I was warned by a warden while flyfishing at Hoodsport not to fish with barbs in the saltwater. I had tied the fly the night before and forgot to pinch down the barb. But I was wondering why you have to have barbless hooks in the saltwater when you can use them in the rivers. I think that it should be the other way around. Because you will more often keep a fish in the salt and practice catch and release in the rivers. It would make much more seanse this way. Is there anybody that knows why the rules are this way?

i'm not exactly sure, but i think it's because the fish are more delicate in the salt, and can be a lot more easily injured. maybe something about hooking juveniles, never been certain though

I suspect a lot of it has to do with the requirement to release many of the fish you catch because they are too small or "wild". You don't see similar requirements in freshwater. I had to release 5 or 6 coho at Neah Bay to find one that was legal. Obviously, barbs would mean higher mortality. Even though many practice C&R in the rivers, it isn't required.

-David

If I am remembering correctly barbless hooks were required for one season as a test to see if the survival rate of juvenile blackmouth (shakers) would increase. It took me a while to get used to but I like the rule now. Like all new Sport Fishing rules it was never removed. The experimental rule at Seiku this year where you can't bring a fish in your boat but it doesn't say anything about not netting them, not lifting them up, etc. That rule will most likely never be removed but instead expanded to other areas whether it's proven effective or not. How do you really prove it does any good or not? Some person or group dreamed it up and now it's law.

How do you PROVE that OJ is guilty, or that dog sh!t really isn't good to eat. Sometimes you just gotta depend on reason and logic... Oh and a little bit of faith probably helps too!

barbless hooks were invented for morons like me who hook themselves in the a$$. They keep me from having to pull up to the boat next to me and asking for help getting it out! Thats not an image you want burned into your memory....

When the barbless hook rule was created in the salt for salmon Chinook weren't considered endangered at that time. Not to the extent they are now anyway. I don't remember the year...some time in the late 1970's I believe. Shortly after the limit went from three to two. Anyone remember the year? Of course that was only for salmon and not all saltwater fishing.
And if we were actually using "reason and logic" then we would have quit fishing statewide years ago to recover the fish.

There is on e reason (maybe two) they put barbless hooks on everything in saltwater and that is simply that it makes it easier the wdfw wardens to enforce the regs. Now people can say there're fishing for cutthroat or trolling for flounder while actually fishing for salmon and still get a ticket. Plus the indians hate dealing with fish that have hooks in them while they are trying to remove them from there nets.

After contemplating what sort of regulation changes will be made for next year, it dawned on me. I thought about the barbless hook issue for steelhead salmon, trout, and almost all fish for that matter. I find it quite perplexing that here in the state of washington I have shopped a few big stores as well as little ones, but I have only seen gamakatsu barbless hooks in upturned eye salmon/steelhead/walleye style.

My question is, If we have regulations for barbless hooks for specific fisheries, why do fishermen have to bear the responsibility of pinching barbs down? It would seem to me that all stores should sell barbless hooks and that manufacturers should produce hooks without barbs. Also, it would seem like manufacturing barbless hooks would be a lot less time consuming than making those with barbs. Yes, I do realize that it would require a replacement of machinery or costly modifiications. But don't you all think that it would be a time saver if we didn't have to pinch down hooks? I think hook penetration would be greatly improved as well. Yes, I know that you can file down the barb section just as easily, but that takes time and effort which isn't always available when you're tying up a bunch of rigs and replacing trebles on lures.

Additionally I think that the definition of barbless needs to be changed. Currently barbless hooks may not have ANY barbs, but as all of you probably have experienced, barbs on the shank helps hold bait in place, but in almost no way infllicts damage to fish when taken out of the mouth. I really would prefer to fish with barbed shanks so I don't have to deal with the bait bunching up at the bend of the hook.

I have used barbless hooks for many years. If the fish is played correctly, it will not be lost. If C&R is at all an option, use barbless hooks.

LOL

"That's a stupid statement. If the fish is landed then it was played correctly? If a very skilled angler loses a fish, he DIDN'T play it correctly?

What has that got to do with barbed or barbless?"


Tsk, AuntyM, I think maybe you need to chill (pun intended!)

"If I lose the fish, it's obviously the fishes fault, not the hook....."


I think that's what Fish Seeker meant, as in, if you play the fish correctly, you won't lose it JUST BECAUSE you have a barbless hook.

Sorry, AuntyM, I'm still scratching my head because I still think you're preaching to the choir....UNLESS:

you're saying that you think that, in the hands of an inexperienced angler, the fish lost/landed ratio is exactly the same (or the difference is statistically insignificant) between those hooked on barbed or barbless hooks.

It seems to me that logic would dictate that if the line goes slack, as is common in the hands of an inexperienced angler, a hook with a barb that's penetrated the tissue of a fish's mouth is much more likely to stay put. If there's data to the contrary (controlled testing and all that) I'm all for examining it.

Give it up Aunty, I'm siding with Skywalker.

It is much easyer to lose a fish on a barbless hook than a hook that has barbs. But if pressure is consistant, then you increase the chance of landing a fish on a barbless hook.

my 2 cents:
i lost several kings in the ocean before i got the knack of barbless hooks, i was losing them right before the net get just a little slack & a head turn & they are gone...

i like the barbless no because sine I have kept the line tight throughout the process I haven't lost one & it EASIER & FASTER to shake off the native silvers... (so i am willing to agree that they are helping keep more alive)

the down side to barbless is i seem to get more hook ups with barbs & using barbs i don't really have to be that careful (=i can be lazy) when bringig in the fish & last down side is that since i was so careful bringing in the fish & de-hooking it, it is perfect shape when it runs into the gill net (the ultimate conservation tool)...