason to preserve sportfishing for this and future generations is to preserve the experience, and the ability to take home a fish or two is an enhancement to that experience, but not the raison d'être for participating in it. Its kind of lazy to just blanket accuse anyone with an even slightly opposing view as "already signed on with the ENGO's" . The moment our argument is that sportfishing is about sustenance we are easy targets for cuts, greedy middle aged men with expensive toys just wanting to kill as many fish as we can. Having reasonable, sustainable limits that contribute to making the sport fishing experience enjoyable is why we are fighting for access, not to fill freezers.

It's not all about you ya know. Many people don't take butt much pleasure just tugging on salmon all day as you might. To many people fishing is about harvesting sustenance and to angle all day harming more than necessary would be considered unethical.

 

[Fishmyster]

Fishmyster, the way you desire our future sport fishery it goes like this: assume regs are 1 salmon any species per day, 6 salmon total per year: Charter with 4 guests leaves the dock at 6 am, early Aug, pink year. Lines down at 6:30, 4 pinks in the boat by 7:15 am, done, maxed out, guests arrive back at dock at 7:45 am. Well that was a fun day! What do you charge for that as a guide? Full day fare? Can't sell another charter that day on such short notice. Hm. The local angler catches a couple winter springs in February, another couple keeper in April, then the first wave of pinks comes through in early July and voila, he is done for the entire year salmon fishing because he had to bonk the first 6 keepers. Great fishing season! That's how sportfishing would look like according to your principles. Come on, give your head a shake! It will be in all our interest to hone in on c&r techniques and learn to live with it, enjoy it and maintain a fishing business with it. If you can't wrap your head around it then you better make alternative plans, boy, because we will be at this junction very soon.

You sure have some wild comments to what would or could happen on my charter boat and my principals. Maybe you should know me before implying such.
My name is Ken. What is yours?

So I am wondering your thoughts. Who is the more ethical sportsman? Is it the person who spends a day of fishing catching many salmon and has no plans to harvest one but just pleasure of fooling salmon to impale themselves on a hook or is it the person who goes out with the intent to harvest and keeps the first legal fish allowed and stops fishing???

 

[lazylump]

Interesting article, but I still think barbed hooks would be brutal on shakers. Like August in my area when you can’t even get the lines down without catching a little coho. With barbless hooks I never touch them, just shake them off gently.

 

[Fishmyster]

Interesting article, but I still think barbed hooks would be brutal on shakers. Like August in my area when you can’t even get the lines down without catching a little coho. With barbless hooks I never touch them, just shake them off gently.

You bring up an important and overlooked aspect of barbless hooks. It is the efficiency in which you are able to sort thru the shakers that has you back in the water faster impaling more fish. If you had to physically handle each fish with care to remove the hooks you lose lots of fishing time. Lets say you have a barbed hook and land a nice keeper Chinook which you netted. Now you spend ten minutes out of the water getting your hook out of the net and loose fishing time. How about the barbed hook gets caught in you sweater, lost fishing time. What about the days when an angler gets a barbed hook in the hand? Lots of lost fishing that day! Now lets say you have barbless hooks and you just want to catch one fish to retain but every time you stop the boat to real in the keeper Chinook the hook falls out! Now how many shakers do you impale in continued attempt to catch that last Chinook with barbless hooks? Only in political optics does barbless hooks conserve salmon. It was simple the, "green" thing to do. In the function of fishing for salmon they have little conservative benefits.

If barbed hooks were allowed I believe it would help me lessen the impact of my business of assisting people to harvest their legal limit of salmon.

 

[searun]

I think I will stick to barbless hooks in fisheries where there is risk of encountering fish that are not our target species or if there are small critters around that we need to release. Its simply easier to get the hook out with the least possible damage. I think one fishery where barbed hooks should be allowed is the Alberni Inlet Sockeye fishery - there are no other non-target species around and quite frankly there is usually no conservation issue. Its a unique fishery where I think barbed hooks are a good idea. Other fisheries, not so much.

