The Net Result Is...

[FarmerDave]

The only time I use a net is when I'm fishing with someone who is carrying one.

Seriously. I am not against nets. I have a few. I just don't have one of those fancy expensive special rubberized C&R nets. And if I carried one of my fabric nets, I'd feel like less of a poser.;-)

 

[724flyfishing]

FarmerDave wrote:
The only time I use a net is when I'm fishing with someone who is carrying one.

Seriously. I am not against nets. I have a few. I just don't have one of those fancy expensive special rubberized C&R nets. And if I carried one of my fabric nets, I'd feel like less of a poser.;-)

They aren't really that expensive. I have one these Frabills that works fine.

Fishusa

 

[HopBack]

Here is a potential flaw in the study. It states that the fish were hooked and held out of the water but it doesn't say how they were caught. My feeling is that if they were caught by rod and reel or fly rod that there would be at least a few that died because of stress from being improperly handled. You might get close to the same results but I feel like there is a huge bias in the control of all they did was hook the fish and hold it out of the water for a while. That's not really taking into account all of the factors that may cause a fish injury or death while fishing.

 

[NewSal]

FarmerDave wrote:
The only time I use a net is when I'm fishing with someone who is carrying one.

Seriously. I am not against nets. I have a few. I just don't have one of those fancy expensive special rubberized C&R nets. And if I carried one of my fabric nets, I'd feel like less of a poser.;-)

I can't believe the price of some of the rubber nets. Unbelievable.


I found this one (picture) for $20.00 at a local store in Altoona called unkel joes. Looks good, works great, and wayyyy less money.

 

[Hook_Jaw]

Cheap at bass pro too I think 24.99 looks like a nice net

 

[McSneek]

FarmerDave wrote:
I was thinking of getting an aquarium net. That way I could see what is hatching, and it would probably work on the gemmies.

Not needed for the gemmies. Haul back and set the hook as hard as you can and retrieve said fish from bankside vegetation before you creel it.

For the record, I carry a net most of the time although I often will try to get a fish landed and released without using it. I do find it comes in handy if you have a fish hooked and are going to need to use hemostats to remove your fly. Just makes it easier to control. Also can give the fish a few extra seconds in the submerged net to get its bearings before releasing it.

 

[moon1284]

I only use a net in a boat. I never use one when wading regardless of location or species of fish.

I think most people who take pics use nets. Most who don't do not.

 

[greenghost]

Salvelinusfontinali wrote:
Im having trouble with the point of the thread.

"Nix the net"...

Simply saying that, according to this study, fish have a better chance of surviving without the use of a net. Netting is a convenience for the angler, period, and may cost the life of a fish.

 

[salmonoid]

Salvelinusfontinali wrote:

FarmerDave wrote:
The only time I use a net is when I'm fishing with someone who is carrying one.

Seriously. I am not against nets. I have a few. I just don't have one of those fancy expensive special rubberized C&R nets. And if I carried one of my fabric nets, I'd feel like less of a poser.;-)

I can't believe the price of some of the rubber nets. Unbelievable.


I found this one (picture) for $20.00 at a local store in Altoona called unkel joes. Looks good, works great, and wayyyy less money.

Looks like a Wetfly net. I have the same one, courtesy of STP at about the same price you paid, as well as a longer handled one (18" x 11" opening), for a few dollars more that sometimes accompanies me at night. Carrying it seemed to be a guarantee about ever having to use it, but it finally had it's maiden netting last October. Never really thought about it but nets tend to make fish look smaller (counterbalanced by the grip and grin and hold the fish out in front of you shot, to make it look bigger). This fish is just an inch shy of the size of the opening of the net.

Inevitably, with a mesh net, my fly would always end up getting all tangled up in the mesh and in addition to a rubber bag being gentler on the fish, it is gentler on the flies too.

 

[FarmerDave]

Good point on the pictures. I carry a camera about as often as I carry a net which is almost never.

BTW, I didn't know those rubberized C&R nets could be had that cheap. Thanks.

And I forgot to take my stupid hemostats at Penns. I could have used them. For removing a hook from a fish of course.

 

[salmonoid]

FarmerDave wrote:

BTW, I didn't know those rubberized C&R nets could be had that cheap. Thanks.

