Hooks

I've been involved on another forum in a thread entitled "Barbed v Barbless" I know its pretty much like the stillwater barbel debate that continues to provoke passionate responses and surfaces with regularity. I use both and micro barbs as well as pinched down barbs depending on what species I am after and what methods I am fishing. However I tried to find scientific evidence either for or aginst just to try and get my facts correct. Unfortunately I drew a blank. Does anyone know of any research being done into this particular subject?

The only research I know of Don is that I have done myself.

My findings? - Barbless come out of fingers, trousers & nets with no trouble and thats why they are all I use!

Apparently they also cause more damage to fishes mouths ....thats why a lot of places(the sensible ones) have banned barbless hooks

Have to say I find myself in agreement with you both. Barbless do come out of fingers even when deeply inbedded(I speak from experience lol).However I agree with Ed as from what I have gleaned barbless can slip out and then rehook the fish again in another part of the mouth or elsewhere. I know its a matter of personal choice but thought that maybe someone on this site would perhaps know of scientific facts rather than what I and others have experienced. The guy on the other forum stated that he thought barbless hooks were better for barbel something I disagree with but respect his decision if he feels that he's correct. Would be nice to find out if the scientists amongst us have done any proper research. I imagine it would be somewhat difficult to conduct a survey without using fish though? Sorry for bringing this up but its really niggling me.

I agree with Ed on this one. I've had some experience of damage done by barbless hooks, especially to carp. One time, during a match, I caught a carp of about 6lb on a size 12 barbless that had penetrated right through the fish's cheek and made a half inch long gash. A barbed hook would not have penetrated far enough to do that damage.
Unfortunately most of the good lakes in my area insist on barbless hooks but the depth of their penetration makes me feel uneasy about using them. I would never use them on a flowing river because I hate to think what damage would be done by the combined pull of the fish and the current.

Wow, I thought Ed was joking, I did'nt know about these issues with barbless.

I suppose the amount of penetration also depends on the length of the point?

It isn't just the damage that may or may not occur with barbed or barbless hooks during the playing of fish, its about the damage done to their mouths when the hook is taken out by inexperienced or impatient matchmen who just rip the hook out instead of using a disgorger, it isn't just matchmen though remember.

I, like a lot of you, have seen the state of the mouths of carp on these match lakes before barbless became a rule, it was terrible. On one match lake in Worcester on our midweek match there, we had a 50p pool for the first one to catch a carp with full lips, I kid you not, most weeks it wasn't won either, it was awful to see them.

Damage like that, on the scale that it was, just had to be controlled and the best and easiest way was to have a barbless hook rule, that is now the norm on most match lakes, and the fish are the better for it as well. I havn't been a matchmen for about ten years now but I still use barbless hooks because I find they are easier to remove from clothing, landing nets and fingers but thats because I've become awkward as I've got older.

I suspect the rest of the rig matters, too. I've always used barbless for float and "ordinary" legering, and the only problem I ever had was with the VMC knife-points that came out in the 70's; they were super-sharp, but the knife edge was on the inside of the bend, the bit that's got to hold the fish, so they cut. And were never used again.
My first attempts at using bolt rigs, however, produced a couple of "in up to the hook-eye" holds (which I have seen rated a good thing on a carp web); now I'm using very short hooklinks and getting much nicer holds and no unhooking probs (touch wood).

I was a confirmed barbless fanatic for many years.

I still use them in all small fish scenarios apart from winter grayling fishing where a micro barb or pinched down barb means they dont throw the hook so often when they corkscrew in the water.

I still use barbless in the bigger sizes for my river fishing for chub and barbel and have never seen the effect Frank describes.

The only time barbless are a no-no is when you are likely to hit and hold when they do cut through the mouth especially with carp and to a lesser extent with barbel.Chub in my experience can be turned without exerting the amount of pressure which would casue cutting out.

I've been using Kamasan Animal Barbless for all my barbel and chub fishing for the last three seasons and have never had a hook come out. That isuntil I want it to when it comes out without a moments trouble.

I would suggest that a factor is that much more design effort has gone into barbless hooks as a result of fishery requirements and they are much more sophisticated nowadays.

As Graham says, it's not so much the hooking or playing, it's when the hook is removed that the damage can be caused.

