single hook

[flies&brookies]

What is the thoughts and opinions to allow the use of only a single hook in any of the C&R or special regs ,delayed harvest and wild trout streams i have many times thought it would be a topic worth someone presenting to the PFBC

 

[PennKev]

What is the thoughts and opinions to allow the use of only a single hook in any of the C&R or special regs ,delayed harvest and wild trout streams i have many times thought it would be a topic worth someone presenting to the PFBC

Do you mean a single fly, or flies with single hooks? What do you hope to improve with such a regulation?

Personally, I don't think it matters much. However, I am warming up to barbless regulations as it seems half the fish are missing parts of their jaws in our more popular waters.

 

[Mike]

What is the thoughts and opinions to allow the use of only a single hook in any of the C&R or special regs ,delayed harvest and wild trout streams i have many times thought it would be a topic worth someone presenting to the PFBC

It’s been extensively studied scientifically comparing delayed mortality rates for trout when single vs treble hooks are used on lures. It’s occasionally been discussed here and I’d generally sum it up by saying that the opinions often conflicted with the science.

To my knowledge, there is one paper that disagrees with the rest. Through experience I suspect that the difference may have had to do with a specific size of treble hook in comparison to the fish mouths within a specific length range of relatively small fish. That problem occurs when a small trout fully, but barely engulfs a treble hook within the forward most portions of the upper and lower jaws at the same time, making the hook quite difficult to remove because there is no leverage. It appears to mainly be a brook trout problem, as I have no recollection of ever having had this problem with brown trout even though I’ve fished over wild brown trout populations much more than wild brook trout populations. It is is easily corrected by going down a hook size or two (larger) on those spoons, spinners, or plugs or by breaking off one tine of the treble hook when no other options are available other than quitting fishing for the day.

I’ve never seen a study that specifically addressed this hook size issue when an abundance of small size trout are present in a population. If it is primarily a brook trout problem, that could be because of differences in length frequency distributions in brook vs brown trout populations and species differences in aggressiveness.

As for barbed vs barbless, a meta-analysis of the studies across species, not just salmonids, resulted in a difference in delayed mortality of 1%. From an angler standpoint, however, I think it’s often easier to unhook a trout from a barbless hook.

 

[flies&brookies]

Do you mean a single fly, or flies with single hooks? What do you hope to improve with such a regulation?

Personally, I don't think it matters much. However, I am warming up to barbless regulations as it seems half the fish are missing parts of their jaws in our more p or bait eliminating the trebble hooks or the baits with several trebble hooks i have also seen many fish torn up from them and thinking it would reduce mortalities

 

[flies&brookies]

I have also seen fish torn up myself. thinking more of the elimination of treble hooks or the lures, baits with multiple treble hooks. Would it reduce the mortalities i dont know just asking what others thoughts would be

 

[Bamboozle]

Many of the US based lure manufacturers offer single hook versions of their lures and almost all of the Japanese companies do as well.

There is also an abundance of specialized hooks specifically designed as single hook replacements for hard baits, spoons and other lures.

About three years ago I switched all of my lures to single hook so I can attest it addresses all of the hassles that got me to cut off two of three trebles on my in-line spinners in the days before I started fly fishing:

Less snags on rocks & other underwater obstructions​

​

Less tangles in the tackle box so no need for hook bonnets​

​

Easier to release fish​

As far as opinions on banning treble hooks two issues make it tricky to consider....

​

Not every lure is available in a single hook version​

​

Swapping to single hooks requires a REAL desire to make it happen, plus buying several different sizes & styles of hooks & split rings which aren't readily available in the US. In the case of dressed hooks, you need to be skilled in fly tying to replicate the dressed trebles.​

IMHO - For those reasons I think it would be unfair at this time. In addition, I am guilty of F'ing up the maxillary process of a trout or two in my lifetime during a clunky C&R with single hooked fly... 🙁

 

[wildtrout2]

A couple of years ago I experimented with some of FTA's custom made spinners, which were VERY effective. Most of the trout I caught were only hooked with one of the trebles, several with two, and a rare fish with all three. But, I thought they would be generally easier to unhook without the barbs, so I crushed them down on all spinners and it made it MUCH easier to unhook them!