 

[Fishmyster]

I think I will stick to barbless hooks in fisheries where there is risk of encountering fish that are not our target species or if there are small critters around that we need to release. Its simply easier to get the hook out with the least possible damage. I think one fishery where barbed hooks should be allowed is the Alberni Inlet Sockeye fishery - there are no other non-target species around and quite frankly there is usually no conservation issue. Its a unique fishery where I think barbed hooks are a good idea. Other fisheries, not so much.

You may keep using barbless where there are abundant shakers because it will get you back in the water faster. Although you may feel better by easily removing the shakers the end result of impaling more fish per hour of fishing is not a conservation benefit.

 

[lazylump]

You may keep using barbless where there are abundant shakers because it will get you back in the water faster. Although you may feel better by easily removing the shakers the end result of impaling more fish per hour of fishing is not a conservation benefit.

Well what if most of the little shakers hooked with barbed hooks have to be handled and or mangled while removing hooks? Then if most of the barbless hooked shakers are released without handling or mangling them and they go on to survive, then there is a benefit.

 

[Fishmyster]

Well what if most of the little shakers hooked with barbed hooks have to be handled and or mangled while removing hooks? Then if most of the barbless hooked shakers are released without handling or mangling them and they go on to survive, then there is a benefit.

Absolutely you are being nicer to the shakers by using barbless and not roughing them up while being released. It is the fishing time you loose while struggling to release with a barbed hook is where many other shakers are saved. The original impalement is where the most fatal damage is caused and not the removal or mangling process. If someone wants to just catch two springs and his land rate is 50% barbless but 90% on barbed then how many extra shakers get poked in the process of catching the two springs? It's lots some days! Every time you loose fish that would have been retained you are adding more time and incidental casualties to your day of fishing. It can be assumed that some of the larger Chinook that got away are fatally injured and that ads unnecessary impact too.

If someone was only intending to c&r then barbless makes sense but in a harvest fishery not at all.

 

[Islander57]

I think the type of rigging plays more of a part in mortality than the type of hook used. i.e. I believe mortality is probably higher with the use of baited hooks, cut plugs, teaser head etc. Fish tend to take the bait deeper in the mouth, and tandem hooks allow for more physical harm, especially when using a treble as a trailing "stinger" hook. Single hook lures and plugs generally get lip hook ups and the gill area is less exposed to the hook. I also thing poor fish handling techniques contribute to an elevated mortality rate. I stand by the use of barbless. All fish intended for release never leave the water. I find it quick and easy to release using my gaff. Unfortunately, there is and always will be a mortality rate, regardless of barbed or barbless. But I do believe the mortality to be lower with barbless when combined with proper fish handling methods.
These are studies results done in Georgia Strait in the 90's

British Columbia--- Gjernes (1990) observed post-hooking mortality for 152 chinook salmon caught by researchers trolling flashers and hootchies in the Strait of Georgia. Lures were rigged
18
Table 8. Summary of recent studies of hooking mortality of chinook salmon caught in recreational fisheries. Table 8 is the image thumbnail

with two size 4/0 (recreational scale) single, barbless hooks in tandem, 5 cm apart. The fish caught ranged from 35-82 cm, and were held for 24-72 hr. Mortality for all fish combined was 9.9% (Table 8). Fish in the 45-62 cm range had observed mortality of 8.2%, compared to 12.5% for smaller (35-44 cm) and 14.0% for larger (> 62 cm ) chinook salmon (Table 8). However, these differences were not statistically significant. All fish that died had hook injuries to major blood vessels associated with the gills or heart. There was no detectable difference in mortality between fish hooked with one of the tandem hooks compared with fish hooked with both hooks.
Gjernes et al. (1993) reported hooking mortality for sport-caught chinook and coho salmon in their first year of ocean residence in the Strait of Georgia. Fish were less than 30 cm in fork length. Angling was by volunteers aboard a charter vessel trolling lures with one of four hook configurations: barbed single, barbed treble, barb less single, and barbless treble. Fish were held for 6-30 hr. Observed mortality for chinook salmon was 30% (Table 8). Most fish that died succumbed within 15 min of landing. Injury location was identified as the most important explanatory variable. Treble hooks had lower mortality than single hooks, and barbless hooks had lower mortality than barbed hooks.
Puget Sound--- In 1989, NRC (1991) conducted a hooking mortality study in the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Volunteer anglers and biologists participated in catching the fish from small boats, using tandem mooching rigs with single-point barbless hooks. Fish were held from 24-48 hr. A total of 67 chinook ranging in size from 31-100 cm fork length were captured. Of these, 6 (9%) died during the observation period (Table 8). Most fish that died succumbed within a few hours of landing. Injury location was the only variable found to be significantly associated with mortality.