I have seen on TV, able, well respected anglers wriggling hooks around, barbed and barbless, in order to get them out. This just cuts and tears tissue on the inside likely to cause infection.

A straight pull on the hook with fingers, forceps or a disgorger is all that should be required. If the hook won't come clean out like that then the barb is too big or the fish needs resting a little longer.

Put it back in the water for a few more minutes until the tension is releaved in it's muscles. If it still won't come out neatly the barbs are too big so crush them in future.

With regards the damage done to fish's mouths, does it matter? Before anyone goes mental over this question, I only ask because I caught a barbel with a horrendous wound under its head where the gill plates nearly meeet on its underside. As soon as I saw it I rushed to get the fish back in the water because I couldn't believe the fish could survive in such a state. I caught it a month later and the wound had almost totaly healed with barely any scar.
I suspect the mouths of carp on hard-fished match venues get bad due to them being hauled on every type of hook on such a regular basis that they never get the chance to heal up properly. Certainly some types of rig, such as the bent hook, can cause permanent damage to fish, but on most occasions I suspect the damage is only temporary and causes very little, if any, distress to the fish.

Some interesting points made that I hadn't even considered.
In answer to Chub King my answer would be yes it does matter, maybe your fish had great powers of healing but I keep fish, and from a fish keepers point of view any damage can be fatal as it can allow other infections to set in. Having said that yours is a tale with a happy ending and one which I wouldnt expect. I took over a big fish pond and the guy had left only the fish he didnt want in it. Some of them had holes right the way through them and you could(if you had wanted to)push a pencil straight through the fish. These fish were swimming around and feeding as if nothing was wrong which, at the time, I found hard to comprehend. Needless to say I had to despatch them as to allow them to suffer would have been crass bad judgement to say the least.There were of course no predators to cull the weakened fish as it was an ornamental pond.The survival instinct in fish and in other wildlife is truely remarkable.
The thing I have noticed about any fish (particulalrly bigger carp and chub)that as had past damage to the mouth is that if your hook gets a hold in the healed up area it is nigh on impossible to get out. I always have a pair of sidecutters with me for this reason as to my way of thinking a new hook is better than further damage to the fish. I will still carry on as I do and use the appropriate hook for the style of fishing I am doing. Barbless hooks do penetrate deeply into human flesh, in my case a stupid lack of concentration meant a barbless embedded up to the bone in my finger and I hardly felt it until I saw it! Such a small wound however is an open door for weils disease so I try to be a bit more careful nowadays.

I agree with Greg that most hook damage is caused by careless unhooking. However I don't agree that damage is unimportant. Your object should always be to return the fish in a condition as close as possible to that it was in before it took your bait.

Angling programs on TV don't help this situation as the methods of unhooking shown are often very poor indeed.

With regard to the Barbless/Barbed arguement there is no absolute. Both have their uses and you should try to use the most appropriate type for the circumstances in which you are fishing.

If you are fishing for bleak on the whip in a match then barbless may well be appropriate.

However if you were fishing for big Perch with lobworms and need a largish hook the deeper penetration of a large barbless hook may risk killing Perch.

Dictating the use of either Barbless or Barbed does little for fish welfare. The answer is educate rather than dictate. Informed anglers promote fish welfare far better than blanket bans.

The only research I have come across was by John Goddard and brian Clarke in thier book and video on Flu Fishing.
The point and barb on hooks are twice the thickness to barbless. Hence less visable to the fish.
I only ever use barbless for all my fishing and as yet not had any problems.
I've been using them since the early eighties.

Andy, that perch question is an interesting one. I appreciate what you're saying about the penetration of barbless, but I've found that deephooked perch - when the hook is virtually out of sight - are impossible to unhook if you're using barbed, but with barbless you can usually get it back and return the fish in good nick providing you're patient and carefull with the forceps. When any hook goes down the throat you know you're in trouble though. Anyone got any tips on how to avoid deep-hooking perch?

And I'm not saying that it's okay to damage fish, just observing that, as a rule, fish tend to recover fairly well from most injuries providing disease doesn't set in.
I've never really made much distinction between barbed and barbless myself. Horses for courses I say.

other than strike early chub king no theres no way you can. its the way they feed woolf it down as fast as possible before it gats away, when they finally decide to take it anyway.