Paul Roberts

Interesting. I remember some early tests on bass in which anglers caught bass on plastics doused in gasoline. Seems scent should work at some level, but just what these concoctions actually represent to fish is what I've always wondered.

That's music to my ears. She sure looks pleased. I bet it was for you, as much as for the fish. Fishing can be real quality time.

Yeah, something else is going on. Take it apart and see what's amiss. I assume you have the schematic? I've had to re-adjust, or replace things, in spinning reels before -especially bail (sp?) mechanisms.

Who put a bowling ball in that fish! ;D Very nice fish!

Nice going! Wading sure is a fun way to fish.

I got one too, yesterday, while crawling a worm through an opening in a weedy flat. Thought it was a bass until it started that twisting maneuver cats do; The big ones I call "cinder blocks with fins". I'd have kept it for dinner, but I'm certainly not going to put a spiny thing like that anywhere near my float tube! But I could bring a fillet knife.

Way to make the best of a picnic lunch! Hey, we used to fish for carp with hot dog pieces, and we discovered that the white-hots float. "Walking the Dog" could take on a whole new meaning.

Incredible lake -I'm envious. My waters are of the dishpan variety, with little morphmetric structure. This time of year I'm reading changes in vegetation as structure. Must be fun to fish. BTW: If those "little lizards" are green with small red dots along the back, then they are newts which carry a toxin and are, supposedly, inedible to fish. I thought that when you said that there are lots of them.

Welcome. A kayaker! Neat.

Yeah, Bass Brat, it's over for me. Sorry for my part in it. You can come out now LOL.

iceintheveins, I wonder if stick-on weight (strips) would help it sink faster.

Tom, OK, I can see where my comments could be seen as some kind of ethical imperative. I do not want to be taken in that way. If you go back and read all my posts in this thread, you'll see I don't suggest that all anglers should go barbless, notably with certain techniques, and as you suggested, fishing pressure varies greatly across water bodies. My point is that, from my experience so far, going barbless is a viable alternative. Muddy, I apologize -seriously. My wife said the roughly same thing (in a much nicer way) when I told her about this thread. She just chuckled, "Men: So quick to be aggressive, or defensive, rather than apologize and explain." She thought it was an easily misunderstood analogy too. My comment on "beer cans" was meant to portray the idea that part of my fishing is aesthetic, being in nature, and appreciating the beauty of healthy fish in a healthy water body. Mutilated mouths, and beer cans, don't fit that aesthetic. I can see how the analogy could be misconstrued. You came on so aggressively I came back with a mirrored response. Again, sorry to have gone on the defensive and dismissed your comments.

Muddy, you're so quick to become aggressive. You claim you've killed three fish in so many years, and "multilated 11". So, this issue doesn't pertain to your experience. Is your beef with me real, or perceived? How have I "peed on your sneakers"? I guess this is getting "off-topic". PM me, if you want.

Agreed! Exactly my point. An inadvertent carelessness. Don't misrepresent me -even for sport. If half the fish you catch are mutilated and you don't like it, and there is an alternative...hmmmm... No brainer. Likely many anglers think barbed hooks are needed. The original poster asked whether it would work, and I responded with my experiences. Not an issue on your waters, or with you? Fine with me. I'm not playing ethics police here, so don't misrepresent me. If you wish to make it an ethical one for you, fine. That's up to you. I've made it an aesthetic issue, for me. I see you agree, Tom. The point is, barbless appears to work just fine -so far. In other words, it's a viable option. That's what was asked in the first place.

I never suggested that angler's are enjoying mutilating fish. Nor was I equating mouth mutilation with the act of purposeful littering. Come on, Muddy. For me, seeing mutilated bass mouths is an ugly reminder of the carelessness with which fish can be handled -if inadvertently. No one likes to tear a fish's face to remove hooks. No one that I've met. I'm definitely in that crowd. Thus, it does feel like a sort of pollution to me -an inadvertent one. Granted, it's an aesthetic. But that's a large part of why I'm out there. It's become an issue, in my mind, in hard fished waters where fish (trout and bass) are caught repeatedly. (There are some trout waters I won't fish because of it). An occasional fish is one thing. But I started fishing a pond earlier this year in which half of the mature fish had mutilated mouths, some severely. That's when I started testing going barbless with my treble-hooks. Do we? One can accept it if they want to. I choose not to. There is a really good alternative: Pinch down your barbs. Hunters and trappers, like myself, go to great pains to minimize game loss, and suffering. In fishing, pinching down barbs makes perfect sense to me. And more so now that I've begun to get such positive experiences with it in my bass fishing. I believe the question was: Does going barbless with bass lures work? So far, for me, the answer is yes, for many lures (read above). More effectively than I initially thought. Cheers!

