Since we have got a couple differnt discussions taking place regarding wild steelhead release mortality rates that occur due to release of steelhead, I was wondering what everyone's opinion of a statewide ban of barbless hooks in our rivers.

Studies have shown that barbed hooks is one the biggest factors whether a steelhead lives or dies upon release. Plus barbed hooks aide in the releaseing of juvenille salmonids and other fishes such as Cutthroat Trout and Bull Trout.

We have had barbless hooks for saltwater salmon for years now with very little complaint plus BC rivers are all barbless and I have heard few complaints from up North.

I would be all in support of it...opinions???

Ryan, barbless hooks work for me!

I also noticed that your job has you reaching celeb status with those northern fishing reports.
We are not worthy :p

FJ...out.

ive always pinched down the barbs on all my hooks, makes it a lot easier to release obviously, but i notice that the barbless hook gets a full tight penetration, where as a barbed hook can tear a hole larger than the hook wire, and given some slack line can let the hook slide out in some situations.

Ryan,

One step at a time partner. Release the natives state wide, barbless hooks, then no bait, ... Locals may think you are a fly fisherman and come after you you may need a bodyguard. How about RT?

Just kidding , it is a good idea but I think it is ahead of its time. We need to educate a lot more people. I fish barbless a lot of times.

I would like to see mandatory barbless hooks in steelhead rivers from Jan. 15th to April 15th. (Gee, that latter date sounds familiar). And I would like to see voluntary barbless hooks whenever a good number of steelie nates are present.

* I only bodyguard for women.

Barbless works for me........just completing a great salmon season. Sure made the release of fish easy. Would be OK with me if 100% of the plugs, spinners, and other lures were single hook, right from the manufactures. Let them package their products ready to fish. Pisses me off that with many spinners and plugs, I must "cut the hooks off" and install a single hook to be legal.

"Worse day sport fishing, still better than the best day working"

I think barbless is a great way to go, I can't say I always pinch the barbs but if I am fishing where I know I will have to release the majority of my fish I will. Last spring we started pnching the barbs on our kwikfish because it made it a whole lot easier to release all those native springers. Was easier on the fish sinch the hooks came out faster and the fish was then back on it's way.

I started going to single barbless on my salmon plugs reluctantly this year. After a fall season where we had something like 50 hookups, I found that we hooked just as many, if not more of the strikes, and lost no fish. That's right, no fish lost after the initial hookup.

I have used barbless hooks for flies for years. It is my belief that if the angler is at all skilled in fighting fish, there is very little loss if fish due to barbless use.

So we could convert over the use of barbless hooks tomorrow without complaint from me. Well, maybe a little complaint, as I change over the rest of the dozens of plugs I own.

Barbless - sure. Single barbless, no way.

Single barbless for bait would be fine, but I personally feel a barbless siwash will do much more damage to a fish then a barbless trebble.

Of all the salmon and steelhead I've caught this year on barbed trebble hooked plugs, *none* have been hooked deep. I see no reason for the single barbless rule when it comes to floating lures.

I have to agree with UltimateFeashKacher on this one! What's next, a line test limit? No more lead? No more bait cures. No more bait? No more paint on jigs or lures? New hook sizes? Where does it all end? After all, are we not fishermen? Yes, we can by choice, choose to bend our barbs down, but why make it another stupid law? Isn't it time we focus on the reel fish killers, i.e. dams, gill nets, trawlers, pollution, other protected predators, and disease?

All of these problems affect the survivability of fish long before the "hook" takes its toll! The secret to recovering wild steelhead is not(my opinion)in the use of the "hook", it's in removal of the damn dams! Look around guys, every ditch around every roadway runs right into some little river or creek. What do you think that does for fish? What next, ban all cars that drip oil? Plug up all coverts? Is 10/40 weight better then 30 weight oil for fish?

Maybe its time for some of you "ban" guys to post on this bb a list showing us what YOU think "kills" wild steelhead. Put them in priority, and what kills steelhead first, and at what percent they kill the fish. That way, we can all see just what you think effect's the recovery of wild steelhead stocks.

That way every member on this bb can see what really kills fish, and in what order that we should attempt to reduce their effect. It could read something like this; Dams #1 (70%); Gill nets #2 (40%); pollution #3 (46%) Hook mortally #4 (8%), etc.

