Yeah, that's right. The new regs state that all hooks used in areas 5-13 are required to be barbless, no matter what species you're fishing for. The only exception is for multi-hook herring jigs. This is going to cause a real problem for people who fish with bait for species other than salmon and those who are stuck casting from shore. When you hook a rock cod or ling, half the time the first thing they do is shoot into the rocks, where you have to give them slack line and wait until they come out. If there's no barb, what's to keep the hook from falling right out? Soft baits such as pile worms just slide right off barbless hooks when you cast. IMHO it's a totally stupid and pointless rule.

So, why don't you tell us how you REALLY feel about it...

What we have are two items, 1)Your wants 2)The resources [fishes] NEEDS. I think they are trying to protect the resource, however late in the game it might be. You can cut little squares of rubberband and push it over the hook point to just past the pinched barb[ you do this after putting the bait on], this will keep the baits from coming off. This works for floating herring for coho on the beach.

Or you can cut a PowerWorm into little discs and put them on the hook after the bait. May as well add some scent. Jack

I'm more concerned about keeping the fish on after he's hooked. As I pointed out earlier, with some species, it's just not possible to keep a tight line all the time. And what about the research that has been done that shows that barbless hooks make diddly and squat difference? The overwhelming factor in fish mortality is if bait was used or not. Fish hooked on lures tend to get hooked in the lip or other non-vital spot, whereals when bait is used, the fish is more likely to swallow the hook and be mortally wounded. I suppose to protect the resource we should outlaw bait too? That would make a lot more difference in 'protecting the resource.' Mandating barbless hooks for all species is just silly and pointless.

If the fish swallows your bait then the hook can't fall out can it? It is much easier to release a fish if the hooks are barbless .

yet another restriction placed on the user group that has the least impact on the resource

this season will be just another year where indian nets continue to rape the rivers unchecked, while i get stopped on the ramp at alki to make sure my hook conforms to proper regulation, while we go after our 1 or 2 fish limit, then drive home past the green river and the piles of dead salmon dumped on the side of the road...

yeah, i cant wait until summer...

It's amazing to me how many fisherman feel that they have little or no impact on the resource. Yes, it's true, some user groups have a much larger impact than the sports fisherman, that still does not obsolve us from doing our best. It's a fact we have sacrificed the most for the fish, I would rather do that than be part of the abuser groups.

Have those that complain about barbless hooks ever tried them? Been using them in both fresh and salt for years, and while I can't say I have never lost a fish as a result, I sure don't lose many. The other fact is that release with these hooks is very easy, with no jerking and tearing. Don't really understand the complaint. However small you think the sportsmans impact, isn't anything you can do better than nothing?

Amen, A.M.!
United we bargain, divided we beg!

I think the WDFW missed the forest for the trees on this one. If the intent is to protect salmon that are required to be released, why not implement a reg that makes it illegal to remove from the water any salmon not legal to be kept. It is easy to release these fish by tailing and using a pair of long handled pliers to pop even a barbless hook out. I have seen many "protected" chinook in Area 10 over teh last few years that are caught (presumably on barbless hooks), then netted, pulled aboard, dumped out, de-hooked, passed around for a couple of minutes for pictures, then released. I suspect may more salmon are killed this way than through using barbed hooks.

The stated intent was to simplify rules and to make enforcement easier. They did not want people claiming they were fishing for bottom fish when they were really mooching for salmon with barbed hooks.

The rule was put into place for the benefit of salmon, not other marine fish. The impact barbs have on the other marine fish anglers target is insignificant.

No, it's barbless!

I think it is a good rule!
I always use barbless, well 95% of the time.
As aunty pointed out though, different strokes for different folks.
Two ways to look at it:
1. Rules are rules
2. Rules are made to be broken

I prefer to go with #1 but that is just me.
It is more challenging with barbless, but really just getting used to it.

My barbless experience is mainly based on salmon and steelhead, and trout, so it is somewhat limited on the bottomfish advantages/disadvantages.
My .02 cents
Woodsy Wayne

Aunty,

Actually, if you look up the ESA listed stocks for Puget Sound, I believe that it's the SPRING chinook that are in the most trouble. Areas 5 through 9 are the migratory route for these listed fish, and this is the time of year that they migrate. (remember the 30" maximum on chinook through June 15 reg.) Not to mention the size limit on lingcod, which means that undersized fish must be released. Regardless of opinion, barbless hooks facilitate easier release. I believe that barbless circle hooks are also available which should solve the halibut issue. I highly doubt that there is a divide and conquer conspiracy being perpetrated on sportfishers at the WDFW. (Ignorance in decision-making maybe, but malicious intent?) While many of us may not fully understand the reasoning behind some of these seemingly illogical regulations, I personally don't think the State is "Out to get us."

