Do fish heal?

[sled59]

I caught a pike the other day that someone else had caught and about 1/4 of its jaw was missing. Do fish adapt to injuries?

[goblueM]

I think you answered your own question - you documented that pike still feed despite missing parts of their jaw!

And yes, fish are just like most animals - their injuries heal with time (well, unless they are mortal injuries that is)

[20lbSloughShark]

Not only do they heal, they can digest hooks.

[bobbymalone]

They won't heal like some magic regeneration stuff, but they either adapt or die. Just like one of us losing a limb or something.

That pike's jaw isn't coming back, if it can still find and eat prey it will be OK. Probably have a bit of a tougher time than a healthy fish.

I don't believe that fish can digest hooks any better than you can.

[20lbSloughShark]

I don't think hooks disolve in a few days like many beleive, but I can see 2 weeks to a month in an acid bath doing it. Oviously fish with a hook in their gut have way less chance of survival.

[Hoffer]

Well for sure fish heal. I have caught many, many fish with scars, mouths that are missing parts but all healed up, eyes that are blinded etc..

I have also caught numerous fish with hooks in their throats with line still attached, even hooks with a plastic twister tail coming out their rear end. They are pretty tough. About the only thing a fish cant come back from is a broken or torn gill. Thats why its so very important to handle them carefully before releasing.

[OnAFly]

I've caught fish with a gill hanging out of their gill plate which seemed otherwise healthy. Though, careful handling should always be practiced.

[Shawn Kellett]

Sorry dude, but they don't digest hooks. WI DNR did a study on gut-hooking muskies a few years back. The hooks were still intact 6mo-1year. Not only that but there was 100% delayed mortality in all of those gut-hooked fish.

[cylinder]

Sorry dude, but they don't digest hooks. WI DNR did a study on gut-hooking muskies a few years back. The hooks were still intact 6mo-1year. Not only that but there was 100% delayed mortality in all of those gut-hooked fish.

This is going to stir up some people. Does anybody have a link to an actual documented study saying definitively whether they dissolve hooks or not?

[scott b]

Wish I knew what article (In-fish) but have read the water will rust and dissolve them in 6mos to a year. Some hooks are designed not to corrode. Musky hooks are so thick that I could see it taking at least a couple of years to 5. My opinion of course.

[goblueM]

http://www.springerlink.com/content/gm903t3v77915282/

Quote:

Use of live bait for angling of muskellunge, Esox masquinongy, is popular in Wisconsin. A traditional method utilizes a large hook through the bait fish’s snout, which requires the muskellunge to swallow the bait prior to hook set. Adult muskellunge (>76 cm; 30 in) were held in lined hatchery ponds and caught while fishing with live bait on 10/0 size single hooks. The leader was cut and the muskellunge was released when hooked in the stomach. Survival was monitored for up to 1 year. No immediate (<24 h) mortality occurred. However, 22% of hooked muskellunge died within 50 days and 83% died within 1 year. Necropsies revealed extensive trauma to the stomach and other organs from hooks, along with systemic bacterial infections.

[20lbSloughShark]

no doubt a hook will increase chances of death, but you are going to kill fish no matter what you do. My thinking is, they have a better chance swimming with a hook in them, than me cutting them up and eating them.

[Shawn Kellett]

This is going to stir up some people. Does anybody have a link to an actual documented study saying definitively whether they dissolve hooks or not?

Here's one synopses:

http://www.chippewaflowage.com/sucker_study.html

I have the other study somewhere that I'll have to look up. It was done in a controlled setting by the WI DNR. It's pretty conclusive that gut-hooking fish is a death sentence.

[aanderud]

no doubt a hook will increase chances of death, but you are going to kill fish no matter what you do. My thinking is, they have a better chance swimming with a hook in them, than me cutting them up and eating them.

Yeah they have a better chance to live with a hook in them than if you had cut them up and eaten them....but what about if you had pulled the hook out (even though it resulted in plenty of bleeding) and let them go? If 83% (or more) of them are dying within a year because of the hook in their gut, maybe it's better to pull the hook out (even if it results in a lot of blood, more than you'd like to see).

[20lbSloughShark]

Very good point aanderud, I have wondered that too. Infection vs Blood loss, I'm not sure. All I know, is that most fish that had hooks ripped out of their gullet were floating within minutes.

[TurnUpTheFishing]

I think pulling the hook out is going to cause a lot more harm than leaving a hook in.

Personally I do what I can to get the hooks out but wont "just pull them out." Whether it be cutting the shank with bolt cutters or using the method to back the hook out working through the gill plate.

If push comes to shove and the hook wont come out I cut as much of the shank off with bolt cutters and hope it will work its way out on its own.

[itchmesir]

Pinched barbs make even some of the most difficult hooks that much easier to remove.. the use of a jaw spreader always seems to make hook removal easier too...

[merkman]

If it looks like the fish is gonna die anyway, and I have to throw it back, I pull the hook.

Might as well face the fact that the fish is gonna die, and eliminate the potential impact further up the food chain (i.e. the Eagle or Loon that will eat this dead fish)

.

[AaronM]

The hooks used in the Wisconsin study were fairly large if my memory serves me correctly. It stands to reason why those fish in that particular study were unable to digest/pass the hooks. This doesn't really apply specifically to northerns as the hooks used are usually quite large, but I do believe the size of the hook and style (single versus treble) play a large part in mortality; i.e. a gut-hooked walleye from a single hook has a much better chance of survival than a northern/muskie with a large treble.

Hook cutting tools are invaluable for this reason, where a hook can be cut out rather than ripped out. Best case scenario would be a circle hook, followed by pinched barbs when fishing techniques where a deeply hooked fish is a possibility.

As per the original post asking if fish heal, yes and no. They can and will heal, but depending on the severity of the injury, they can suffer a slow death by being unable to effectively feed. I caught a ice-out northern a few years back with one of its gill rakers ripped out of the fish. It was alive, but extremely skinny with low odds of prolonged survival. I don't normally keep northerns, but that one traveled home with me for dinner.

[jigginjim]

Could be a good reason to use circle hooks. You don't have to set the hook just crank, fish hook themselves.

[delmuts]

Another one for having part of the gill hanging out.

Caught a 3# northern yesturday, that was fat and very aggitated about being caught. It wasn't me! I hooked him on the outside of the top lip with a 1/16 oz, jig and twister tail and 6# mono.

[popriveter]

I make a point to keep and eat my badly hooked fish (whenever legal) and often release more desirably sized, healthy ones. The bad mortality rates associated with bait-fishing have me convinced to stick with artificials on muskie waters and pike lakes with size regs.

[Hoffer]

I just thought of that million dollar idea.

How about manufacturing a hook with the strength of metal, yet would dissolve if kept in a combination of stomach acid from a fish and H20 after say 24 hours or so.

Of course...I am posting this with humor..but who knows...stranger things have been developed.