 

[Fishmyster]

In my angling career of nearly 35 years I have pulled the hooks out of a few hundred thousand fish. My eyeball guess is that an average of 10% fatality for ocean caught trolled fish. The mortality on shakers was definitely higher than larger fish. Every study I have read implied hook location was the most important factor in survival which is what I have witnessed many times. Just because a shaker slides off your barbless hook and swim away doesn't mean it is going to grow to adult with one eye! I have not seen a study where there is a comparison of barbed hooks being significantly more damaging than barbless or that removing the barbed hooks caused major increase in fatality. If a barbed vs barbless study was done with consideration to increased fishing time after fish are lost and efficiency of time in the water it will clearly show that barbless hooks add substantial more impact to the resource than barbed hooks would in retention fisheries. Yes even when there is lots of shakers.

I could tell everyone this but until it is on paper in a study nobody seems to believe or care.

 

[Rockfish]

Just because a shaker slides off your barbless hook and swim away doesn't mean it is going to grow to adult with one eye!

It also does not mean that they will not grow up. A few years ago I posted about catching a larger healthy robust salmon that had a healed scar over the location of one missing eye. I have also caught and seen some salmon with very substantial healed injuries like missing a third of their tail and some meat, likely from predators.

They are surprisingly robust animals. I was reminded of this when clipping the little ones at the local hatchery. There were some younger children also clipping salmon with there families which was a good experience for them. However they did drop a fair number on the table and even the concrete floor and squished them with their fingers will trying to pick them up. I was expecting that I would see at lease a few floaters, poor swimmers or dead ones in the tank they were returned to, but they all seemed to recover from this harsh treatment.

The one thing I think would result in death would be those that bleed out from badly ripped and bleeding gills, but lets not over state the case for salmon being killed from being hooked, (whether barbed or not) or from being poorly handled (scale loss from dry hands etc).

 

[Fishmyster]

It also does not mean that they will not grow up. A few years ago I posted about catching a larger healthy robust salmon that had a healed scar over the location of one missing eye. I have also caught and seen some salmon with very substantial healed injuries like missing a third of their tail and some meat, likely from predators.

They are surprisingly robust animals. I was reminded of this when clipping the little ones at the local hatchery. There were some younger children also clipping salmon with there families which was a good experience for them. However they did drop a fair number on the table and even the concrete floor and squished them with their fingers will trying to pick them up. I was expecting that I would see at lease a few floaters, poor swimmers or dead ones in the tank they were returned to, but they all seemed to recover from this harsh treatment.

The one thing I think would result in death would be those that bleed out from badly ripped and bleeding gills, but lets not over state the case for salmon being killed from being hooked, (whether barbed or not) or from being poorly handled (scale loss from dry hands etc).

I too have seen all kinds of amazing survival signs on some fish but fish reduced to one eye at a young age have a far less chance to making it to the river escapement stage. Either way 10% is the average barbed hooks or not. Barbless hooks just cause more injured fish in a retention fishery.

 

[Fishmyster]

OK This has been bigging me reading all of this. Hey ken so barbless on ocean salmon and catch/release is not ok but steelhead on the river are different? Last time I checked you fished lots of c&r rivers for fun and sport........double standard.? I fish and have guided on barbless for a while and i think hook size has way more to do with mortality than barbless. Come on if the only reason you want to go salmon fishing is to fill the cooler and worry about mortality then just dive your guests to safeway.....