Last June as I was dropping my 8 oz. dart to the bottom for the Butt's I got a monster hit about 80 ft. from the bottom, almost jerked the rod out of my hand and then it was gone! Big salmon I think.

I have caught 12lb black mouth in five feet of water casting bait with barbless hooks,no problem,as long as I was using A LONG ROD!!!

I agree AuntyM, keeping the rule in place for halibut was stupid. The state sportfishing advisory council thinks it is stupid too.

Even if it were to happen that someone did accidentally catch a salmon when halibut fishing, who cares, just let the fish go. The point is that your not going to find people fishing for halibut with a 6 ft rod and 2 pounds of weight. The only reason that I can see this being applied to halibut is that trolling for halibut with downriggers has gained some popularity. But they could have easily made the rule applicable to all downrigger fishing and left halibut out of it.

Aunty,

Maybe my glasses do need a bit of cleaning. I am not necessarily defending the regulation, merely looking at the motivation behind it. How about we delve into the hypothetical for just a moment? Let's say that the barbless hook regulation really is a politically motivated plan to keep the different factions of the sportfishing community at odds with each other. Again I ask you, what's the payoff? Is there a fear among commercial fishers that sporties may someday unite and effectively end commercial fishing altogether, so they've exerted their influence (politically and financially) on those who set wildlife policy in this state to create this particular regulation? I don't think that this is the case. We all know that sportfishers hold no political influence, therefore what do the commercials really have to fear? Mike Gilchrist provided the state's reasoning above. Personally, I'll take it at face value. As I said before, a lot of these regulations do not seem to have any logical basis, and WDFW definitely has a reputation of not always having the resource's best interest at heart. But in this case, I think a little too much is being read into it.

Aunty,

You have a valid point, and even though we may not see exactly eye to eye, I respect your opinion and concern for the benefit of sportfishers.

I think that this is part of a much larger problem. New fishing regs were supposed to be the product of the 2001 "Major Cycle" regulations package. All proposed regulation changes should have been published in the 2002-2003 Sportfishing Rules Concise Explanatory Statement."
In December, the Commission met in Vancouver, Wa. and took public testimony on all the proposals. Several members on this board attended and testified. This is the "public process."
Where was this Major Proposal? And where was the proposal submitted by Clark-Skamania Flyfishers and Camas Wildlife League regarding E. Lewis and Washougal Regulations? For some reason, the department failed to publish them. In my opinion, if it wasn't placed before the public in the hearings process, then it should be off the table. I think that WDF&W needs to do better staff work.

Sorry but I have to correct you CT, but this was part of the major proposal package. It was originally applicable to areas 1 through 13 but was modified before the commission made a final decision in Feb to drop areas 1 through 4. There was testimony at the meeting in November against it, but it may have got lost to many in all the wild steelhead release testimony.

Nice dialogue...but from experience I have found many of these regulations to be for appearances sake rather than actual effect. Just passing rules to make it look like something is being done...and thats fish politics in a nutshell. My personal feeling is that the blanket ban on barbed hooks is based more on personal feelings than actual science....but I'm sure some will use smaller scenarios to opppose this thought...just remember I'm speaking about the larger picture as this rule applies too...discussions of smaller pictures of reality
will go both ways.

I just can't sit out on this one!
I "only" fish in the sound for Lings, nothing else!
The problem is we have a bunch of IDIOTS! in the WDFW.
They guess and make up changes as Gooose stated.

#1- I fish w/a 5 ft tuna rod. A spreader bar, 8 to 20 ozs of weight, 14 inch herring and in areas salmon are scared to venture! Common sense isn't in the WDFW!

How in the world can you hook and hold a 40lb ling in the rocks and currents with bardless hooks? I catch alot of lings (11 last Thurs) and I don't see it happening.
What they are doing are forcing us to break rules due to lack of common sense on their part.
I for one, will continue to use barded hooks for lings. Screw them!
They can read this, *Finger* I don't give a rats a**.
I'm getting sick and tired of their silly a** rules. What's next guys, No Bait??

They cut our limit down to 1 ling because they say there are not enough lings out there, BULLSH**!
Our boat caught and released 32 in two days!
Where are they fishing, Bellingham harbor?
Like I said, THEY are turning law abiding sportsmen into outlaws!

Been taking lings the last few days, as well as a yelloweye today. I don't mind going barbless. Sitting there yanking a jig at 200 feet with a 2x4 isn't much like fishing anyway, in my book...it's more like grocery collection. My gripe is more with the manufacturers and shops--where can I buy barbless hooks? If I have to use barbless, I'd rather use points that resemble hypodermic needles rather than points with a big ol' bulge on 'em...

...actually, as good as lings taste, I'll use whatever gear they tell me to...

