rrt wrote:
Geez, Frank, why would you post this on a fly-fishing site? You know you are going to incur the ire of people on here for this.
This post would be like me posting on a spinfishing site that I fished a section of creek only two days after you did and that I found six dead trout, probably from multiple-hook stress. If I then suggested that spinfishers limit themselves to single-hook spinners, I imagine that would stir up the spinfishermen. (By the way, this example is true.)
Anyhow, I think is poor taste on your part to put up this post on this fly-fishing site where you have been involved in such nasty arguments in the past.
I posted it because it's a tough question for fly fishers and it's time to give serious thought to this inequity. I'm not concerned about the ire I'll receive from my tough question. I believe if some fly fishers think deeply about my question rather that submit an emotional, knee-jerk response (not yours) that they'll actually agree with me, though I wouldn't expect them to admit it on a fly fishing website.
If you posted that spinner fishermen should limit themselves to one-point hooks, I'd remind you of the following written on this site by "Mike" on 6/12/2014 under the thread "Re. Do bait and spinners kill more fish?"
("Mike" is Mike Kaufmann, Area 6 (SE PA) Fisheries Manager with the PFBC.)
He wrote:
"Treble vs single hooks have been tested scientifically and the results published in the scientific literature. Angler lore and emotions aside, here are the results.
Single hooks on spinners cause significantly greater delayed mortality due to the deep hooking in vital areas of the mouth and esophagus. The vital areas, such as the tongue, bleed excessively, resulting in delayed mortality.
One study countered this with small, wild brook trout. I observed that the problem in that case was that the treble hooks were TOO SMALL, most likely resulting in all three hooks being engulfed by the brook trout. This occurs in the field and is easily corrected by anglers by using slightly larger hooks, which usually prevents all three hooks from being taken by the fish. Another way to correct the problem in the field if anglers do not have lures with larger treble hooks or spare hooks is to break one of the hooks off the treble combination. There is a too small treble hook that is placed on some lures which allows all three points to barely fit into the mouth of the wild brookies of a common sublegal size. The three points hold the mouth shut when an angler tries to extract the hook and provide a real challenge to the angler, increasing the holding time and jaw damage.
As for the scientific studies evaluating barbed vs barbless hooks and delayed trout mortality, the barbless hooks cause one percent less delayed mortality. This insignificant difference is so small that anglers would not be able to detect it in fish populations. Additionally, any angler worrying about this amount of additional delayed mortality should not be lifting fish from the water to unhook the fish, be using very light tippets during trico time, or be taking photos of fish held out of the water in my opinion."
I'll add that I use #10 VMC treble hooks on my spinners and I do not crimp down the barbs. For several years now I've been keeping track of how many points of my treble hook are embedded in trout flesh when I unhook them. I've logged probably 40,000 trout during my "study." I've found that most trout are hooked with one point (around 50% - 60%), another 30% - 40% are hooked with two points, and well less than 10% of the trout I catch have all three points of my treble hook in their flesh.
I'll also add that since trout quickly become wary about striking a spinner a second time, in the course of a year it would not surprise me if an individual trout gets many more hook injuries from flies than from spinners since it is getting caught many more times on flies.