Its not about filling the cooler it's about lessening my impact. Salmon hook capture in the ocean has a mortality rate of about 10%. Steelhead capture in rivers with drift gear has a mortality of about 3%. When you factor in all the shakers ocean trolling fatality skyrockets river fishing. Steelhead fishing is all catch and release and a totally different type of fishermen then harvesting civilians fishing in the ocean. I don't have a double standard but am able to see both sides. My brother thinks I am an idiot for going steelhead fishing for a fish I would never keep. He says why would you hurt those fish for pleasure? He doesn't understand that part of the hunt. He does appreciate harvesting from the sea and knowing where his food comes from though rather than packaged at Safeway. I can appreciate the outlook others who prefer to just harvest. You, like others can call me a hypocrite, scumbag, dirty, greedy guide just trying to rape the resource for an easy dollar but I am trying to lessen my impact while employing myself as a guide. It does bother me when I have to release lost of shakers. I don't let guests releaset any legal fish which are badly hooked so they can catch a bigger one. The big difference is harvesting vs C&R. In harvest fishing barbed will kill more based on my field experience. I will sign my name behind that statement.

I don't personally fish or guide steelhead much anymore. The last few years I have spent more time snorkeling, invertebrate sampling and water quality assessments than casting for fish. The populations are presently at a low era so I don't bother impaling them for pleasure much anymore. I been getting more enjoyment by understanding why the populations are restricted in abundance.

I will ask you the same question others seem to coward away from. Who is the more ethical sportsman? Is it the person who spends a day of fishing catching many salmon and has no plans to ever harvest one but just pleasure of fooling salmon into impaling itself on a hook or is it the person who goes out with the intent to harvest and keeps the first legal fish allowed and stops fishing? Will you answer this question and put you name behind it of are just like the rest on here who like to lash out words implying I have low morals then run from the conversation?

 

[wildmanyeah]

Barbless hooks just cause more injured fish in a retention fishery.

Keep point being in a terminal retention fishery.

The First Nations argument against marked selective fisheries is similar to Ken’s barbed argument. To many killed wilds being released.

They would rather us have like an annual limit of 5 fish and mandatory harvest of caught fish. No playing with food, just harvest. If harvest is the goal the barbed hooks make sense.

Would barbed hooks make sence in a C&R
FISHERY, probably not because they would probably effect the time out of the water. I am not even sure that it would be worth removing the hook might be better just to
Cut the line.

 

[Fishmyster]

It is written in the fisheries act where, "it is illegal to waist fish that is suitable for human consumption". This is an honorable rule that gets broken often by most fishermen during a shaker fest. If there is a reasonable solution it could be that the size limits be removed and it be recommended to keep any severely damaged fish as part of the daily salmon quota regardless of size. I would be ok with that and anyone I fish with could be convinced it is the right thing to do.

 

[mikep]

I will answer your question, no issues, i'm not shy on this. You have presented a interesting scenario because I can be both of those fisherman that you described. I try to be ethical as I possibly can and have different strategies to achieve that goal. I will when fishing for certain species in certain locations go out kill my limit and return home. (sockeye typically, sometimes local Chinook). In this case I use the most lethal and effective gear possible, big hooks heavy leader species selective gear in both size and color. Mission is go...kill...home. If you start seeing any by catch, adjust to eliminate this.

On the other hand I really enjoy hunting the biggest Chinook I can find, usually a long way from home adventure style fishing. I approach this in much the same way that I steelhead fish. I release 95% of the fish I catch on these trips and this is where I become the catch and release angler in your question. On these trips I will drop to a single 2/0-4/0 hook in a cut plug/whole herring, use heavy mainline/leader and an appropriate rod for the prey. I only fish off of downriggers as mooching is too lethal. We miss a good number of fish with this setup but it really reduces hooking mortality. Heavy gear allows the fish to brought to the boat quickly, a flick of the gaff and the fish is released from the hook. last years trip we probably hooked 50-60 fish over 4 days. I would say 1 fish was questionable on survival. I guess I could reduce my impact further by stropping fishing after 4 of 5 fish C&R, for the day. Sometimes we do this.

I think that I apply an ethical approach to fishing and like to think that others could think like this, care and treatment of fish goes a long way in their survival.


So Ken in a perfect world where we could have a low impact fishery you would support the following: No size limit, barbed hooks allowed, kill the first fish that you catch towards your limit then you are done.

I get that and respect your opinion, that would probably be lower impact, if we are going to go this far then why not just shut down sport fishing then we would have zero impact.

