mouth, money and barbless hooks

[Bradford Angler]

It is an old and argumentative subject so it is not my intention to bring to life the old barbed vs barbless threads.

However, after thinking about it and posting my views on several occasions . . the time came for proposals at my associations next AGM. I have proposed barbless hooks for stillwaters (upto size 6, after a 6 barbs also can be used - I am not a carp banger and leave that to someone else).

 

I will come up against some pretty agressive "traditional" anglers and it would be ideal for me to attend with my proposal with as many facts and figures as possible.

 

Can anyone tell me if any of the major societies, clubs or big names in angling have sponsored or carried out any "structured" research into the barbed vs barbless debate ? and if they had any beneficial output . . . . it is now time for the money to be put where my mouth was some months back

[Peter Sharpe]

Studies have supposedly been done, which seem to prove the point of view of whoever carries them out. Can you imagine what sort of research would have to be carried out to prove this scientifically. You would certainly have to maim hundreds of fish to carry out the tests to make this conclusive. I can only say that I totally refute the argument that barbless hooks cause more damage than barbed. This is from experience gained over 35 years of angling. I doubt if genuine micro barbs cause significant damage, (Fox Series 2 strong version) but I flatten them with pliers anyway.

[Alan Taylor]

Bradford Angler:

Just take 1 of each to the comitee meeting and ask them if it came to the crunch, which one would you prefer to pull out of your finger after it has gone beyond the barb or where the barb should be.

 

Alan(nl)

[Steve Burke]

As many of you know on my Coarse Lake at Wingham I ban barbless hooks above size 10. This is to protect my perch. My feeling, not backed up by formal studies but based on many years of experience as a perch specialist, is that perch can die from the use of barbed hooks, certainly in the larger sizes.

 

On my Carp Lake, which doesn't contain perch, members are free to use either barbed or barbless hooks. The vast majority, if not all, use microbarbed type hooks, which I encourage.

 

It's interesting that an increasing number of fishery managers are banning barbless hooks, many having found from experience that they can cause more mouth damage than barbed ones when playing fish.

 

On the other hand, barbed hooks can cause more damage than barbless ones on unhooking, especially in the hands of those who haven't learnt how best to extract them. Therefore on waters that are fished by less experienced anglers barbless hooks may be a lesser evil than barbed ones.

 

All my members are very experienced and thus I don't have the problems that can be caused with barbless hooks when unhooking. In other words it's horses for courses.

 

Many of us have differing views on this issue. I therefore believe it ought to be up to individual fishery managers to decide.

 

What I do object to is other anglers telling me I'm wrong and wanting to run my fishery for me - especially if they're not even members! I have enough problems with 60 members, meaning that I have 120 fishery managers - most of the members plus their mates!

 

[ 30. September 2003, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Steve Burke ]

[wunnus]

OK then lets change the arguement to "lets ban hooks above size 10".

[ayjay]

wunnus:

OK then lets change the arguement to "lets ban hooks above size 10".

Now you are just being bl**dy silly.

 

You obviously don't ever fish with big baits wunnus.

[Nugg]

All this talk of ban this, ban that and arguments.

Does this get us anywhere?

The way to educate poeple is by the use of persuasion on which way to go, but without hard facts either way how can this be done. Therefore it must be a case of individual choice, this goes for both fishery owners and anglers.

I personaly use both barbed and barbless depending on what I fish for, so you could say that I am half right or half wrong.

One thing I am sure of is the right of fishery owners to decide what happens on their fishery, whether I was to think it right or not, if I want to fish it I stick to the rules.

 

As a rider to this, above I mentioned education, well we all know that litter on the banks is a fact, a very hard fact, it is also a fact that some people just will not be persuaded not to litter,[ thats not insinuating that A.N. members do] so is this also a case of personal choice? Litter can also damage/kill fish too, so how about getting this put right for everyones sake.

 

Stepping down from saop box now.

[Guest sslatter]

The argument rages on. To barb or not to barb? It has been pointed out that it's easier to remove a barbless hook from one's thumb than it is a barbed one; others state the case for certain fish being damaged by barbless hooks moving around whilst playing a fish.

 

..but let's not forget that it's easier for a fish, wild bird or mammal to shed a barbless hook that has been lost by an angler, than it is to get rid of a barbed one.

[Newt]

"lets ban hooks above size 10"

 

Awk.

 

That would stop me fishing altogether. I don't use anything below a #6 and rarely that small. Ah well.

 

As to the original thread topic - I really don't think it's possible to put the terms barbed and barbless in the same post without starting an argument and one that, in the end, will come down to personal opinions.

[manse]

On the other hand, barbed hooks can cause more damage than barbless ones on unhooking, especially in the hands of those who haven't learnt how best to extract them. Therefore on waters that are fished by less experienced anglers barbless hooks may be a lesser evil than barbed ones.

 

Even though i've never used one what is the right way to extract a barbed hook.