• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Barbel conservation thoughts?

Russell Emms said:
why do people like Wye and Usk state barbless only, do you think you know better than them??
Click to expand...

Why did the likes of Cemex (and there are other waters that do the same) ban the use of barbless hooks on their waters? Perhaps, just like many on this thread, they have had different experiences.
 
I've just been sent a sample of some new hooks from Pallatrax that they're calling Gripz. They look interesting for anyone using barbless hooks and certainly have a relevance to this debate.

From the promotional blurb:

"The point of the hook is flattened, giving more room to become super sharp, but the patented element is a series of grooves across the inside point. And why? Just think of the benefits of what is in essence a super sharp, barbless pattern which when you strike and put pressure on has grooves into which the flesh of the fish moulds. No slippage, no movement, no damage - simple but ingenious."

Could be a winner...

Cheers,

Andy F
 
Russell Emms said:
I'm not dismissing anyones point of view i'm just trying to get to the bottom of why people hate barbless so much when i've seen very little damage made by them.
Of course you're going to see more than there was in the 50's and 60's because all the examples on this thread seem to be commercial/carp based and everyone can be an instant carp fisherman these days without trying anything else, which leads to a lot of inexperienced anglers on the banks of these places, and like i said earlier why do people like Wye and Usk state barbless only, do you think you know better than them??
I'm trying to get a good perspective on the pros and cons of it all.
Click to expand...

Russell, I think throughout this thread people have offered their perspectives, typically based on personal experience and many that have posted have decades of experience and insight. I don't think a proper independent study has been conducted on the pros and cons so we can only apply our own judgement informed or influenced by the perspectives of others. Personally, I use micro-barbed hooks for barbel. I cant ever recall seeing mouth damage on a barbel and given that virtually anyone I have ever spoken to states they also use barbed/micro-barbed hooks then my conclusion is that these are the hooks to use. My only experience of barbless is in commercial fisheries and as I have already said, what I have encountered is utterly depressing. These fisheries generally have a barbless hook only rule so again, I have to draw my own conclusions from that experience. I do recognise that the mouth damage suffered by the carp I have encountered isn't necessarily just down to a barbless hook.

I note that you are relatively dismissive of the YouTube clip that Graham put up but you seem to put faith in people at the Wye & Usk. Do you know these people or seen narrative that explains the reasoning behind their decision to impose a barbless hook only rule? In the absence of that, then is that faith misplaced? At least in the video clip an explanation has been offered which of course people can discount or accept as they see fit.
 
Russell Emms said:
I'm not dismissing anyones point of view i'm just trying to get to the bottom of why people hate barbless so much when i've seen very little damage made by them.
Of course you're going to see more than there was in the 50's and 60's because all the examples on this thread seem to be commercial/carp based and everyone can be an instant carp fisherman these days without trying anything else, which leads to a lot of inexperienced anglers on the banks of these places, and like i said earlier why do people like Wye and Usk state barbless only, do you think you know better than them??
I'm trying to get a good perspective on the pros and cons of it all.
Click to expand...

Russell you say you are trying to get to the bottom of why people hate using barbless hooks .
I think people have made it perfectly clear that they are of the opinion that barbless hooks and have seen the evidence that barbless hooks cause more damage than barb hooks .
 
thanks to both Andy and Chris for enlightening us about the new hooks,
after having a good look i think i,ll still stick to barbs or micro barbs thanks. interesting to see what theyre trying to conjure up though:)
 
Russell Emms said:
I'm not dismissing anyones point of view i'm just trying to get to the bottom of why people hate barbless so much when i've seen very little damage made by them.
Of course you're going to see more than there was in the 50's and 60's because all the examples on this thread seem to be commercial/carp based and everyone can be an instant carp fisherman these days without trying anything else, which leads to a lot of inexperienced anglers on the banks of these places, and like i said earlier why do people like Wye and Usk state barbless only, do you think you know better than them??
I'm trying to get a good perspective on the pros and cons of it all.
Click to expand...

Why do you assume that Wye and Usk know better than anyone else Russell? Is it because they mirror your views? There may be no right or wrong anyway, just a differing of opinions on which does the least damage, because any hook will cause some. From my experiences, like many others on here, I would not use barbless out of choice for big fish like carp and barbel, or tench for that matter.
 
As usual I am late in entering the topic :D

However, Russell you have made your stand and posed some very valid questions but appear not to like the answers that you have received from some very experienced and venerable anglers?

Personally I would never use a Barbless Hook unless I had no choice, for all of the valid reasons previously stated.

We all have choices to make when we go fishing and personally I have learned so much from my own previous experiences (I have been fishing for 50 years) but more importantly from my fellow anglers some of whom are legendary in our sport (Terry Lampard for instance) that even if I might have had my doubts, I watched, listened and after seeing the evidence, accepted the logic of the argument.

I have absolutely no doubt that Barbless hooks cause massive damage to large harder fighting fish.

