Mouth damage

[poledark]

Chesh, I consider 3oz plenty heavy enough to cause mouth damage, try to imagine a 3oz weight hanging from your bottom lip!

 

I do use 3oz or more for most of my carping and sometimes go up to 4oz when putting stringers across the wind.

 

Trouble with heavy weights is that you need powerful rods to cast with and the combination of these leads to mouth damage.

 

Suttton Lsa was a good illustration of this, the fish had immaculate mouths despite being caught many times over the years, but most of the members used 1.5/2oz weights and light rods.

 

 

As the fashion changed and new members came along many of them brought their heavy rods and rigs and so the pattern was established of 2.5/3oz weights becoming the norm.

Result????????????? mouth damage.

 

Den

[Rob Ward]

Good point Den!

[Peter Sharpe]

It doesn't sound like very sound research all of a sudden, does it? Anglers are using heavy leads, rods of a type previously used for winching cod through the breakers; all this magnified by the use of non-stretch braid. Then they decide that the damage is actually caused by barbless hooks. I have been using 2.25lb tc rods with 12lb mono line, and even with 3.5oz leads on the Trent, I have not even once seen any signs of the damage supposedly caused by barbless hooks. This same setup caused barbed hooks sometimes to bury themselves almost out of sight. The country is suddenly awash with bad science and naive research, produced as a result of jumping to simplistic conclusions. I will certainly take any research published by Sparsholt with a pinch of salt from now on.

[Rob Ward]

You must have been lucky is all I can say.

[WickerDave]

On a related note (but lighter tackle perspective) from the "Avon rods" thread on the Coarse Forum, do Avon rods cause more mouth damage than stiffer rods ?

 

There have been several instances in the last few years where I have caused mouth damage to carp, which concerned me, but I never plucked up the courage to post a question on this.

 

The background for the post on this topic I never posted was...

 

"I play the fish with a loosely set drag for the strike and initial run, and then tighten the drag a little and use the drag or backwind for the remainder of the fight. I don't think I try to bully the fish and always give line where possible, unless the proximity of snags prevent it.

 

Tackle is a 1.25 T/C Avon rod with 6lb or 8lb thin diameter mono. Hook sizes are normal 8s or 10s and carp 6s, always barbless. Bait is just on the hook, not hair-rigged. Methods vary from mid range method feeder and surface fishing to close range float fishing. Venues are smallish commercial stillwaters. Target fish are any species or size that will take a non-boilie bait, with some carp in the low doubles and plenty of 6lb+ fish."

 

So is some mouth damage inevitable, or am I doing something wrong?

[Steve Burke]

Peter, you obviously have strong views on this subject as your posts are usually balanced and objective.

 

Here though, have you critisized the Sparsholt report without actually reading it? If you haven't read it but do so in the future, I wonder whether you'll still denounce it because it doesn't accord with your own experiences? This certainly would be bad science. If you have read it, please let us know and accept my apologies.

 

I haven't read the report myself, but have seen summaries of controlled experiments from across the Atlantic (Turek & Brett, 1997, and the studies at Yellowstone in the 60s amongst others). These suggest that there is no significant difference in mortality rates between barbed and barbless hooks.

 

As to mouth damage, opinions are divided, and I therefore fall back on my own experience. This is that both barbed and barbless hooks can cause damage, but "microbarbed" hooks are the best compromise on waters that are fished by experienced anglers. Having said that, I accept that whether a hook has a barb or not isn't the only consideration.

 

BTW, I'm no doubt one of the "extremist" fishery managers that Peter refers to! On the Coarse Lake at Wingham I ban barbless hooks above size 10. My experience shows that, for whatever reason, such hooks can kill perch. This is probably because perch, unlike carp, have vital organs near the surface of the throat.

 

I don't have any ban on barbless hooks on the Carp Lake as it doesn't contain perch. However, I do state that I prefer microbarbs. One of the reasons is that, wherever feasible, I'm against bans and encourage free choice. This works well on a syndicate water as I have almost complete control of members and their behaviour.

 

I don't have a specific rule about the use of heavy leads, although I do have the following at the front of the rules: "every member must do his or her utmost to avoid damage to fish, wildlife or the site."

 

However, I haven't seen any of my current members using 5oz leads. Perhaps this, coupled with the very low fishing pressure is why Wingham fish don't have deformed mouths.

 

Finally, Peter, I'm heartened that you say you'll stick to your principles and so refuse to fish waters where the use of barbless hooks is enforced. I just wish others would do the same, both on this and other issues.

 

[ 29. April 2004, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Steve Burke ]

[Rob Ward]

I thought it was Barbless above size ten you'd banned, Steve?

[Steve Burke]

Whoops, typing error, now corrected. Thanks, Rob.

[Peter Sharpe]

Remember that I don't actually use manufactured barbless hooks, always preferring to flatten the barb on barbed hooks that I buy because of the pattern (Drennan Boilie Hooks or Fox Series 2).

I don't see how this ought to make a measureable difference, but it's just concievable that it might. Don't worry Steve, I haven't been perch fishing for years, so I will probably take your advice if I do. It would obviously be instant death for any perch that managed to grab one of those mediaeval jerk baits. The huge barbs on those don't stop them going clean through a pike's head (as Coarse Fisherman constantly reminds us, quite graphically every winter).

 

[ 29. April 2004, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: Peter Sharpe ]

[Billy the Fish]

Personally speaking, i blame the new strain of fish that are present in so many carp ponds these days. They are bred to grow quickly, but still arent physically formed and toughened up, a thing that only age can bring. On young fish, the moths tend to be much softer and this would encourage hook pulls and subsequently mouth damage.