From Information I've read the highest mortality occurs with barbs, BUT bait and barbs can really put a hurt on the kelts, smolts & resident populations

Maybe an easier read from here:http://wildsteelheadcoalition.org/Repository/WSR%20rpt%20full.pdf
go to page 48


Hooking Mortality in Steelhead
Proponents of catch and keep fisheries for wild steelhead offer the notion that steelhead caught and released by anglers die or do not spawn successfully, and that the percentage of fish succumbing to the stress of hook and line capture is unacceptably high. Published or available hooking mortality data sets that relate specifically to steelhead or salmon in freshwater are scarce (Mongillo 1984; Muoneke and Childress 1994). Consequently, catch and keep proponents have invariably applied hooking mortality studies of other species, usually resident salmonids, to anadromous steelhead in rivers. British Columbia Steelhead Brood Stock Program Data
The British Columbia Ministry of the Environment, Lands, and Parks produced a multiyear study of summer and winter-run steelhead hooking mortality (Hooton, 1987, Hooton 2001).
Seven years of hooking mortality data were published between 1981 and 1987 on Vancouver Island streams. During this period, over 4,000 steelhead were caught on conventional gear (bait,barbed hooks), most to provide brood stock for hatchery programs. Of these angled steelhead, 144 mortalities occurred, representing a study-wide average of 3.6 percent hooking mortality
(Table 1).

Table 1. Stock specific hooking mortality among winter-run steelhead on Vancouver
Island, 1981-1987.
Basin Years of Record Number of
Steelhead
Angled
Hooking
Mortality
Hooking
Mortality
percentage
Cowichan 7 509 16 3.1
Englishman 5 240 9 3.8
Heber 1 70 3 4.3
Gold 1 30 0 0
Nanaimo 7 378 7 1.9
Puntledge 7 481 9 1.9
Salmon 6 464 27 5.8
San Juan 2 49 3 6.1
Somass 7 1,174 43 3.7
Tsitika 7 320 10 3.1
Keogh 2 336 17 5.1
Total 4051 144 3.6
Source: Hooton 1987.
Hooking mortality of winter-run steelhead was studied more rigorously on the Keogh River on Vancouver Island in 1985 and 1986 (Table 2). Among 336 steelhead angled on various combinations of terminal gear, a total hooking mortality of 17 fish, or 5.1 percent occurred. Use of natural bait produced higher mortality (mean = 5.6 percent) than did artificial lures (mean = 3.8 percent). Mortality while using barbed hooks was higher (mean = 7.3 percent) than for
barbless hooks (mean = 2.9 percent) regardless of whether bait or artificial lure was employed.
Examination of all combinations appear to indicate that barbed hooks were the largest contributor to mortality.

Table 2. Percent hooking mortality (number of fish in parentheses) on various terminal
gear types in the Keogh River in 1985 and 1986.
Year Gear Type
Barbed/Bait Barbed/No
Bait
Barbless/Bait Barbless/No Bait Total
Mortality
1985 12.5 (6) 7.7 (2) 3.6 (2) 0 (0) 7.7 (10)
1986 5.9 (3) 2.5(1) 2.6 (2) 2.6 (1) 3.4 (7)
Total
Mortality
9.1 (9) 4.5 (3) 3.0 (4) 2.6(1) 5.1 (17)
Source: Hooton 1987.

A study evaluating the degree of injury of winter steelhead was also undertaken on the Keogh River (Table 3). Fish were caught with hook and line just downstream of a weir located in the lower river. The degree of injury was observed, followed by tagging and immediaterelease upstream of the weir. Later, after the spawning season, out-migrating kelts were trapped at the weir to determine post-spawn survival of angled and non-angled fish. Of the 336 steelhead originally caught by hook and line, 84 were later recovered in post-spawn condition at the weir,
representing 27.5 percent of fish that had recovered enough to migrate back down to the lower river. Post-spawn recovery of non-angled fish was 32.9 percent, a difference of 5.4 percent.
These data indicate that the majority of caught and released fish not only made it to spawning grounds, but spawned and out-migrated.
Table 3. Number of hooked fish (percentage in parentheses) and non-angled fish later recovered as out-migrating post-spawners in the Keogh River in 1985 and 1986.
Year Hooked Fish Recovered as
Kelts
Non-Angled Fish Recovered
as Kelts
1985 25 (22.3%) 56 (24.0%)
1986 59 (30.6%) 403 (34.7%)
Totals 84 (27.5%) 459 (32.9%)
Source: Hooton 1987.

