Hookless Fishing

[Gandalf]

Was at the doctor's last Friday and while in the waiting room thumbing through a magazine that I don't normally read but drew my interest (from the other magazines in the waiting room), saw the following article:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m.../ai_n49424142/

Kind of misleading because its not entirely "hookless" but an interesting take on minimizing the potential of fatally injuring fish.

Just in case this has been debated before, I am not trying to re-enflame those debates, just found it interesting and wondered what others think.

Paul

[deepcreek]

Silver Creek had a warm Summer a few years ago and the Conservancy asked not to play the fish so i cut the hook off at the bend and had a great day. Since i fish dry it was easy to see if you had a strike and in most cases you felt the tug though it was short lived.

[kglissmeyer]

Sorry Gandalf, but there s nothing 'hookless' about this system. Not to fire anything up, but this is the 'new' Moffitt snagging system that does more harm than good, and it has been debated here several times, in fact just in the last week there was a 'discussion' about this setup.

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/bb/s...hlight=moffitt

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/bb/s...hlight=moffitt

I'm sure I am probably too opinionated about this, but I guess you either like it or not, and I don't like it. I, like Buddy, think it's a bit too gimmickey. I hear the guides in Alaska love the method, since they've been doing it with 'pegged' beads imitating fish eggs, and they catch a lot of fish. Moffitt seems to have just mutated this to use other types of flies beyond the eggs they use in Alaska. I'm sure there are many here who have used this method and I would love to hear their opinions as to it's effectiveness and the ethics of it in their view.
As for me, I'll continue to use tried and true methods for foolng fish as they seem to work quite well.

Kelly

[sperzonkers2]

I agree with Kelly, this nothing more than a snagging system disguised as fly fishing.

[JohnScott]

"Moffitt knew there had to be a better way to hook-and-release fish, so he studied it tirelessly for eight years, using his engineering background to develop an innovative catch-and-release system."

You guys really think this is a gimmick and just another way to snag fishies ?? Really ??

[Ron Eagle Elk]

E-Mail from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. Yup, it's snagging in this state.

Thank you for your email correspondence to the Washington Department of Fish and
Wildlife (WDFW) Fish Program. We apologize for the delay in our response.



We have had a few inquiries regarding the Moffitt Angling System. This method of
fishing would be considered snagging, which is illegal in Washington State. As
per the Definitions of Terms used throughout the pamphlet, snagging is defined
as follows: Snagging - Attempting to take fish with a hook and line in such a
way that the fish does not voluntarily take the hook(s) in its mouth.. In
freshwater, it is illegal to possess any fish hooked anywhere other than inside
the mouth or on the head.

The regulations in other states may require the fish to voluntarily strike the
fly in order to be hooked, but Washington's rules specifically say that the fish
must voluntarily take the hook (not the fly) in its mouth.

If you have further questions, please email again or call (360) 902-2700. Our
Customer Service hours are 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
We hope this information helps.
Sincerely,
Fish Program

REE

[Gandalf]

Sorry Gandalf, but there s nothing 'hookless' about this system. Not to fire anything up, but this is the 'new' Moffitt snagging system that does more harm than good, and it has been debated here several times, in fact just in the last week there was a 'discussion' about this setup.

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/bb/s...hlight=moffitt

http://www.flyanglersonline.com/bb/s...hlight=moffitt

I'm sure I am probably too opinionated about this, but I guess you either like it or not, and I don't like it. I, like Buddy, think it's a bit too gimmickey. I hear the guides in Alaska love the method, since they've been doing it with 'pegged' beads imitating fish eggs, and they catch a lot of fish. Moffitt seems to have just mutated this to use other types of flies beyond the eggs they use in Alaska. I'm sure there are many here who have used this method and I would love to hear their opinions as to it's effectiveness and the ethics of it in their view.
As for me, I'll continue to use tried and true methods for foolng fish as they seem to work quite well.

Kelly

Kelly, if you read my post, I did say it was misleading because it was not really "hookless". Sorry that I missed the discussion the past couple of times around, it took flashy pictures to catch my eye that reading the forum here did not.

In a way, I think the idea of the fish being hooked only at the mouth is a good idea, it makes it easier to get the fish off the hook and back into the water, vs. the potential of hooking a fish deeper and having to decide if leaving the hook in will do more damage than trying to retrieve it. That said, that does not mean I endorse Moffit's specific rig, just saying that if there is any method of ensuring you hook the mouth vs. the tried and true way which can allow the fish to swallow the hook deeper, it would probably be worth investigating if it really is less harmful.

