Beaten up Carp

[maverick 7]

Did you mean barbed in the first sentence? If so I agree with you - it goes in one way, will move somewhat during the fight and intevitably has to make another exit out. I am happy to use either but suspect the defence of barbed is mainly from people afraid to lose a fish or too.

I don't blame you for thinking that way Bob....I think most people think the anti barbless brigade (which includes myself) are simply afraid of losing a few fish....but I know that is not the case for me...nor is it for any of my fishing pals too but that's mainly because we are mostly river men and use barbed hooks to our hearts content.

Because of our vast 50 odd years experience with barbed hooks there are very, very few fish that go back in the water from us with damage to their mouths. I have seen Hayley's Comet more times than I have seen fish with damage to their mouths in rivers. However, on the few occasions we visit a commercial...we often see this damage to fishes mouths. I realise these places are fished far more heavily than rivers but this shouldn't happen even so. When an angler hooks a decent sized fish (6lb and above)....he really has no control over the tearing that occurs in the mouth of the fish when using barbless hooks....the sheer power of the hooked fish will ensure that tears will occur.

The angler is totally powerless to stop this from happening...well, if he wants to land it he is anyway.

Generally speaking Bob....I don't think that defenders of the barbed hook ( not that I think it needs defending...as results speak for themselves on that front) are afraid of losing a few fish off their hooks......I think it's more of a case of being afraid of losing a few fish period...for good.

Maverick

 

[tigger]

I may be wrong but its not something I am willing to experiment with to find out.

This is a barbel I caught last year that had a barbless hook left in it's mouth. The hook had gone right through it's mouth (due to there being no barb)and turned over and become fixed. Luckily I caught it on a 14's drennan super spade (barbed). I should have taken a pic of the fish from the front as it's face was swollen right up and it was quite badly disfigured.

 

[law]

This is a barbel I caught last year that had a barbless hook left in it's mouth. The hook had gone right through it's mouth (due to there being no barb)and turned over and become fixed. Luckily I caught it on a 14's drennan super spade (barbed). I should have taken a pic of the fish from the front as it's face was swollen right up and it was quite badly disfigured.

But who's to say that the same wouldn't have happened if it was a barbed hook?

 

[maggot_dangler]

This is a barbel I caught last year that had a barbless hook left in it's mouth. The hook had gone right through it's mouth (due to there being no barb)and turned over and become fixed. Luckily I caught it on a 14's drennan super spade (barbed). I should have taken a pic of the fish from the front as it's face was swollen right up and it was quite badly disfigured.

BUt the Barb only prevents movement of the hook backwards it does not stop or indeed prevent forward progress so that sort of thing will happen barb or not .

PS carry a decent quality pair of wire snips and you could remove that hook in a few seconds ..

PG ..

 

[tigger]

But who's to say that the same wouldn't have happened if it was a barbed hook?

The barb would keep the hook in a fixed position.

 

[theartist]

But who's to say that the same wouldn't have happened if it was a barbed hook?

It would have!

I fish a barbel water that has a barbless only policy it is chock full of Barbel. There is a keepnet ban, compulsory unhooking mats and a barbless only policy and the fish are in amazing condition considering how intimate the river is and how heavily fished it is. Some fish heavily some fish light for them.

However some fish, a small minority are caught with a hook in them and it is always barbed, usually accompanied by the swelling. Only in rare instances like the photo would a barbless not come out. The free stretch above and some club anglers breaking the rules are to blame.

The whole barbed barbless thing can depend on the species and the pressure used but when it comes to swellings on barbel it's barbed hooks that are far worse.

 

[tigger]

BUt the Barb only prevents movement of the hook backwards it does not stop or indeed prevent forward progress so that sort of thing will happen barb or not .

PS carry a decent quality pair of wire snips and you could remove that hook in a few seconds ..

PG ..

The barb holds the hook in position and stops it from moving about or going further in.

I did remove the hook easily without cutting it, just turned it round and it poped out....leaving the fish dissfigured.

I've seen this type of situation several times with barbless hooks but never with a barbed hook.

 

[maverick 7]

I suspect that another major factor for mouth damage to fish.... and I know I keep saying this but I am talking 6lb upwards......is that anglers tend overcompensate with the tautness of their line on the fish.....this is because they fear losing the fish due to using barbless hooks.

