Barbless hooks for bream - two questions, please.

carphauler

Barbel Tickler
Joined
Mar 19, 2012
Messages
5,910
I have not used a barbed hook since the early 80's and I don't think it has cost me any fish that I would not probably have lost with a barbed hook, in fact when I 1st started using barbless hooks I think my fish per bite ratio possibly increased as the hook has no barb to pass over when you set it so penetrates the fishes lip far better than a barbed hook. The trick is not to let the line go slack when playing a fish. When I started using barbless I was doing an awful lot of Dace fishing on the north east rivers and never noticed any drop off in catches
I'd have to agree with this, not used a barbed hook since the 80s either.
 

Godber

All gone floppy.
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 12, 2006
Messages
10,833
I've not used a barbed hook in years, can't stand them personally. I even crush the barbs on trebles when Pike fishing.
I honestly don't think using barbless hooks results in more lost fish.
Maybe not, but when you chuck an impaled worm 50-60m for 20 or so minutes the last thing you want is the worm wriggling off after a couple of minutes. The barb just gives you that little bit more reassurance.
 

smiffy

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
3,610
As has been said. Once the feeder has settled, tighten up and after 30 seconds or so just take up a tiny bit more line. This will straighten the rig out and help to avoid deep hooking.
Its a problem many people have and there’s no way to completely eliminate it. So don’t beat yourself up about it. Slammo’s help but don’t go digging any further than you normally would. Straightening the terminal tackle out is the best way👍
 

squimp

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Messages
2,119
Can somebody please explain the logic behind choosing to use a long hooklink, letting it sink to the bottom and then pulling the lead/feeder back towards you in an effort to straighten the hooklink out.

Unless you are trying to ‘kill two birds with one stone’ and maximise the opportunities to catch on the drop before the bait hits the bottom; my little brain thinks it would be simpler and probably more efficient to tie a shorter hooklink to start with…..

what am I missing ?
 

Total

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
15,768
Can somebody please explain the logic behind choosing to use a long hooklink, letting it sink to the bottom and then pulling the lead/feeder back towards you in an effort to straighten the hooklink out.

Unless you are trying to ‘kill two birds with one stone’ and maximise the opportunities to catch on the drop before the bait hits the bottom; my little brain thinks it would be simpler and probably more efficient to tie a shorter hooklink to start with…..

what am I missing ?
^^ :giggle:....It just means you don't have to pull it back so far when it's hit the bottom if you've used a shorter hook length to start with!:p:geek::ROFLMAO:
 

Zerkalo

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 4, 2019
Messages
11,280
What usually happens to me with a long hooklength (I don't move the feeder though can see the reasoning behind it), I get a few taps, have to wait for the tip to go round properly which it usually does, but imagine the taps are fish moving with the bait as much as line bites. They have to swallow the whole worm. I wouldn't feel as confident fishing a short hooklength with worm, maybe with a wafter or something, but feel that the old school baits are just as effective if not more on some venues. Usually hooked inside their mouth at the worst, but just as often in the lip.
 

smiffy

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
3,610
Can somebody please explain the logic behind choosing to use a long hooklink, letting it sink to the bottom and then pulling the lead/feeder back towards you in an effort to straighten the hooklink out.

Unless you are trying to ‘kill two birds with one stone’ and maximise the opportunities to catch on the drop before the bait hits the bottom; my little brain thinks it would be simpler and probably more efficient to tie a shorter hooklink to start with…..

what am I missing ?
There are still plenty of wary fish out there that will spook at the sight of a feeder or only take a bait that is presented as naturally as possible or will take a bait on the drop.
Barbel on the Trent are a perfect example where hooklengths of Six foot or more are common because they will spook at the sight of a feeder.
Often with a shorter hooklength you won’t get the bite in the first place.
 

Silver fan 82

Regular member
Joined
Sep 2, 2019
Messages
3,432
Maybe not, but when you chuck an impaled worm 50-60m for 20 or so minutes the last thing you want is the worm wriggling off after a couple of minutes. The barb just gives you that little bit more reassurance.
I usually tip it with maggot, caster or corn. Never had any issues mate.
 

mickthechippy

space cadet
Staff member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
17,408
There are still plenty of wary fish out there that will spook at the sight of a feeder or only take a bait that is presented as naturally as possible or will take a bait on the drop.
Barbel on the Trent are a perfect example where hooklengths of Six foot or more are common because they will spook at the sight of a feeder.
Often with a shorter hooklength you won’t get the bite in the first place.
Just as a Wonderin ?

how do you know when they are spooking at the sight of a feeder ?
 

smiffy

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
3,610
Just as a Wonderin ?

how do you know when they are spooking at the sight of a feeder ?
I guess we take it for granted. Anglers far wiser than me knew such things.
Back in the day it was usual to go longer and longer until you started getting bites. Or, chuck a bomb over the same spot. People draw conclusions based on their experiences and of others around them. One of them was that the fish were backing off the feeder.
Fish could also associate a feeder with being caught.
 
Last edited:

mickthechippy

space cadet
Staff member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
17,408
I could understand that in general on such a place as my local chalk stream, being its shallow and runs clear the majority of the time

but on a big deep river, wheres its dark down on the deck and it often runs a tad murkier, I doubt very much whether any fish can see a feeder, unless they are right on top of it, or it hits thier head on the way down

berties feed by smell and taste, maybe they are backing off the feed ? not the sight of the feeder

None arguementive meant , just wonderin
 

smiffy

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
3,610
The fish associate the plastic thing that deposits feed on the riverbed with danger.
” Mustn’t get too close, got a hook through my lip last time I ate the stuff that came out of that thing”. “I’ll pick these bits off further down here where it’s safe😉

You have to bear in mind that these Barbel are quite pressured.
 

Total

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
15,768
The fish associate the plastic thing that deposits feed on the riverbed with danger.
” Mustn’t get too close, got a hook through my lip last time I ate the stuff that came out of that thing”. “I’ll pick these bits off further down here where it’s safe😉

You have to bear in mind that these Barbel are quite pressured.
:oops::rolleyes:;)

Dr Dolittle.jpg
 

smiffy

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
3,610
Wether it’s the feeder or the feed is open to debate I guess. Most of the lads I’ve spoken to on the Trent believe it’s the feeder and line to it.
 

Total

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Feb 25, 2016
Messages
15,768
Wether it’s the feeder or the feed is open to debate I guess. Most of the lads I’ve spoken to on the Trent believe it’s the feeder and line to it.
As you say above, prolly a mixture of things......I'm sure the noise factor comes into too and often negatively especially in the cooler months....
 
Top