You forget that this is fly fishing. Take the cost of a product. Multiply by 4, double that for brand overhead, and then affix a name brand to a product.

http://www.sierratradingpost.com/wetfly-rubber-net-with-wooden-handle-small~p~5213w/

Tack on a 20-35% off coupon plus free or cheap shipping when you buy some other goodies and you can get one for less than three figures. Heck, you can probably get five for less than three figures if you play your coupons right.

Hemostats are those tools that I inevitably need to use just twice per outing. The first time is to remove a fly from a fish. The second time is to remove a fly from a fish, when I realize that I've left the hemostats lying back at the first place I used the hemostats to remove a fly from a fish. I've backtracked and retrieved many a pair, but have also blessed other anglers with a free pair.

 

[NewSal]

salmonoid wrote:

Salvelinusfontinali wrote:

FarmerDave wrote:
The only time I use a net is when I'm fishing with someone who is carrying one.

Seriously. I am not against nets. I have a few. I just don't have one of those fancy expensive special rubberized C&R nets. And if I carried one of my fabric nets, I'd feel like less of a poser.;-)

I can't believe the price of some of the rubber nets. Unbelievable.


I found this one (picture) for $20.00 at a local store in Altoona called unkel joes. Looks good, works great, and wayyyy less money.

Looks like a Wetfly net. I have the same one, courtesy of STP at about the same price you paid, as well as a longer handled one (18" x 11" opening), for a few dollars more that sometimes accompanies me at night. Carrying it seemed to be a guarantee about ever having to use it, but it finally had it's maiden netting last October. Never really thought about it but nets tend to make fish look smaller (counterbalanced by the grip and grin and hold the fish out in front of you shot, to make it look bigger). This fish is just an inch shy of the size of the opening of the net.

Inevitably, with a mesh net, my fly would always end up getting all tangled up in the mesh and in addition to a rubber bag being gentler on the fish, it is gentler on the flies too.

Agree the fish do look smaller in the net, this one was my largest this year at 22" and it doesn't look that large in the net.

 

[NewSal]

greenghost wrote:

Salvelinusfontinali wrote:
Im having trouble with the point of the thread.

"Nix the net"...

Simply saying that, according to this study, fish have a better chance of surviving without the use of a net. Netting is a convenience for the angler, period, and may cost the life of a fish.

I disagree with the study and your opinion.

 

[FarmerDave]

I do have a nice hand made net. Some old guy made it years ago. It looks nice, and the guy seemed like a nice guy, so I bought it. For all I know it could be worth a lot.

But I have never used it. The netting is fabric anyway.

I don't fish for trout very often anymore, and when I do, I usually don't catch all that many and don't mind losing the occasional one for lack of a net.. I don't take a camera anyway. If I got a good look at it, I'm happy.

I don't count fish either once the count gets much above 2.;-)

So consider me neutral.

I frankly don't think I need a net.

Unless I am fishing for bluegills. ;-)

P.S. The last handful of hemostats I bought was at a gun show years ago. But I think I am down to one or two left. I likely had one in the car with my gear, but simply forgot to attach it to my vest.

 

[ryansheehan]

Don't ask me to come net your fish, the answer is no!

 

[albatross]

I like to net fish of roughly 15 inches or more. I won't carry a net if I think such fish are unlikely to be caught on a particular outing. I use a rubber coated measure-net.

 

[FarmerDave]

ryansheehan wrote:
Don't ask me to come net your fish, the answer is no!

LOL! no problem.

BTW, I offered to net a steelhead for someone last fall using his net. He didn't ask, I just offered. And wouldn't you know, it got away just as I was trying to net it. ;-)

He was a little bit pissed, but I did apologize.

Hey, handle was too short.

 

[geebee]

each to their own, but I don't get why you guys think a net is a PITA to carry - you know you can attach them magnetically to the D loop on the back of your vest or jacket right ?

& since I switched to rubber, I note that the net snags in thick brush a lot lot less.

cheers

Mark.

 

[PatrickC]

I would not go so far as to say this study "confirms" anything, but it's sample is certainly suggestive the nets can play a role in fish mortality. Everything we do in fishing does. The best point this study makes may not even be about the net, but that the damage is not seen for days down the line. Just because they swim away quickly, does not mean they will live.

All that said, we're all fishermen. Fishing will forever be harmful to fish. Manage them as wisely as you know how. But seriously, we fish for enjoyment...not to fight about it

 

[salmonoid]

PatrickC wrote:
But seriously, we fish for enjoyment...not to fight about it

You must be new here? ;-)