I am sure that your 10% impact can be reduced other ways as well. When your in lots of shakers......move. You could also use smaller hooks, look at all of the steelhead that you are able to hook and land on #2-1/0 single hooks. I think a max shank length/hook size, dare I say it circle hook reg would go a long way in reducing mortality. I know that you have about 3x the guiding experience which I have, 10 years vs 35 and I do respect your position but you have to see and know that there are other options to reduce mortality. Just killing your limit with the first fish you catch then your are done for the day is not the only solution.

I like discussions line this. The reason I deleted my post last night was because it was a little harsh and maybe to directed, it doesn't really contribute in a debate such as this. I am all for taking care of these fish while still getting out and enjoying all of the BC coast. If you ever want to chat further my phone is always on 604 671 0109..

Mike Panz

 

[Fishmyster]

Thanks Mike for the sensible response.

I was pushing hook size regulations back 25 years back but was always told by MOE that it was too difficult for application in the regulations. There already was a hook size restriction in place for burbot fishing so it was not that it was difficult but that regulation was not what the regulators wanted. My favorite salmon friendly gear is tandem claw stile hook in 3/0-4/0 on hootchy. With those there is enough grab to hold a big fish when on a high speed run but they are small enough to not totally destroy the shakers. The steelhead style claw hook also has a shorted tip so does less damage than siwash hooks. That set up had very low damage to juvenile fish. Problem with those is once you take the barb off you loose most of your fish when the line goes slack. I been using a 4/0 siwash. It would be different if I was fishing in calm waters with expert anglers but this not the case. Sometimes I have 80+ year old anglers, women or children who are half sick and just hanging on for dear life in big swells. I could yell at them to reel faster or just grab the rod and real the fish in myself but that isn't much fun for them or professional on my side. It has become popular for many guides to just keep the boat trolling full speed because they know if the boat is stopped so the guest could reel the fish in it would likely fall off. I have watched a 20lbr get towed half a mile before getting landed! How much fun is that?

Some think if you get into shakers a fisherman could just move. Well that sounds easy but if you move from the fishing grounds to somewhere where there is not salmon whatsoever you wouldn't be a very good guide or popular to fish with ever again. Many days we are restricted by weather and cannot just pick up and move. Then what? Should I just tell guests, "sorry, there are too many shakers around so lest just stop fishing". Sometimes there are shakers everywhere and it should be considered a good thing. Lots of shakers means there is a future batch. I still feel that in the process of sportfishing for a legal limit of salmon my impact would be lessened by barbed hooks. Less fish need to be damaged to obtain the desired quota. If I had guys who want to c&r then it would be full barbless as usual. It should be optional for the people who are not into c&r but harvest. That would be a regulation which made sense.

Thanks again Mike for being a stand up guy. I will try give you a call someday. If you are ever in Ukee in the summer give me a call and I will share where the fish are and shakers aren't too bad. 250-720-5118

 

[fish brain]

Its not about filling the cooler it's about lessening my impact. Salmon hook capture in the ocean has a mortality rate of about 10%. Steelhead capture in rivers with drift gear has a mortality of about 3%. When you factor in all the shakers ocean trolling fatality skyrockets river fishing. Steelhead fishing is all catch and release and a totally different type of fishermen then harvesting civilians fishing in the ocean. I don't have a double standard but am able to see both sides. My brother thinks I am an idiot for going steelhead fishing for a fish I would never keep. He says why would you hurt those fish for pleasure? He doesn't understand that part of the hunt. He does appreciate harvesting from the sea and knowing where his food comes from though rather than packaged at Safeway. I can appreciate the outlook others who prefer to just harvest. You, like others can call me a hypocrite, scumbag, dirty, greedy guide just trying to rape the resource for an easy dollar but I am trying to lessen my impact while employing myself as a guide. It does bother me when I have to release lost of shakers. I don't let guests releaset any legal fish which are badly hooked so they can catch a bigger one. The big difference is harvesting vs C&R. In harvest fishing barbed will kill more based on my field experience. I will sign my name behind that statement.

I don't personally fish or guide steelhead much anymore. The last few years I have spent more time snorkeling, invertebrate sampling and water quality assessments than casting for fish. The populations are presently at a low era so I don't bother impaling them for pleasure much anymore. I been getting more enjoyment by understanding why the populations are restricted in abundance.