The hook is an easy one to pick on because you can catch the fish and hold him in a net pen for a couple of hours, or days, and wait for him to die. But what about the other killers, how long to you think it takes for the other "killers" to take their toll?


Now wouldn't that make a good thread! At some point, RT could make a final posting and reveal the final survey. Every one could put their 2 cents worth in and explain how they came up with their numbers. Then, and only then, can we really see what is really going to speed up wild steelhead recovery. Some of you may not like what you'll see, because it may affect your way of life. We can get all this information free!

Who's going to take the first shot?

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the bait worth the sting of the hook???

AAAhhh, the ongoing barbless hook debate.

We went to all barbless in Oregon until the studied it and found it really made no significant difference.

They have now changed back to barbed hooks. As of the first of the year, they are also doing away with the size limitations for bait hooks.

Again, after limiting us to a larger size their studies determined no significant difference.

I have hooked and landy many, many fish both with and without barbed hooks and have found little difference in the release time.

I have found barbles hooks buried clear into the brain cavity of a fish. That fish will be just as dead as one that a barbed hook was dug out.

My opinion is that until we get a handle on the dams and other fish killing situations that are really taking their toll on fish, we are doing little more than making ourselves feel like we are doing our parts to help fish when we make these little rule changes.

The real solutions lie in restoring and protecting habitat, not barbed vs barbless, not bait vs. artificials and not wild vs. hatchery.

I would personally support barbless hooks in a heartbeat, this is a regulation that would immediately lower hooking mortality rates. I don't understand why folks are against it, look at the C&R areas and seasons, they have selective gear rules, no bait in place. Everyone still catches fish and the type of gear you use is not discriminated against, anglers can still use: floats/jigs,rubber worms, spoons, spinners, plugs, drift bobbers, flies, whatever you want except barbed hooks and bait.

CowlitzFisherman,

Undoubtedly, the things you mention are more detrimental to wild steelhead than barbed hooks. However, since we can't just go out and breach all of the dams, stop logging, and take away the tribes right to net the rivers to death, why not start with something WE CAN DO

Mandatory barbless hook regulations are a good idea. If it were possible to effectively ENFORCE the regulation, it would be a great idea.

As pointed out above, fishing barbless hooks does not significantly reduce the number of fish landed. IMHO it adds a little more challenge to the sport, and reduces, even if just a little bit, the chance of a released fish not surviving.

cowlitzfisherman you forgot the biggest killer of them all... hatcheries!!! or at least outplanting!!!

Like has been said above this isn't the end all cure all to the problem but it is a something we can do as sportsmen to help a little. It doesn't increase the survival rate that much but any increase is a plus. I also agree that it doesn't have to be single barbless, Siwash hooks do a lot of damage from being longer shanked and getting further back in the fish's mouth. I have seen many more fish that have a hook coming through and eye or back into the gills with siwash hooks. you are better off with a barbless treble in my opinion over a siwash if you are going to be releasing fish. I have never noticed a significant increase of lost fish due to barbless, I actully think you get better hookups because there isnt that extra piece of hook that has to penetrate. The hooks slide out a lot better and that makes release easier in my opinion. We turned loose a lot of springers in the columbia last year and once we went to barbless it was a lot quicker and easier. This is a hot issue as always and we will all have different opinions on what is the best way to go.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: Firedog ]

So Parker, are you telling us that it takes you the same amount of time to unhook a fish from a single barbless siwash as a barbed treble. I used trebles[barbless] as a trailor hook beach fishing for coho's but found the length of time to release some fish was unexceptable to me so I only use single hooks now.

This old chestnut of who`s to blame for salmonid declines brings out all of the irrational subjective opinions as to the prime culprits. One says logging another native catch others think dams but we have no objective evaluation of causes of decline. Nor are we likely to have such;too many vested intrests prevent an objective assesment.Fisheries and forest managers feel threatened,water managers are in a blue funk and the native peoples defy the white mans logic with dreams of their forebearers.
While its purely opinion one can apply a form of logic to even the subjective. Northern rivers in Canada provide some basis. The fabled Dean River in spite of not having any industrial development or polution nor having any significant logging history and while reasonably inaccesable has suffered virtually the same declines that other steelhead rivers such as the Thompson have experienced. There is only one conclusion one can reach it has to be commercial bycatch.
Coho in northern rivers suffered similar declies and opinion said it was American overfishing. But when commercial fishing was banned four years ago the returns were up by 400 to 500 percent. Again logic would tell you that commercial overfishing by both countries was the culprite.
The move to barbless hooks will help to increase the escapement but barbless is no panacea for preserving fish stocks.
The days of commercial fishing are or should be over.The revenues from tourism and sport fishing will more than replace the loss of commercial fishing revenues. What is needed now is political influence to overcome the tunnelvisioned perceptions of prehistoric politicans.
coot