For a report, I fished lings yesterday for the first time with barbless hooks. We hooked five and landed three of them. Of the two that we did not land, one of them went down and hung me up around a rock. The other just got off, dont know why. This is too little fishing to draw any solid conclusion, but so far I feel confident in landing lings without barbs.

Nice. Where were you fishing?

My Gawd! When you fish for lingcod you release MANY bottom fish and undersized fish. You should have been fishing with barbless hooks already!

I'm glad for the barbless hook rule. You can learn to adapt, most all humans are good at that. The fish don't adapt as well.

Kilo...my gawd where have you been fishing? Barbless or not the mortality is the same for rockfish and lings. Please be knowledgeable about what you post before you post it...thanks.

Arklier,
I won't give out exact spots in Puget Sound on an open access board. All I will say that it is near Seattle.

To repeat myself, the only reason to have in place a barbless hook rule is for the benefit of salmon. Barbs have virtually no impact on rockfish or lingcod, especially lingcod. I was speaking to a charter who caught a ling off the coast that was living with one set of gills completely torn apart. Another example, one of the lings I caught Sunday I cut the gills to let it bleed out and left it without water. An hour later when I got home the fish was still alive. I found out when it bit me. (I was pretty ticked off, pried its mouth open to have blood streaming from my fingers).

#1 Circle hooks are just as good barbless as barbed.

#2 Yes I have caught big kings in the straits fishing for halibut. With 24oz lead spreader bar and a horse herring. I am not the only one to do so either.

#3 The ONLY reason I am mad about it is the "commercial" guys (ie. charter operaters) always get there own way and we never get a break.

I will fish barbless for it all.

Jason S

I've got no problem going barbless. In fact if you guys catch as many fish as you say you do then barbless will be good since it makes taking the hook out that much easier. The only thing I don't like about this rule is having to go through my box and cut all the barbs.
As for catching salmon when Halibut fishing I've done it as well. 15lb silver in 200 ft of water (yes I got it off the bottom) on a 24 ounce steel jig.

That's your point not mine, mallard and mike. You won't get it untill you get good with barbless fishing. What are you guys bass fishermen? Why do any more harm then you have to to makeup for your inadequacies as a fisherman? That's what I would like to know. All you fancy dancy CnR jokers that fish with barbed hooks really freak me out, man. Dudes, just try the barbless hooks it's not that hard. And don't go out the first time and start tallying up your loses, it is an adjustment that takes time. If you don't switch.......... good luck not getting caught.

Later

.99 Kilo

PS "I was speaking to a charter who caught a ling off the coast that was living with one set of gills completely torn apart." Is that good?

Let's see: There's reality based on science and real experience which I like to adhere to, then there is religious zealotry which others wish to impose on everyone. I think we all know where Kilo stands. Your zealotry has no basis in fact or experience regarding rockfish and Ling Cod so all that is left is a "cult following" religious belief....similar to the Taliban and other social illnesses afflicting human culture past, presently, and sadly in the future. Sorry son ...when you can discuss with real facts and experience then you have something to stand on....otherwise alls you are asking us to do is rely on faith that you choice is only true choice....even though there is zero info to back it up. As for the salmon that you guys hooked incidently while fishing for other species...how bad were they hurt and would barbs have really mattered. BTW you all..especially Kilo...might read my all posts closely...have I ever said I will fish barbed hooks anywhere for any species....What? No? Gooose fishes the appropiate hooks for the situation and as the law requires.

Sorry I care about fish. Sorry don't post much. Sorry I didn't agree with many of the regulars. And sorry to hear about the double standard with personal attacks.

Later

MUCH like forever, man.

Aunty, Looking into it, no known felons as of YET.

The jury is still out on using circle hooks for halibut. They can catch fish with bait, but how many are missed is unknown. They can be very inefective with some artificials.

Kilo,
Would I somehow be less concerned about the resource if I was a bass fisherman? I don't really fit into that category by the way, maybe sea bass. This really has nothing to do with any inadequacies I might have. I have used barbless hooks everywhere they are required and if I have any deficiencies its getting them to bite, not keeping them on.

But I will tell you who does have a problem with fishing inadequacies, young kids. They do not have the skills to keep pressure on a fish at all times. Slack line=lost fish. Lost fish=lost kids. Lost kids=lost sport.

"PS "I was speaking to a charter who caught a ling off the coast that was living with one set of gills completely torn apart." Is that good?"

Good, bad, indifferent? The point is those fish survive more damage than any barbed hook will do.

Warning to those in this debate that think barbless circle hooks will be a cure-all when targetting lingcod - Circle hooks require quite a bit of knowledge to fish live bait and effectively hook keepers. If you don't know what you are doing you will miss most of your strikes.

Since I have no previous experience with circle hooks I did some research and this is what I came up with. Maybe someone more experienced with them can confirm if the information below is true/false.