I really did not mean to start up any hostilities, I really am on the fence over this issue. On one hand, I can see that it is potentially a benefit, on the otherhand, I assume that you can also catch other parts of the fish body with the hook and potentially cause even more serious injury. Obviously, you want to obey all local laws, afterall, treble hooks (I don't know of any Flies that are based around treble hooks) are banned from some areas, yet they are perfectly legal in most areas (at least in my neck of the woods) not to mention that for non-FF'ers that would severly limit the kinds of baits used, if localities were to make them illegal in larger numbers.

Paul

[kglissmeyer]

Paul, I'm sorry if you took my post as confrontational, it wasn't meant that way. I think this 'idea' will be debated for a while. As far as how fish are hooked, I'm all for minimizing stress to fish, although we all know this is a 'blood' sport and nothing is for certain. This Moffitt method though appears to 'nsag' the fish outside of the mouth which is why several states have labeled it as 'snagging' and therefore banned it as an acceptable method of fishing. It may prove to be a better method to minimize fish mortality, but only time and participation will tell. As for me, I'll stick with what has worked so well for so many years. I'm willing to put up my tried and true against this 'new' method and I'm really confident that I'll hold my own. As an aside, in my 40+ years of flyfishing I have never, not once ever, had to cut off a fly and leave it in a fish because it was hooked too deep, that being said, I'm sure this has happened to others, but it seems pretty rare.
Your reference to this is good, in that more and more of us will take a look at this and make our own informed decisions.
Thanks,

Kelly.

[Gandalf]

Paul, I'm sorry if you took my post as confrontational, it wasn't meant that way. I think this 'idea' will be debated for a while. As far as how fish are hooked, I'm all for minimizing stress to fish, although we all know this is a 'blood' sport and nothing is for certain. This Moffitt method though appears to 'nsag' the fish outside of the mouth which is why several states have labeled it as 'snagging' and therefore banned it as an acceptable method of fishing. It may prove to be a better method to minimize fish mortality, but only time and participation will tell. As for me, I'll stick with what has worked so well for so many years. I'm willing to put up my tried and true against this 'new' method and I'm really confident that I'll hold my own. As an aside, in my 40+ years of flyfishing I have never, not once ever, had to cut off a fly and leave it in a fish because it was hooked too deep, that being said, I'm sure this has happened to others, but it seems pretty rare.
Your reference to this is good, in that more and more of us will take a look at this and make our own informed decisions.
Thanks,

Kelly.

Apology not accepted because it was not warranted (here you go, save it for when you need it ). I did not really take your post as confrontational, just pointing out that despite my thread title, I did acknowledge that the method is not really "hookless". I did take it from your post and others that this is a contentious issue, I did not quite realize how contentious it was because I did not follow those other threads, but now I know. I was not trying to be confrontational back, just explaining how I see things, right, wrong or indifferent. I like the idea of not causing the fish too much bodily harm (agree, it is a blood sport, but like boxing there are ways to minimize mortality rates to the bare minimum) and any method that can accomplish that should be looked at. New technologies may make it possible to have some kind of waterproof sticky material that sticks to the fish's mouth and not stick to its esophagus if it swallows it further. I don't know of anything, just speculating. That said, Moffit's rig might meet the definition of snagging in all 50 states plus DC and if snagging is illegal in all those places, the choice is simple, unless you have special permission to use it for research purposes (or whatever) follow the rules and you won't get in trouble. I don't think anyone will disagree with that, whether they are pro-Moffit or anti-Moffit.

I will admit, I do more "bait" fishing than fly fishing and I have had a few fish, since getting back into fishing a few years ago, take a worm or other small bait, too deep for me to retrieve and I had to cut the line and leave the hook in. Confession time: I have also, just once mind you, inadvertantly snagged a fish. I fished a lot when I was a kid and I do not remember ever snagging a fish (but my memory is not so good anymore), so I was surprised at having it happen, a couple of years ago on Father's Day while fishing with my son no less, when I brought the small fish in and found that he did not try to swallow the lure yet was hooked to my lure. I was using an aritficial lure and was reeling it back in and I guess the fish got in the path of the lure and I snagged it, right above the eye. Certainly not my intention, but I guess I will forever be a "snagger". Please forgive me.

Paul

[kglissmeyer]

Paul, thanks. I don't know if this issue will go away soon, or if it will just be rehashed in some form or another over the years. I noticed a bit of debate over use of strike indicators and whether their use dilutes the purity of 'true' flyfishing. I guess it comes down to what we're each comfortable with and does it fit us and our ethics. As for snagging, I have foul-hooked (snagged) my fair share of fish, especially when nymph fishing with multiple-fly rigs, but it has been accidental and not intentional. It happens, and I'm not ashamed to admit it happens. Anyway, I have tried to avoid this debate or dillemma previously, but I felt the need to jump in a bit this time. Thanks for giving me the opportunity. Now, let's just all go fishin', if I could just develop a method that lasso's the fish...

Kelly.