I'm saying that I'd rather use a barbless trebble than a barbless or barbed siwash. I'm also saying that siwashes will probably do more damage to a fish than a barbless trebble. It's a lot easier for fish to deeply swallow a siwash then it is a trebble hook.

Siwashes are mean, deep penetrating hooks (especially if you use the VISION Siwash! ) You'll probably never see a fish swallow or deeply hooked with a trebble on a plug.

So yes, JG, it takes no more time to unhook a barbless trebble then it does a siwash. Just use a pair of pliars...give a good, sharp and direct yank in the opposite direction of the hook point, and VOILA.

Also, JG, were you using bait on the coho? I have no argument with single barbless for any bait. I was referring to non-baited plugs.

Finally, my comments were directed towards Special's original comment of a state-wide single barbless restriction.

I have no problem with barbless. I just have a problem with the single barbless on floating lures. Barbless trebbles on floating lures would be fine.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: parker ]

Ryan, are you suggesting a statewide ban on barb less hooks or did you mean a statewide ban on barbed hooks? Either way I catch fish both ways. When it comes to releasing, the barb less is much easier, especially if using bait.

Coot I tend to agree with you that barb less will help with escapement and possibly mortality. Commerical fisheries will kill more in one pass that the average fisher person could ever kill in a life time with the usage of barbed hooks.

Cowlitzfisherman ditto on what you stated.

4salt: Instead of imposing new laws just getting the ones on the books enforced would be a bonus. If our lawmakers would hire more enforcement agents instead of cutting them back, violaters would spend more time in jail and less time on the water.

Parker,

Your experience is different than mine. I (well, my boat) hooked and caught well over 50 salmon this fall on siwashes. NONE of them were hooked in a manner that caused them permanent harm. Most were hooked in the corner of the jaw. A few were hooked in the roof of the mouth. These were on a mix of kwikfish, wiggle warts, and spoons. All could have been released without harm, and most were.

I haven't been there when your examples were caught, so it's hard to say what this means. However, 50 fish is a statistically significant sample, and so therefore I am unconvinced of your position, that siwash hooks are harmful to the fish.

I fish mostly fairly large hooks. I use 3/0's and 4/0's on Kwikfish, and 1/0 or 2/0's on warts. Of course, all I use are those cheezy Gamakatsu's, so that may make a difference.

I also think that the indirect effect of using single hooks is important. If you use singles, they get tangled in the net less, which makes it easy to quickly release fish. If the goal is to get a healthy fish back in the water, I think this important.

Hooks, shmooks......cowlitzfisherman knows what he is talking about. What all of you don't see first hand is hurting you.
I don't care what they (WDFW) say about the environment, el nino, la nina, global warming, barbed hooks, endangered species, over developement, air pollution, it is all a bunch of SH**!
The number one reason fish all over the state are suffering is because of netting, commercial and indian. I watch the indians rape the hell out of the Green River every year. I think if more people saw what was really going on they would be a little more upset because their property taxes are going up to protect the endangered Puget Sound Chinook. The worst part of all this is that at the tribal hangout (launch) on the Green there is always a WDFW truck parked there.

To clarify I meant a barbed hook ban because the studies have shown that barbed hooks increase hooking mortality. I have not seen significant evidence when comparing single versus treble hooks.

If anyone has any studies that would discount this I would love to see them!!

And in regards to other arguement about who is at fault and who we shall blame, the blame lies squarely on US-as a society. We are overpopulated and have managed to urbanize and pollute our enviroment and rape our forests and oceans. While taking on the larger fight for growth management and protection for our rural and forested areas we must make the small sacrficies that we can to help save our fisheries which includes barbless hooks.

We are the first to point fingers but are the last ones to act!! What have you done to save our wild salmonids as of late???? I'd love to hear about it!!!!!!!