Since part of our study is to determine if circle hooks reduce latent-hook mortality, we have accumulated some information which should assist anglers in the use of circle hooks. A common theme among people is that a circle hook defies all they have been taught in terms of hooking the fish ( experienced anglers). It is a distinctly different methodology to using a J-hook and will take some practice and patience when becoming accustomed to the hooks.

The manufacturer of the circle hooks we use, Eagle Claw, lists the following as background to the circle hook:

THE CIRCLE SEA HOOK
"This functionally-shaped fishhook results in more fish being hooked. Fishermen are learning that the Circle Sea is catching 60% more fish than conventional J shaped hooks, including a 95% lip hook rate so the fish cannot escape. The Circle Sea is scientifically proven to reduce fish mortality. Hook set is not required. The hook had greater hooking power, more hookups, fewer drop-offs and it holds bait better. Ideal for all freshwater and saltwater fish species." (Eagle Claw http://www.eagleclaw.com/Pages/hooktermMain.html)

Here is an explanation from an angler on how to best use , in his experience, a circle hook:

"The trick is to let the fish take the bait, resist the temptation set the hook yourself, let the fish take it, eventually the rod will double and the fish will set them self. If you try and set the hook, the hook will not work properly and you will actually pull the hook right out of the fishes mouth. If you get too excited and set the hook you would pull the bait right out of the fishes mouth. You must resist as the reel screams out line...and the fish would hook itself."
(Brad C., http://www.wcnet.net/adc/usingcirclehooks.htm)

The target species we are studying are aggressive feeders and will have no problem in attacking bait and setting the hook for you. All that is required is watching the line to see when it gets tight and reeling the fish in. Circle hooks do not lose fish once they are hooked, so that should not be a prevalent problem. If you have any questions on using circle hooks feel free to contact us her at the lab, or you can use the internet as a valuable resource as well. Two web sites are listed on this page and any search engines will produce useful information Thank you for your assistance and good luck!

Kilo, The point of my post is "What's next?"
I have always obeyed CNR, closed waters, bait, barbless rules because they made sense, until now.
I care probably more for the resorces than most of you, but when a STUPID reg is put in place without the proper research, like Pete Castle closing the Nooksack because he said there wasn't enough Steelhead returning? We caught more in the last 3 yrs than the previous 10! But would he listen to TU, no way, he knew best! Like I said before the WDFW is full of IDIOTS!
I say Bullsh** on the barbless rule for bottom fishing!
I spend hundreds of dollars, (one hundred in fuel each trip!)just to fish for Lingcod, which isn't threatened but they say it is, and they decide to make it thougher! Yes, it pisses me off and I say NO!
How about eliminating the nets???
Let me repent what I said before, I have "Never" had a Ling or Rocky shallow the hooks. I have never caught a Salmon when Ling fishing.
I think barbless rule is good when Salmon fishing, Damn Shakers! but for bottom fishing I don't think it should apply.
Does the WDFW make mistakes somtimes? Yes. And this is one of them. If, I get caught, I'll pay him $150.00 $75.00 for that violation, and another $75.00 in advance for the next time That's chump change compared to what I spend to go out and catch "one" Lingcod.

Leadthrower, good article, but only two problems using circle hooks for Lings.
#1- Try to side hook both hooks through a frozen 14" herring, can't.
#2- Letting them take it means, Let them swallow it!
Not letting them swallow it is one of my goals. Hard to release a fish after it's throat has been ripped open or it's gills torn out!

G-MAN

I do not fish for lings, yet, so I was not knowledgeable of your point #1.

As for your point #2, yes I agree that if a fish swallows the bait and is hooked deep the mortality rate goes up. Since I am unfamiliar with circle hooks I thought that was one of the bennies of using them was that they hooked more fish in the mouth?

The shape of a circle hook only allows it to set the hook point after the part the line is tied on to is out of the fishes mouth- thats why you don't jerk to set the hook.

Somehow we got from "circle hooks for halibut" to "circle hooks for lingcod." I have never considered using circle hooks for lings because one of the first things you want to do is put alot of pressure on them to get them out of the rocks so they don't break you off. If your waiting for a circle hook to set itself that would be a problem. Just use a J-hook with the barbs piched like for salmon and don't give them slack. Same thing for rockfish. Circle hooks have been proven to be effective for halibut, but only when fishing bait.

The idea of a circle hook is that it (usually) will not hook a fish in the gut, even if it swallows the hook down to its stomach. The shape of the hook protects the hook point, and as the fish starts to swim away the hook is drawn from the stomach to the fish's mouth. Once it gets to the edge of the mouth and the part of the hook with the line on it pops out, the point will catch at the corner of the mouth and literally screw into the cartilage there, resulting in less gut hooked fish, even though they might totally swallow it.