These studies have helped alleviate some of the mortality issues for me too. However, in terms of amount of handling, and tissue damage with barbed vs barbless hooks -there's an enormous difference. In my hardest fished waters, bass with (sometimes greatly) mutilated mouths are common, especially where treble hooks are used. Maybe returning bass with mutilated mouths doesn't bother some, or most, but for me it's akin to throwing beer cans overboard into a beloved fishery. Yesterday I took a few fish on a crankbait, and was again amazed and pleased at how easy they were to release. But on one of those fish I hadn't mashed down the (large) barbs on that particular plug. The bass had a mouthful of barbs and it took some time to extract, with some mutilation. I even severed the tendon along the lower jaw back at the corner -(this is not uncommon). I hate that. Yeah, I can pitch 'em back, shrug my shoulders, and say "It'll live". But I still get the feeling I just pitched a beer can into the water. To each his own I guess. Barbless catches fish, and offers a world of difference in terms of atraumatic release. Micro-barbs are a good compromise -they are easier to extract. But nothing is as easy as barbless.

Cabela's went nuts on shaky heads this past year. So, that's a good guess. Maybe Flick-Shake. My guess is they'll at least expand the swimbaits.

Layer: One of the best things I've found has been Shetland wool turtlenecks, used as an undergarment. This is soft "reprocessed" wool so it's not scratchy. Unbelievably warm, and inexpensive if you look in the right place: I look for them at thrift stores, and often find them. Polypropylene thermal underpants. Cabela's A down vest. Fleece jacket -Worth getting a good quality (dense) material -like Polar-Tech. It should be dense -Avoid the cheap thin stuff. I don't bother with the wind-proof types because of expense. A good shell with hood to keep wind and wet out. I just use a rain jacket. Mine is made by Walls, but there are lots of good makers. Winter hat in wool or fleece.

Pickeral, on matched tackle, are one of the gamest fish out there; Really worth going after. I miss them.

Beast, Neat experiment -along the lines of what I've been doing. Thanks. T9, Glad you piped in. I knew you were testing the barbless route, but didn't know how it fared, or how many fish you had into it. Thank you! Very interesting.

I guess I should have separated into two paragraphs...like so: I wasn't meaning that ALL those things stiffen plastic. But, I believe glitter can stiffen a bait. No, not "one piece at the bend". Here's where I came to that: I used twister type grubs a lot a while back, often at super-slow retrieve speeds. It was really important that they operate at slow speed. Those with glitter in the tails wouldn't "swim" without reeling them too fast, although it was a lot of pretty course glitter though. Maybe, the plastic in those batches was stiffer than the non-glittered, but I believe it was the glitter. A small amount of fine glitter does work OK. But, my point is that old worms work just fine, and a lot of the new gimmicks are mostly for the angler's eye.

Fish it slow, like you might a live worm, and keep in contact with it. The bass will teach you the rest. Hey, since this is duckweed, it isn't all that hard to fish through. Lots of options out there for ya'. Pick a few and don't get carried away by the bait monkey -yet ;D As for books I always recommend the In-Fisherman Handbook of Startegies: Largemouth Bass. Great reference material for understanding bass and bass waters, as well as a good introduction to tackle and techniques.

X2 The worst was when they started putting all that glitter into worms and grubs. It really stiffens the plastic. IMO, glitter, speckles, scent, and salt sell anglers, not fish. Excepting the density factor a LOT of salt offers, which most companies don't do like the Yamamoto's do.

Beast, Curious -What lure types did you use?

You know, that's a long fish. And you'll probably see her again. If it's anytime from Oct to March -she'll break 8lbs. And she's in nice healthy condition: She's probably got a few more years in her. Curious: Is this water body fished very often?