I did start missing/losing more trout, but considering the ease of release, it was a still great decision getting rid of the barbs. I'm sure the trout appreciated it as well.

 

[Bamboozle]

A couple of years ago I experimented with some of FTA's custom made spinners, which were VERY effective. Most of the trout I caught were only hooked with one of the trebles, several with two, and a rare fish with all three. But, I thought they would be generally easier to unhook without the barbs, so I crushed them down on all spinners and it made it MUCH easier to unhook them!

I did start missing/losing more trout, but considering the ease of release, it was a still great decision getting rid of the barbs. I'm sure the trout appreciated it as well.

It is far from a scientific conclusion, but I feel because of added leverage combined with the weight of an in-line spinner, barbless trebles are easier for a fish to get off versus a single hooked lure.

I ran into a company at Philadelphia Fishing Show in Oaks the past two years called RoxStar who was selling custom in-line spinner sets with fly trailers. They offer the option of a bunch of different blade styles with flies on single or double hooks/with & without trailers in brass, silver or copper.

At the show, you can pick what you and and they make them while you wait. For that reason I bought two sets over the past two years all with single hooks and they work great.

BTW - They also sell flies...

 

[wildtrout2]

It is far from a scientific conclusion, but I feel because of added leverage combined with the weight of an in-line spinner, barbless trebles are easier for a fish to get off versus a single hooked lure.

I never suggested it was a scientific conclusion, it was only MY "experiment" to see the results of removing the barbs on treble hooks. 😉

 

[Bamboozle]

I wasn't implying that...

I meant MY opinion wasn't a scientific conclusion, not your results.

 

[wildtrout2]

I wasn't implying that...

I meant MY opinion wasn't a scientific conclusion, not your results.

Gotcha, my appologies. Because, I'm far from scientific. 😆

 

[jifigz]

I think this is such a non-issue that it doesn't warrant and type of changes to the regs.

Just my opinion.

 

[wildtrout2]

I think this is such a non-issue that it doesn't warrant and type of changes to the regs.

Just my opinion.

I agree, it's not a major issue. But, I do believe going barbless makes a big difference in the ease of releasing trout unharmed.

 

[CRB]

Going barbless is easier when "I" get impaled on a hook.
Dam barb makes it tough to remove and painful.

 

[vern]

I would have to say "no" to restricting hook numbers to one per artificial.

(And definitely not one hook per rod.)

Construction and movement characteristics that make something successful can be easily destroyed if the total functional dynamic of the lure-fly isn't considered.

Having fished with spinners, plugs, spoons, jigs, etc., there is something that a treble provides and that is stability of the movement of the lure.
The weight balance between the drag of the treble and the need to eliminate the spin of the body helps maintain a constant movement pattern.

Pinching barbs is generally good for all hooks, but could present a problem with trebles and that's generally when there is no stiff attachment between the eye of the hook and the line.

If the treble shank-to-mono connection isn't stiff enough, it can make the eye of the treble serve as a hinge.
When it does, the penetration of the treble hook tip is not sufficient nor well-considered nor designed.
It doesn't work.
When there is no stiff attachment to the eye of the treble hook it's more likely that two of the hook points will flip away from where the first hook point pricks into the trout's mouth.
A barbed hook on a treble can stick and stay. If the hook set is done well.
A barbless hook on a treble can much more easily flip-slip. It's a lot more difficult to get a good result.
But it should only be a problem in this one type of situation.
Agree that barbless could be considered necessary for all fishing methods.

I have deliberately purchased and switched out rear treble hooks on the Rapalas to improve lure movement and hooking ease.
These Rapalas and other full stiff body lures/flies can have barbs pinched without too much concern.

I put a larger treble on the rear of Rapalas to help with enhancing the body wiggle speed to better compare to an actual minnow, and it also helps with using the "walking-the-dog" subsurface technique.