Yeah, we know Carl. Any suggestions? Perhaps an "Alar scare" to decrease consumption of netted fish? You know, if you eat salmon and steelhead your pecker will go limp or something?

Looking back at my post, it may have came across as self-righteous so I want to bring it up before someone else does.

What I was trying to get at is that I get so frustrated with the b*tching and comaplaing and blaming with regards to our fisheries but when someone or a group wants to do what they can to fix the problem, they are flamed as extremist liberals and/or self-righteous yuppies etc. etc.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: RPetzold ]

I support single barbless hooks for many reasons but the best is to keep it simple to understand. SINGLE BARBLESS HOOKS ONLY No more questions about what where. The regs are complicated enough.

I have recently changed all my plugs that will be used while native fish are present to single siwash hooks due to the extended time it takes ME to unhook a terble hook(s). I realize all others may not have this problem but for the sake of the fish hooked by the those who do I support the use of manditory single barbless hooks.

Not really complaining about who is at fault there is enough debate about that one. I would rather not see more regulation leading to more regulation. Like Cowlitzfisherman pointed out what is next line weight, so on and so forth. After all barbed or barb less can be a personal choice.

As for making sacrifices how about each of us just make ten less fishing trips during peak season to the river next year? Think of the fish that will get through to spawn! That could be made into regulation by assigning alphabetical only fishing days for license holders.

Dan S.

I think the "limp pecker" scare tactic might be worth pursuing LMAO

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: KORE ]

SkaGuy (as in the music???)-
No offense but that is a red herring!! Barbless hooks regs have been used to aide, rebuild and create excellent fisheries in the past 20 years so passing a barbless hook regulation would be nothing new.

It is not some regulation being pulled out of thin in air so there is no reason to believe that some other assonine regulation would be pulled out of thin air as well (line wieght restrictions, etc.)!

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: RPetzold ]

Ryan,

Achieving your goal may be easier than you think. Based on the assumption that 10% catch 90%, all you have to do is to convince the 10% to go barbless year around and the other 90% can do whatever they want. Now few of those 10% that visit this site claim to catch 95% of the 90%. I don't want to name names here but you know who they are. so your work might even be easier.

sparky, face it, your part of a special intrest group and that group is "catch and release fisherman".

According to the survery done by the WDFW this past year 60%+ fisherman want wild steelhead release. How does that make us a special intrest group???

sparky, do you realy think that 60 percent of the fisherman are "catch and release" fisherman ?, has it ever entered your mind that there is a difrence in "catch and release wild steelhead" and "release all wild steelhead" ?

That is what the survey asked and 60%+ replied they would be in favor of statewide wild steelhead release year-round.

sparky, on the homepage of the wsc in the mission statement it says that the wsc wants year round "catch and release" of wild steelhead, if it said "year round release" of wild syeelhead i wouldnt veiw it as a special intrest group. i agree that 60 percent want release of wild steelhead but dont confuse everyone and say 60 percent want catch and release of wild steelhead.

I'll pass on the barbless hooks... It's just setting yourself up for more and more restrictions. Next thing you know you'll have a special permit drawing to fish specific rivers.

Concentrate more on the true issues that are hampering the runs. Nets, dams, predators, etc..
What's your next questions Ryan, Bait bans???
Keith

Personally, I'm for no more restrictions. Currently, sportsmen pay more and get less every year. Here is a section from an article I've read about barbless hooks.


Anglers also often are mistaken when they assume that barbless hooks increase the survival of released fish. Not true, Goeman said.

"There's been a lot of research done on this, including with trout fisheries out West," said Goeman. "It started to come out 10 or 15 years ago that barbless hooks didn't decrease mortality, and it was a shock to the scientific community. It makes sense to the layman that barbless hooks would be the answer, and it even makes sense to scientists, but the science doesn't bear it out."


Barbless hooks accomplish one thing — they aid the angler in removing the hook and perhaps reducing the time the angler spends holding the fish. But, all things considered, the fish still fights and can sustain injuries that ultimately could kill it after it's released.

"Barbless hooks do not reduce hooking mortality, period," Goeman said.


The entire article can be read here

Why should the group that does by far, the least damage, continue to get the most restricions and penalties? When I go fishing, my goal is to hook and land a fish. Communing with nature, getting fresh air, etc is just a bonus. I want to catch fish and whatever benefits I can give myself, the better.