However, I do not think that it is entirely down to the hook on commercials where lots of matches take place.

I do think that on such a venue where Pole Anglers are hooking big Carp on lighter gear resulting in a prolonged fight in which the afore mentioned movement of the hook can occur damage to the mouth is inevitable.
 
Comparing barbel and commercial carp is not a fair comparison anyway. The number of times they get caught, the differing methods, etc make it a moot point. If people are that concerned about damaging fish then perhaps they need to reconsider their hobby and look into golf or something.

Barbless hooks may tear. I personally have yet to see any evidence of this but don't doubt it may have happened elsewhere. Barbed hooks - well warfare of the past tells us they put a barb on an arrow for a reason and I'm sure, in the wrong hands, hooks of this type could also cause significant damage. As I said earlier, if you're debating this then perhaps dragging a fish from its habitat against its will should be considered. In that context, it seems a rather pointless debate.
 
That seems a rather binary view Lee. So, in accepting that we subject fish to some degree of distress and trauma by simply catching them then why bother giving their welfare any consideration. Not sure many would agree with that sentiment. Anglers must accept that they cause distress to fish no matter how much care and attention they apply. That has to be a given. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't do what we can to minimise that distress and damage to the fish. For that reason, it is right to consider and debate hook choice.

Yes it is difficult to make a meaningful comparison perhaps between carp and barbel and their respective watery environments, but it's not totally irrelevant and in the absence of any other data or research, I am happy to use the experience on commercial fisheries to help guide me.
 
There are benefits of both choices I am sure, which will be determined by previous experiences. But these experiences will be determined by how the fish are fished for, who fishes for them and the tactics people employ. To say that that barbless hooks, or barbed for that matter cause more damage than the other is always going to be a matter of opinion. Commercial carp get caught countless times, on some fisheries even several time per day. I would say that such pressure is almost willing damage regardless of the tackle used. I doubt there are any stretches of river in the country that come even close to this. Certainly, where I fish sees nowhere near this amount of pressure so for me it is a little irrelevant. I'm happy with my choice as I haven't experienced some of the things mentioned in this thread. I do my best and feel comfortable with my choices and that's all anyone can do. If things change then I would reflect on these choices.
 
Lee Poultney said:
There are benefits of both choices I am sure, which will be determined by previous experiences. But these experiences will be determined by how the fish are fished for, who fishes for them and the tactics people employ. To say that that barbless hooks, or barbed for that matter cause more damage than the other is always going to be a matter of opinion. Commercial carp get caught countless times, on some fisheries even several time per day. I would say that such pressure is almost willing damage regardless of the tackle used. I doubt there are any stretches of river in the country that come even close to this. Certainly, where I fish sees nowhere near this amount of pressure so for me it is a little irrelevant. I'm happy with my choice as I haven't experienced some of the things mentioned in this thread. I do my best and feel comfortable with my choices and that's all anyone can do. If things change then I would reflect on these choices.
Click to expand...

Good points very well made and with which I agree with and probably the way I should have tried to have made them.

With that, I'll get my coat :cool:
 
Hey ho isn't this fun! If you look on the posts in the youtube clip there is a good summary by an angler (his opinion):

hebones2 months ago

typical, little mention of tethered fish and furthermore no proof exists that barbless hooks move around in fishes mouths and cause more damage than the process of removing barbed hooks. Andy Loble says the barbless hook has a chance of going into different areas in the mouth, does he seriously thing the hook is bouncing around in there? Even with barbless hooks it can be a struggle to remove the hook in a particularly grisly part of the mouth, a barbless hook properly set in the fish's mouth does not move around, yet is usually very easily removed and I've never seen the type of tears described by Steve Renyard, not even once.
I see most mouth damage in the corners of the mouth and I think that is down to braid, unforgiving test curves, and ripping of the flesh there by poor unhooking techniques, specifically when using barbed hooks

As someone who recently had to visit A & E with a barbed lure treble hooked to the bend in my thumb, i can tell you that it took an incredible amount of pulling to get it out with forceps! That aside, there was no lateral tearing ;)

I'll be conducting my own experiments (when I get the chance) possibly using an uncooked leg of lamb (or similar) to replicate the alleged effects of barbless hooks turning in the flesh. If I have a eureka moment, I'll film it and put it on this site. In the meantime I'll continue to use a mixture of micro-barbed and barbless hooks and for information always use the latter when perching.
 
dont try it with meat it,ll tell you nothing, try a conger eels head or other type of sea fishes head, just for the record i used a small meat hook for decades in my work, towards the last 30 years customised ones,
a straight pull tears only a little flesh, twisting or turning whilst pulling tears the flesh considerably, sometimes as clean as a knife cut
 
the reason why i suggest the sea fish i mentioned is that the actual flesh is firm so when you cut it open cleanly you can see if damage has occurred, most if not all freshwater fish doesn,t retain its firmness:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top