They sense that if they let up on the pressure....the fish will shed the hook and be on it's way in no time....so they keep the line as tight as possible. I don't think there is anything wrong with this.....I would say it is quite natural to take this train of thought and engage in this sort of activity. On the few times I visit commercials I am sure I do it myself....but unwittingly when we do this we are contributing to the damage of the fish by putting that extra pressure on the hook hold.

I don't know ...it's really just a thought because I KNOW that's what anglers do on these venues...it could be a major factor towards fish damage.

Maverick

 

[tigger]

I suspect that another major factor for mouth damage to fish.... and I know I keep saying this but I am talking 6lb upwards......is that anglers tend overcompensate with the tautness of their line on the fish.....this is because they fear losing the fish due to using barbless hooks.

They sense that if they let up on the pressure....the fish will shed the hook and be on it's way in no time....so they keep the line as tight as possible. I don't think there is anything wrong with this.....I would say it is quite natural to take this train of thought and engage in this sort of activity. On the few times I visit commercials I am sure I do it myself....but unwittingly when we do this we are contributing to the damage of the fish by putting that extra pressure on the hook hold.

I don't know ...it's really just a thought because I KNOW that's what anglers do on these venues...it could be a major factor towards fish damage.

Maverick

I think your right Maverick.
I think barbless hooks cause damage to small fish also, especially when they're swung to hand and they're wriggling about.

 

[cg74]

But who's to say that the same wouldn't have happened if it was a barbed hook?

Whoever says it wouldn't/couldn't happen with a barbed hook is very mistaken. I caught a barbel back in March that had a barbed hook (I reckon it was a size 10 Drennan Super Specialist Barbel hook, which have a fairly large barb) positioned in exactly the same place.

As someone else said; cut the eye off with a pair of side cutters and remove with ease.

 

[cattyfatty]

there's one point no one has brought up is fish after care when you have landed your quarry .
one water i fish it is in the rules to treat any fish with mouth damage after you landed it with kryston klnik carp care antiseptic.
i do most off my fish with a koi treatment that treats the area were the hook as gone through the mouth tissue and use a separate treatment to cover the wound as well,
this act like a gel and seals where the hook has penetrated the mouth.
if you think about it any hook will make a hole in the tissue of the fishes mouth barbed or barbless and when put back into the water there's going to be some infection around where the hook damage is.
so if a fish is getting caught quite a few time in a short time frame the damaged area will just get more infected resulting in what we see in commercials fishing lake.
you can never say this will work all the time , but may help in recovery time.

 

[law]

Ive caught a fair few fish over the years with hooks in them rusting away.
And none have been barbless.
How on earth is a fish able to get rid of a barbed hook?! Thats the whole point of them, to stay in!

 

[tigger]

Ive caught a fair few fish over the years with hooks in them rusting away.

And none have been barbless.
How on earth is a fish able to get rid of a barbed hook?! Thats the whole point of them, to stay in!

The chub seem to get rid of far too many of mine when i'm playing them...leaving the hook in a snag or bankside vegetation. Salmon, trout and grayling throw enough also.

At the end of the day Law you've obviously made up your mind so I ain't gonn'a preach to convert you .

Oh (being serious), just to see exactly which one hurts most and goes in furthest pull a small one of each into your finger.

 

[theartist]

Oh (being serious), just to see exactly which one hurts most and goes in furthest pull a small one of each into your finger.

I really hope no one tries this

 

[Jim Crosskey 2]

Here's a couple of extra thoughts on the matter - and to be clear, i'm talking here about mouth damaged carp in commercials...

1) I believe the vast majority of mouth damage comes about when the fish is not landed. Carp have a relatively fleshy (as opposed to bony) mouth. A hookhold is found when the fish takes the bait - and then subsequently lost as the fish moves away quickly and manages to rip the hook out. This may happen because the tackle is handled badly - i.e. the angler, be it using a pole or rod, applies more pressure to the fish than the hook hold will take and the hook subsequently tears out of the flesh. If anyone's unsure on this theory, try placing a size 10 hook into your flesh (anywhere will do!) and then attaching some 8lb line to it. Now tie that line to a suitable immovable object (fence post maybe) and walk backwards until either the line breaks or the hookhold tears. I think there's every chance that at least some of the time, the hook hold will tear - and there's our moth damaged carp.

