As a companion to the other does it make sense coho post.

How does WDFW justify a selective fishery with Barbs on estuary coho?

Aren't columbia wild coho ESA listed? Do the B-10 rules make any sense?

Do you fish barbless at B10?

It matters little as to location. C&R with barbed hooks is a self defeating proposition void of any realistic chances of success. That it could exist anywhere anyway in this day and age is only confirmation of how utterly invalid harvest management has become.

Columbia is already going barbless next year, it's in the regs.

Sledddder -
It remains to be seen what next year will bring. Any regulations on the Columbia shared by Oregon and Washington require that the two states agree - which usually means that when there is a disagreement on the regulations the most liberal one applies. To date the folks in Oregon continue to resist going to barbless.

While it has been most of our experience that going to barbless makes releasing fish easier (common sense?) the available science (?) has shown little benefit from going barbless. It is those studies that serve as the foundation of the agrument of those resisting the change from barbed to barbless.

Tight lines
Curt

Along the lines of Smalma's comments, barbs don't have much relevance with fish as large as salmon. Barbless seems to matter more with trout fisheries where the smaller fish are subject to tissue damage and more handling stress when barbed hooks are removed. Handling of salmon is not increased that much by using barbed hooks. Where fish are hooked is usually of more importance than whether the hook is barbless or barbed.

My personal observation from using spinners with treble hooks a couple weeks ago at B-10 is that handling and handling time is significantly increased because fish can be hooked in two or three places with trebles. I think it would be better to restrict lures to single hooks than to require barbless hooks.

Sg

Ah ............. any bait with barbs ( herring / eggs / whatever ) has one hell of a greater impact. Treble of coarse the same, so the least impact overall is barbless.

Now get rid of bait then that is another thing all together as I the impact of barbs are minimal then.

Curt, No disrespect here but you may want to read the regs first. In BOLD print Columbia river BEGINNING JAN 1, 2011 BARBLESS HOOKS ONLY FOR SALMON & STEELHEAD.

Rivrguy,

Sorry, but the evidence doesn't back you up. Barbed hooks make no appreciable difference in fishing for salmon and steelhead. The use of bait makes a difference only when fishing in ways that encourage the fish to swallow the bait, which naturally changes the location of where the fish is hooked, and that is the factor that contributes to higher incidental mortality. Skilled anglers fishing bait for steelhead found no increase in mortality rate because fish were still hooked in the corner of the jaw. This stuff on mortality rates is in the literature. It's pointless to debate it unless new evidence is being brought to light.

Sg

SG I don't care what your data says. If you fish bait barbs make a diff, especially with Chinook and Coho or Chinook in ocean waters. That said to be honest getting rid of bait would do more than barbless but then that would really light things up.

For the record,
...says the accounting clerk to the fisheries biologist.


Just sayin'...

Actually GH the accounting clerk has handled more fish and fish with hooks than the Bio ever did. Just have to know what I did for 30 years as a hobby.

That may very well be true.....


...or not.


But, as an engineer unrelated to the fisheries arena, I would never publicly dismiss the data points of a professional's field of study. Challenge them perhaps with countering points, but not outright dismiss them.

GH I know how they do them, have been part of the doing, and know how data is manipulated. ( In GH mainly ) Again you have to break things down by location as to cause and place. The people doing it showed us how it is done, nah I am a whole lot closer than you want to know.

I have devised an extremely effective and consistent way to hook biting fish with bait such that 90+ percent are hooked from the outside in.

I use the same concept for my artificial presentations.

Bait or no bait, my ability to consistently inflict NON-mortal hooking wounds is now IDENTICAL.

At this point in the evolution of my C&R techniques, the presence or absence of a barb is inconsequential, although going barbless makes my no-touch quick-release technique a split second faster.

Care to elaborate for those of us not in the know?

He is at a CCA meeting but this will bump it for you.

http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=268341

http://www.ifish.net/board/showthread.php?t=287870&highlight=hangback

I can now confidently add diver and bait for steelhead to that list of hangback applications... got an old friend that ran 'em that way for me this season with spectacular "outside-in" results!

I can also confidently add hangback spoons to the growing list of hangback applications, based on my experience with ocean kings and coho this past weekend.

Hangback... just try it. Hey, it's what all the cool kids are doing these days.

Oh Geez, now I have to re read this thread and eyeFISH's post, because whenever I read about outside in hooking in any other context "I see flossing people, everywhere." I know Doc, and he is not a flosser.

Had an interesting time last week on the Klickitat with a very good and generous guide. We used divers and bait but with a single 1/0 (large) hook and hooked 3 wild fish cleanly and releasable because of the single larger hook.

Doc, are you hopefully able to offer a summary?

And Welcome Back!

As Francis has seen in action, my steelhead worm and spoon rigs are also tied up with a purpose to hook fish in the corner of the jaw, facilitating easier release and a lower likelihook of hooking them in a vulnerable spot...it's not hard to do, and it does matter.

Fish on...

Todd