I will ask you the same question others seem to coward away from. Who is the more ethical sportsman? Is it the person who spends a day of fishing catching many salmon and has no plans to ever harvest one but just pleasure of fooling salmon into impaling itself on a hook or is it the person who goes out with the intent to harvest and keeps the first legal fish allowed and stops fishing? Will you answer this question and put you name behind it of are just like the rest on here who like to lash out words implying I have low morals then run from the conversation?

I always keep a legal bleeding or hooked through the eye fish. I'm not generally a fan of catch and release, although I have done it from time to time for Steelhead. I try not to unless my buddies are really pushing to to go with them. When I encounter large numbers of shakers, I try to take reasonable steps to avoid them, but it's not always easy to do. Unfortunately, there are so many grey areas, that if you implemented a strict If A happens, then you do B set of rules, then there would be very few days you could actually fish. So my approach is do the least harm under the circumstances.

 

[The Jackel]

I will answer your question, no issues, i'm not shy on this. You have presented a interesting scenario because I can be both of those fisherman that you described. I try to be ethical as I possibly can and have different strategies to achieve that goal. I will when fishing for certain species in certain locations go out kill my limit and return home. (sockeye typically, sometimes local Chinook). In this case I use the most lethal and effective gear possible, big hooks heavy leader species selective gear in both size and color. Mission is go...kill...home. If you start seeing any by catch, adjust to eliminate this.

On the other hand I really enjoy hunting the biggest Chinook I can find, usually a long way from home adventure style fishing. I approach this in much the same way that I steelhead fish. I release 95% of the fish I catch on these trips and this is where I become the catch and release angler in your question. On these trips I will drop to a single 2/0-4/0 hook in a cut plug/whole herring, use heavy mainline/leader and an appropriate rod for the prey. I only fish off of downriggers as mooching is too lethal. We miss a good number of fish with this setup but it really reduces hooking mortality. Heavy gear allows the fish to brought to the boat quickly, a flick of the gaff and the fish is released from the hook. last years trip we probably hooked 50-60 fish over 4 days. I would say 1 fish was questionable on survival. I guess I could reduce my impact further by stropping fishing after 4 of 5 fish C&R, for the day. Sometimes we do this.

I think that I apply an ethical approach to fishing and like to think that others could think like this, care and treatment of fish goes a long way in their survival.


So Ken in a perfect world where we could have a low impact fishery you would support the following: No size limit, barbed hooks allowed, kill the first fish that you catch towards your limit then you are done.

I get that and respect your opinion, that would probably be lower impact, if we are going to go this far then why not just shut down sport fishing then we would have zero impact.

I am sure that your 10% impact can be reduced other ways as well. When your in lots of shakers......move. You could also use smaller hooks, look at all of the steelhead that you are able to hook and land on #2-1/0 single hooks. I think a max shank length/hook size, dare I say it circle hook reg would go a long way in reducing mortality. I know that you have about 3x the guiding experience which I have, 10 years vs 35 and I do respect your position but you have to see and know that there are other options to reduce mortality. Just killing your limit with the first fish you catch then your are done for the day is not the only solution.

I like discussions line this. The reason I deleted my post last night was because it was a little harsh and maybe to directed, it doesn't really contribute in a debate such as this. I am all for taking care of these fish while still getting out and enjoying all of the BC coast. If you ever want to chat further my phone is always on 604 671 0109..

Mike Panz

Care to elaborate on the quote in red, i mooch, would never even think of running off a downrigger and have no problem on C&R mortality?????

 

[advTHXance]

Probably an unpopular opinion, and I havent fished with a barb for salmon in like 20 years or however long the regs have been in place, but I dont think its a big deal to fish barbless. If you maintain good pressure on the fish I would assume that the barb doesnt even come into play most of the time. Part of the challenge, and the sport, of sportfishing is giving the fish a fighting chance. If he does that perfect headshake and he gets off, so what, good fight and congrats to the fish. Hes earned his freedom for the day. I feel like barbs are a crutch for bad fishermen and meathunters. Dont @ me!

I know from experience that its much easier and less painful to remove a barbless hook from a hand rather than a barbed one. If the goal is to cause less trauma and harm to the fish we are releasing, then using smaller hooks than you might normally is a good way to reduce the number of eyeball hookups.