Some may argue that since we can't stop netting yet or bring down dams we should at least do "our part". Well, in the big picture, "our part" doesn't mean jack ****. If every sport caught native was released in perfect health, the runs would continue to diminish almost just as quickly as they are now because, pay attention now, sportsmen are not the problem.

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: JacobF ]

boater:




I'm not being facetious here boater. That sentence confuses me. What is the difference between those 2 phrases? 60% don't want wild steelhead caught before being released?

RPetzold


You said;

"According to the survey done by the WDFW this past year 60%+ fisherman want wild steelhead release. How does that make us a special intrest group???"

Did you ever stop to think that every survey is designed to get the results that it wants! WDFW is so darn bias when it comes to "wild" fish recovery that it is almost funny! Just stop and think about it for a few moments. WDFW can sit on their fat duffs (as usual) and do nothing but spend our money on their jobs without doing a damn thing to produce fish that we can catch and yes, KILL!

Not to long ago I was told that WDFW was forming a brand new advisory group of citizens who supposably represented all the different aspects of fishing and hunting interests. I was told by one of the WDFW staff that among others, my name was one that was proposed for what was to be called "the round table".

I was also told that I was not chosen because I am to outspoken on my fishing interests! I have worked with many WDFW personal for the last 17 years and known them well. WDFW does not want anyone who may have a different opinion, then theirs, having anything to do that may change their current fish managing polices (guard job at all costs).

Do you really think that WDFW has one single person on this new "Round Table" that promotes catch and KILL? (well maybe one gillnetter) You can bet your last dime that they have all been chosen because they support WDFW catch and release policy. If WDFW really cared about saving "wild" steelhead, they would immediately stop the gill netting on the Columbia River. Believe what you want, but common sense tells you (and most others) that hook and release won't do a damn thing to restore wild steelhead runs as long as the nets keep killing them. Where is the logic to make us use barbless hooks at one point, and then release the fish unharmed, just to go around the corner and get entangling to death in some gill net?

First, the nets must come out, and then we will see if hook and release is needed. I am all for hook and release if removing the nets don't do the job! Common sense tells most of us that everything else is just spitting into the wind. Let's put every recovery effort in its rightful order and then see what else is truly needed to recover our wild steelhead runs. Dam removal, habitat enhancement, hook and release will do nothing until the nets get out of our rivers!

RPetzold, I understand that once someone has practice what they preach that it is hard to change. I have also talked to a lot the "common" type fishermen, and believe me, they are not supporters of any new barb less hooks restrictions.

That's mine and a lot of others 2 cents worth.

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the hook worth the sting of the bait????

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: cowlitzfisherman ]

boater,

Try making some sense. What are you going to do.....release fish you haven't caught?

JacobF,

Don't quote a guy talking about walleye, bass, and other spiny rays. This discussion is about steelhead. That 10% figure is BS when discussing steelhead.

I could take it or leave it. I believe the effect on the run would be insignificant, but I guess it wouldn't hurt.

cowlitzfisherman,
Not sure why you think F&G is for C&R. Bob Gibbons who heads the steelhead area of F&G is totally against C&R. as are his understudies. At the Vancouver meeting Bob stood outside helping a catch & kill advocate with his speech telling the guy not to say this but say F&G science is the real science, etc.
From reading your posts over the last year& half I have a lot of respect for your hard work in saving steelhead down your way but you are wrong about where the F&G stand on steelhead release.
As for the questionier, F&G had it put out by an independent group and did it not ask the Question; "If wild steelhead runs are healthy would you suport C&R state wide"? 61% said yes even if the runs are healthy, 34% said no, that's all most 2 to 1. That surprised me because I thought the question was biased for the catch & kill advocates with the healthy run bit in the question.
As for the barbed hook discussion I would agree it may make little difference on adult fish but a barbed hook in June and July on smolts going to the ocean takes it's toll would you agree on that.
Land Tuna.

Dan,

I fear that asking Boater to apply logic to his statements may be an exercise in futillity.

Jacob F,

There's that old tired arguement again. Since we can't do sh!t about nets, dams etc... why do anything at all?

How about this. Forget conservation, and all of the arguements pro and con posted above. Why not do it to:

1 - Simplify the regs.
2 - Add a little more challenge to the sport.