2) (this could actually be the more important point)... many commercial fisheries are stocked to such a level that the fish are 100% reliant on anglers bait for their diet... and even so, there isn't enough to go around. So the fish feed with an artificial enthusiasm on anglers baits because they have absolutely no choice whatsoever (in terms of natural food). So taking the example of the uncaught mouth damaged fish above - that fish will be feeding on bait immediately after the incident, because its the only food it knows, and most likely getting caught again very soon after. Chances are the hookhold could be in a different place this time, but the catching has every chance of worsening the wound or preventing healing. And lets say the next time it takes a bait (possibly the same day) - the hook does go straight in to the previous wound, tears some more and comes out again. And so on....

I fished a fishery at the weekend with an almost comical number of fish in it - you literally couldn't go for more than 1 minute without catching a carp. That kind of stocking level (and the repeat catches it must pesent when 40 anglers fish a match on Wednesday and 50 pleasure anglers turn up Saturday and Sunday) seems to have a part in it too i think.

 

[cg74]

The chub seem to get rid of far too many of mine when i'm playing them...leaving the hook in a snag or bankside vegetation. Salmon, trout and grayling throw enough also.

At the end of the day Law you've obviously made up your mind so I ain't gonn'a preach to convert you .

Oh (being serious), just to see exactly which one hurts most and goes in furthest pull a small one of each into your finger.

It's commonly accepted that fish find it easier to remove a barbed hook with the line being under some tension.

Conversely it's widely accepted that barbless hooks fall out when under no tension.

 

[tigger]

It's commonly accepted that fish find it easier to remove a barbed hook with the line being under some tension.

Conversely it's widely accepted that barbless hooks fall out when under no tension.

Err, not quite right, when playing a salmon and it leaps from the water shaking it's head a loose line will allow it to throw the hook.

I've hooked dace in clear water and then let the line go slack and watched them shaking their heads often throwing the hook.
A slack line will allow a fish to shake a hook out far easier than it could with a tight line.

 

[soft plastic]

Err, not quite right, when playing a salmon and it leaps from the water shaking it's head a loose line will allow it to throw the hook.

I've hooked dace in clear water and then let the line go slack and watched them shaking their heads often throwing the hook.
A slack line will allow a fish to shake a hook out far easier than it could with a tight line.

And it has always been common practice to lower your rod when a fish, particularly a salmon, jumps. This allows some slack in the line thereby helping to reduce the chances of a break if the fish lands on the line. That established advice can't be wrong, can it?

 

[maritimesbob]

Well I'm going back to said fishery tomorrow but intend fish their less popular "tench" ponds where they don't have matches or pleasure anglers after a "bagging" session. Anyway will be interesting to see what their fish are like, whether I can blame match anglers, the carp anglers with sea fishing gear who knows.

As a fisherman who is still getting used to these new rules such as barbless, no keepnets, dipping nets, minimum hook sizes etc, I feel barbless hooks are certainly an entirely different beast.

Before returned to coarse fishing, barbless hooks were rarely used. I myself used barbed spade end hooks, I always felt good about tying spade end hooks by hand and was happier with the presentation.

That said, it's nearly all barbless hooks these days and I have found they enter the fishes flesh far more deeply, often right through the mouth, out the other side and get hooked on the outside making a mess, often causing removal very difficult. I never really had these issues in the "good old days" with barbed hooks.

Not saying barbless hooks are to blame. Personally from my limited experience of fishing commercials, over fishing and repeat catches seem the most plausible idea. Also like the idea of commercials not really having a natural food source for the fish, I wonder if this tames the fish somewhat in much the same way goldfish are in a garden pond? Makes sense that fish will gorge on anglers baits in an unnatural way.

Either way, I am looking forward to getting out tomorrow after finishing my continentals. Looks like one more fine day weather-wise too!

Glad I started this topic as the discussion has been interesting.

 

[cg74]

Err, not quite right, when playing a salmon and it leaps from the water shaking it's head a loose line will allow it to throw the hook.

I've hooked dace in clear water and then let the line go slack and watched them shaking their heads often throwing the hook.
A slack line will allow a fish to shake a hook out far easier than it could with a tight line.

Yes tigger, what I wrote was not quite right, it should've been; fish with fleshy mouths, rather than just "fish".

As for your dace, it's pure speculation on your part as to how the hooks came out, as even slack line pulled against water offers resistance.