Interestingly, Hooton (2001) provided a cautionary note to his earlier study, reporting that hooking mortality was measured as mortality occurring in the first 24 hours after capture. Mortality observed after 24 hours was considered holding mortality related to the holding and
transport of fish in artificial environments for brood stock programs. Unfortunately, holding mortality was not recorded during the brood stock program and could not be evaluated. However, the above kelt recovery data on the Keogh River provide evidence that delayed
mortality resulting from angling injury is minimal.
Comparison of the degree of hooking injury with mortality rates revealed, not unexpectedly, that mortality was highest among fish that sustained severe blood loss when the hook pierced or tore a major blood vessel (Table 4). In these cases, 53.3 percent hooking
mortality occurred. An instructive feature of these data was that despite extensive blood loss, 47 percent of the most severely injured fish recovered and were released in what appeared to be a
healthy condition. While the number of fish in the most severe injury groups was small, their recovery as post-spawners did not differ substantially from the least injured fish.

Table 4. Number (percentage in parentheses) of hooking mortalities among steelhead ofvarious hook injury categories and the percent of individuals of each category recovered as out-migrating post-spawners in the Keogh River.
Hook Injury* Fish Landed Hooking Mortality Number Post-
Spawners Recovered
1 257 0 (0%) 51 (20.6%)
2 49 1 (2.0%) 7 (15.9%)
3 30 16 (53.3%) 4 (28.6%)
All 336 17 (5.1) 84 (27.5%)
* 1=Superficial wound, no blood loss.
2=Moderate wound, some blood loss but no major blood vessel ruptured.
3=Severe blood loss associated with rupture of major blood vessel.
Source: Hooton 1987.
Other Steelhead Data
As reported, other than the British Columbia steelhead brood stock program, hooking
mortality data for steelhead are scarce. However, several other hooking mortality data sets were
identified in which steelhead were captured for study or brood stock collection (Table 5).
Table 5. Other hooking mortality data sets for steelhead.
Study Hooking Mortality (%) Comments
MELP1, Kamloops 1.61 436 steelhead collected from the Thompson R. for brood
stock between 1982-1995
MELP1, Surry 0.31 306 steelhead collected from the Coquihalla R. for brood
stock between 1985-1995
MELP1, Surry 209 steelhead collected from the Squamish R. for brood
stock between 1985-1995
Lirette, 1988
4.31
7.9 76 summer steelhead collected from the Somass River
R. for brood stock in 1984 and 1985
Lirette, 1988 195 winter steelhead collected from the Somass R. for
brood stock in 1984 and 1985
Lirette, 1989 69 summer steelhead collected from the Campbell R. for
brood stock in 1988 and 1989
Thomas, 1995 21 steelhead collected from the Skeena R. Terminal
gear not specified
Nelson et al. 2001
4.1
8.7
4.6
0.9 226 steelhead were angled and tracked in a radio
tracking study in 1999 and 2000.
1 Ministry of the Environment, Lands, and Parks, British Columbia (unpublished data).
53
Average hooking mortality for Table 5 is 3.54 percent, which is within the general range
of that found for the British Columbia steelhead brood stock program.
Other Hooking Mortality Data
In contrast to the relative scarcity of mortality data in freshwater anadromous fisheries,
there is an abundance of data on resident salmonids, for which a consistent pattern is apparent.
Specifically, resident fish caught on bait experienced significantly higher mortality compared to
anadromous fish in rivers. This result is confirmed repeatedly in numerous review papers (Table
6). Studies also show that hooking mortality of resident salmonids with bait is consistently three
to nine times higher than mortality associated with artificial lures or flies. The typical
observation was that baited hooks were taken deeply and that rupture of blood vessels was the
primary cause of mortality (Hooton 2001). Most studies with resident fish indicate hooking