Surely, all of the "Expert Fisherman" here on this board should have no difficulty whatsoever maintaining their astronomical catch statistics.

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: 4Salt ]

There's still plenty of challenge, that's why they call it fishing and not catching...
Keith

Just fish with gammies, they hardly have a barb! Ain't that right Keith?

The last thing we need as sport fishers is one more rule governing hw we fish. We are already regulated to death as it is. There have been at least two different studies quoted. One supossedly said that barbless hooks help and the other supossedly said there was no difference. This needs to be a personal choice. One thing I have seen is that a barbless hook tends to penetrate deeper than a barbed one. If we go to a statewide ban on barbed hooks in the name of reducing mortality of wild steelhead then we also have to go along with eliminating the Mar-Apr C&R season specifically targeting wild steelhead! Afterall this is about conservation of wild steelhead right?
Sparky: You asked the question "What have you done for the fish lately?" I noticed you didn't mention what part you have played other than being a member of the WSC. Over that last four years I have been involved in almost fifty restoration projects in some form or fashion in Snohomish County through my job. I spend the summer hacking blackberries and reed canary grass and other noxious weeds. And spend the fall/winter either doing site prep, planting, or salvaging native plants to be used for restoration work. I have done work for the Snohomish Conservation District, Snohomish County Surface Water management, Adopt-A-Stream, Stilly/Snohomish Fisheries Enhancement Task Force, and the Lower Stilly Flood Control District. I do this not for any recognition. I do it for personal satisfaction and to mitigate some of my impact upon the environment by my existence in this world and the fact I like to fish.
I tried to get local fishers together earlier this year for a plant salvage in Machias and had a whole six people show. Why the small turnout? Because everyone had something else going on. That is always the story with us. We b****h alot but won't put our money where our mouths are. Just like the reference earlier about the lack of turnout for saving Reiter. I was involved in that as well. I wrote letters, emails, and attended the meeting in Snohomish with WDFW reps, two state reps, Bob Heirman, and Gary Bee. Compared to all that utilize the fish from Reiter it was a very small number of folks that went to bat for all and put pressure on WDFW to re-think their decision. I also spent two days Clipping fins to show we were committed.
Sorry for the rant folks but we need to concentrate on the things that can make a real difference: commercial by-catch, tribal exploitation, excessive population growth, and continued habitat destruction. When you look at the big picture the barbed-vs-barbless debate is but a very very small symptom of the much larger disease that affects all our wildlife resources. Not just steelhead!

Chumcatcher

If being a part of a “special interest” group that’s determined to preserve the legacy of wild steelhead by blending opportunity with conservation, I will gladly be labeled as such. It’s funny that those who are quick to shout special interest are really only interested in their own opinions and generally do not have any data to back up their statements. Granted the 4 “H”s have a large impact, but the only way to challenge those impacts is through a “special interest” organization and getting involved. But has an individual angler do you ever stop to think what are some the small practices you can change in your angling approach to benefit the fish and help preserve your opportunity for the future?

A scientific study in Canada concluded the following about barbless hooks:

"Data from BC indicate that wild steelhead release fisheries on winter steelhead stocks exert a minimal influence on the ability of the fish to spawn and refute claims that caught and released steelhead were effectively lost from the population. The following conclusions from the study were drawn:
Hooking mortality of steelhead ranged between 0 and 6 percent in 11 Canadian river basins over a 7 year period with a Province-wide average of 3.6 percent.
Hooking mortality of winter-run steelhead averages between 2 and 3 percent using barbless hooks, regardless of whether bait is used.
Barbed hooks appear to be the largest contributor to hooking mortality”

Remember this is referring to wild winter steelhead only, not summer steelhead, in the late spring and summer when kelts, wild smolts are present.

ok, here goes. first off i do not keep wild steelhead, when i go to a river i am in search of hatchery fish and in the rule book it states "release wild steelhead", so i do that, i release wild fish. 2nd, i do not target a river with a "catch and release for wild steelhead" season in effect. i am not a cnr fisherman for wild steelhead but i release them when i`m fishing for hatchery fish, to me a cnr season is for a group of people who like to cnr`s fish, i am not part of that group even though i release wild steelhead. to me statewide cnr is catering to a special intrest group, what is wrong with simply using the term "release all wild steelhead" ? when you see the term "release wild fish" in the rule book there is a reason for it, for people who think the 2 terms mean the same thing explain to me why the ocean rules this years stated "release all wild coho" instead of "catch and release all wild coho".