But while that's not flyfishing, it does seem to be useful construction effect information. Something that may be useful in rigging and building flies to achieve better movements and hooking qualities.

Otherwise,

In flyfishing, IMO, a major concern for creating trout mouth destruction is using a long-shanked hook.

A very long shank hook is used commonly for some standard streamer patterns.
Also for things as Muddlers.

Importance is great for considering the length of the shaft of the hook.
The long, streamer body hooks have so much torque that they tear up the flesh by twisting the hook point back and forth, strongly and with wide cuts.
Instead, two 1x short shank barbless hooks combined by mono can make for a good streamer construction foundation. It can be a good modification, even if it isn't something intended for larger warm water fish.

Personal practice is to use flexible extended bodies tied on regular shank length or 1x short shaft hooks, and/or wider gap hooks The shorter shanks also provide a better energy focus and snug hookup without tearing up flesh, as much. It doesn't do the back-and-forth flesh ripping that long shanks can do.


(As an additional consideration, if using a section of tubing for the body foundation the eye of the treble should be inserted well into the tubing, so that the tubing is essentially a thick line, or perhaps more so a good flexible shank for tying a fly body.)

 

[KELORGO]

I fish barbless all the time. My brother, not so much…

 

[JimKennedy]

Not a science based observation here, but it seems to me trout that get caught a lot end up having their jaws damaged. An example I can give is a 10-inch brown I caught in the slack water up from the Allenberry this spring. It was on a barbless fly. I was able to get a firm hold on the fly and turn it to set the trout loose without touching the fish. I've done this hundreds of times, but this time, a chunk of jawbone came off with the fly.

Possibly it was a bad bit of leverage on my part, but it was clear the trout was no stranger to being hooked. I suspect being caught several times put a few too many holes in the fish's mouth and my hook was the one that finally ripped a piece of jaw loose.

A single bad release can do a lot of damage, but I'm increasingly inclined to believe a lot of tender releases have the same effect as a death by a thousand cuts.

As for the treble hook issue, I'm inclined to agree with Mike that there's a lot of hard opinion out there that isn't backed by science that's similarly hard.

I know a few years back I looked at some of the studies about the best kinds of nets if you want to release fish. I wanted to find the numbers behind the logic of switching to the now standard rubber nets. I found a study called "“Effects of landing net mesh type on injury and mortality in a freshwater recreational fishery" by fisheries biologists working for Florida, Illinois and Canada. It studied the effects of netting on bluegill with 50 bluegill netted with each type of net, plus another 50 hand released:

• None of the fish released by hand died
• Four of the fish landed in the rubber net died
• Six of the fish landed in the knotless mesh net died
• 14 of the fish landed in the finely knotted net died
• 10 of the fish landed in the coarsely knotted net died
  

In short, the rubber net is better, but hand release is best (based on sunnies and other panfish, not trout). I figured I rarely catch a trout so large that it truly needs to be netted, so I stopped carrying a net and never looked back. It's made me more cognizant of how I play my fish so as to get them in efficiently without the crutch of using a net a the end. (Also, I had to cringe about a year ago when I was at a heavily fished spot and saw guys swinging their 10-inch trout through the air and into nets as though the nets were lacrosse sticks, but that's a different subject.)

There's guys out there who swear by the rubber net, and it is better than knotted mesh nets for fish survival, but that's only part of the story. I'm going to guess the research on treble vs single vs single barbless shows a similar range of results.

The study I cited is at this link (at least the abstract is): https://www.researchgate.net/public...ndicate that fish,the rubber or knotless mesh

 

[vern]

I fish barbless all the time. My brother, not so much…
View attachment 1641244235

And I thought it was nuts when people started putting rings in their noses (and other body parts)!
Maybe this could catch on!
Get some Etsy marketing and provide profits to TU!!

Latin designation "Tubis Lobis"?

 

[vern]

Not a science based observation here, but it seems to me trout that get caught a lot end up having their jaws damaged. An example I can give is a 10-inch brown I caught in the slack water up from the Allenberry this spring. It was on a barbless fly. I was able to get a firm hold on the fly and turn it to set the trout loose without touching the fish. I've done this hundreds of times, but this time, a chunk of jawbone came off with the fly.