mortalities between 25 and 50 percent, as shown in Table 6.
Table 6. Hooking Mortality in Resident Trout.
Species Hooking Mortality (%) Study
Multiple Species 25 Wydoski 1977
Atlantic salmon (landlocked) 35 Warner and Johnson 1978
Rainbow trout ~30 Mongillo 1984
Cutthroat trout ~50 Mongillo 1984
Several resident trout species 43.6 Taylor and White 1992
Several resident trout species 31.4 Trotter 1995
It is clear that hooking mortality data from resident salmonids are not applicable to nonfeeding
steelhead in rivers. Equally clear is that the hatchery steelhead programs in southwestern
British Columbia provide evidence that angled steelhead have a high survival after capture by
angling.
54
Conclusions
Overall, the data indicate that wild steelhead release fisheries on winter steelhead stocks
exert a minimal influence on the ability of the fish to spawn and refute claims that caught and
released steelhead were effectively lost from the population. The following conclusions can be
drawn:
• Hooking mortality of steelhead ranged between 0 and 6 percent in 11 Canadian river
basins over a 7 year period with a Province-wide average of 3.6 percent.
• Hooking mortality of winter-run steelhead averages between 2 and 3 percent using
barbless hooks, regardless of whether bait is used.
• Barbed hooks appear to be the largest contributor to hooking mortality.
• The great majority of released fish make it to spawning grounds and spawn.
• Use of resident salmonid hooking mortality data is not applicable to steelhead in
freshwater.
55
References
Hooton, R.S. 1987. Catch and release as a management strategy for steelhead in British
Columbia. Catch and release fishing, a decade of experience. A National Sport Fishing
Symposium. September 30-October 1, 1987. Sponsored by Humboldt State University,
American Fisheries Society, California Cooperative Fishery Research Unit, and California Trout,
Inc.
Hooton, R.S. 2001. Facts and issues associated with restricting terminal gear types in the
management of sustainable steelhead sport fisheries in British Columbia. British Columbia
Ministry of the Environment, Lands and Parks. Nanaimo, British Columbia.
Lirette, M.G. 1988. Telemetric studies of summer and winter steelhead in the Stamp and
Somass Rivers, 1984-1985. Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks, Fisheries Program,
Fisheries Report No. VI 881. Nanaimo, B.C.
Lirette, M.G. 1989. Monitoring of tagged summer steelhead in the Campbell River, 1988-1989.
Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks, Fisheries Program, Fisheries Report No. VI 882.
Nanaimo, B.C.
Mongillo, P.E. 1984. A summary of salmonid hooking mortality. Washington Department of
Game, Fish Management Division. Olympia, Washington.
Muoneke, M. I. and W.M Childress. 1994. Hooking mortality: a review for recreational
fisheries. Reviews in Fisheries Science 2(22):123-156.
Nelson, T.C., J. Rissling, and C.E. Mussell. 2001. Vedder/Chilliwack River steelhead telemetry
program 1999-2000. Report for the Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks, Lower
Mainland Region, Surrey, B.C.
Taylor, M.J. and K.R. White. A meta-analysis of hooking mortality of non-anadromous trout.
N. Am. J. Fish. Manag. 12:760-767.
Thomas, J.O. 1995. 1995 Skeena River sport fish coho and steelhead catch and release study.
Unpublished report. J.O Thomas and Associates Ltd. Contract No. FP 95-5049-170H-0315.
Department of Fisheries and Oceans, Prince Rupert, B.C.
Trotter, P. 1995. Hooking mortality of trout. Fly Fisherman 26(3):16-27.
Warner, K. and P.R. Johnson. 1978. Mortality of landlocked Atlantic salmon hooked on flies
and worms in a river nursery area. Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 107:772-775.
Wydoski R.S. 1977. Relation of hooking mortality and sublethal hooking stress to quality
fishery management. In: R.A. Barnhart and T.D. Roelofs (eds.). Catch and Release Fishing as a
Management Tool. Humboldt State University, Arcata, California.
56
5