IMO, it wouldn't be "One more rule". It would be a few less rules. Barbless hooks in all rivers, year-round, statewide. Pretty simple huh? Now you won't need the pliers you forgot in the tackle bag, to release a fish. Now you won't kill that smolt or SRC that you accidentally hooked. Salmon or steelhead, hatchery or wild, doesn't matter. It's just plain easier to release fish from a barbless hook, PERIOD

Boater,

The mission statement excerpt you referred to does not refer to a desire to have fishing areas open year round to catch and release wild steelhead in year round.

It means that the WSC supports no open seasons, anywhere, anytime, for the direct harvest of wild steelhead in the state of Washington. If at anytime during the year a wild steelhead is caught, it should be released.

Time, place, and manner of possible catch and release seasons are other issues that are not addressed by that mission statement segment.

Fish on...

Todd Ripley
Vice President and Legal Advisor
Wild Steelhead Coalition

Land Tuna

Hooking any smolt with or without a barb is flat bad news for the fish! So why not close all fishing during the smolt migration time if we really want to protect wild steelhead? Then we all can have more time to figure out new fishing restrictions and rules!

Sometimes I think fish are gods! They are only fish! Wild fish have been exploited for years in an attempt to shop the over fishing by the commercials and Indians. Now so many people have forgotten that issue and are only fooling themselves. It all started when everyone was looking for a ways to stop the over fishing by the gill netters and the tribes.

Now it's become a personal issue with many people because it is "their cause". Don't take me wrong, it's a good cause; people just need to learn how and when to compromise.

When will the different sides ever get together and reason on the how we can have both a Kill fishery and c&r fishery at the same time? One real simple way that it could be done is to allow a very small limit of wild fish during the fishery. Let's say one or maybe 2 per year, per fishermen. Some will cry and say that you are "targeting" wild steelhead, but think about from the other point of view. That view also makes common sense. When a fishermen hooks a wild steelhead and the fish is bleeding badly (real badly) why release it when you know there is a 99% chance that it will die in short order? Don't even say it, because I know that the reply will be "It's 100% killed if you don't release it". There's not a true fishermen on this bb that has not hooked a wild steelhead and released it knowing that it was probably not going to make it. God, I can hear the c&r guys already screaming!

When will fishermen ever learn to compromise and work together? It seems to always be the "my way or the high way" when it comes to wild steelhead harvest. I suspect Salmo G. will jump in and reply even those we have had this same debate numerous times when is comes to Wild Steelhead and harvest. Differences of opinions are what make this such an interesting board. Who knows, maybe someday this bb will solve this problem.

Cowlitzfisherman

Is the taste of the hook worth the sting of the bait????

I am against it.I don't see why I should be restricted to barbless hooks,while chasing December hatchery fish on a river,the Skykomish,that is closed to fishing when the native fish return.
If the run of native fish is so fragile that the difference between fishing with or without barbs is signifcant to their survival as a species,maybe we shouldn't be fishing for them at all.

Many many excellent points from Double Haul, Land Tuna and 4-Salt!!!!

Secondly...


I am all for looking at the big picture and in fact I do as does the WSC but those are Wars and they take many many years and many thousands or even millions of dollars to fight so why not do something small where the positive effect on the fish greatly outways our sacrifice.

BTW-I would like to know your big plan when dealing with the Big Picture. There has yet to be anyone that has come along that has been able to find a way to fight the War.

[ 12-28-2001: Message edited by: RPetzold ]

UltimateFishCatcher and BK - you two crack me up! Those were some downright funny comments!

I don't think it will have any effect at all. I don't want any more restrictions on my fishing. PERIOD. Every year, sportsmen pay more and get less. If you guys are that concerned about the fish, than don't go fishing. I fish for the fun of landing a fish. The only benefit to barbless hooks is that it makes it easier to get the hook out. That's it. If you're dealing with hatchery fish that you're going to keep, who the hell cares. If you're dealing with natives, the time spent landing the fish is more damaging to them then the 1 or 2 seconds it takes to get the hook out so don't fish for them period.