Possibly it was a bad bit of leverage on my part, but it was clear the trout was no stranger to being hooked. I suspect being caught several times put a few too many holes in the fish's mouth and my hook was the one that finally ripped a piece of jaw loose.

A single bad release can do a lot of damage, but I'm increasingly inclined to believe a lot of tender releases have the same effect as a death by a thousand cuts.

As for the treble hook issue, I'm inclined to agree with Mike that there's a lot of hard opinion out there that isn't backed by science that's similarly hard.

I know a few years back I looked at some of the studies about the best kinds of nets if you want to release fish. I wanted to find the numbers behind the logic of switching to the now standard rubber nets. I found a study called "“Effects of landing net mesh type on injury and mortality in a freshwater recreational fishery" by fisheries biologists working for Florida, Illinois and Canada. It studied the effects of netting on bluegill with 50 bluegill netted with each type of net, plus another 50 hand released:

• None of the fish released by hand died
• Four of the fish landed in the rubber net died
• Six of the fish landed in the knotless mesh net died
• 14 of the fish landed in the finely knotted net died
• 10 of the fish landed in the coarsely knotted net died

In short, the rubber net is better, but hand release is best (based on sunnies and other panfish, not trout). I figured I rarely catch a trout so large that it truly needs to be netted, so I stopped carrying a net and never looked back. It's made me more cognizant of how I play my fish so as to get them in efficiently without the crutch of using a net a the end. (Also, I had to cringe about a year ago when I was at a heavily fished spot and saw guys swinging their 10-inch trout through the air and into nets as though the nets were lacrosse sticks, but that's a different subject.)

There's guys out there who swear by the rubber net, and it is better than knotted mesh nets for fish survival, but that's only part of the story. I'm going to guess the research on treble vs single vs single barbless shows a similar range of results.

The study I cited is at this link (at least the abstract is): https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228854436_Effects_of_landing_net_mesh_type_on_injury_and_mortality_in_a_freshwater_recreational_fishery#:~:text=Our results indicate that fish,the rubber or knotless mesh

Like this post.

IMO, two things need more consideration per research and use of nets.

Regarding the research, using release survival as the only parameter is not good science.

The hand-release portion should definitely have included a comparison portion for the fish's survival features.
Trout swim quickly and can hide better with quick dips downward and beneath and behind debris and others. That's evolutionary.

Bluegills and other sunfish have evolved with very sharply pointed dorsal fins. These lessen the strength of the grip on the fish and thus reduces the opportunities for internal organ damage.

That is much different than for trout.

Also for consideration, use walking stick nets.
I made my own.
Smaller net than currently common, mounted on the top of a walking stick. Suggest searching building supply stores for wooden pole possibilities.
After many years of having and watching so many other trout being brought in to shore for release, it's always observed that they will bang and flip and flop on rocks and other bank-lined fish-damaging stuff.

With the long-handle net, it's so much more likely that the fish will not be bounced around the shoreline.
Netting a fish before it gets into the stone-bouncing shallow depth of shoreline helps.

Also, my practice for a long time is to always, and slowly, roll them over onto their backs - upside down - while they are still in the net and the net is still in the water. It makes them go limp-ish.
No need to grasp.
A lot easier to do a gentle backout of the hook point and calm release.

Only other time a fish gets gripped as hard as a fisherman's hand is by the mouth of a fish eater.

.

 

[Bamboozle]

No science in my opinion, but as someone who ONLY uses a net to release trout that I catch from places where I don't wade AND I am standing on a high bank WELL above the surface of the water so even kneeling wouldn't get a net to the water...

I feel it is the time element in netting that causes the mortality that is exacerbated by photographing your catch IN the net or your hand...

FWIW - I built an extension for an existing long handled net I own which resulted in a net over 5" long. It's the only thing I can use at the "high bank" places mentioned above to avoid having to pick up a fish by my leader then literally tossing it back in the creek.

However, I'm not sure which is worse... 😒