Keepnets - ethics

[peterthefisherman]

Thanks folks

When I raised this topic i was absolutely mad with Bobs attitude to the flying tench. As you are all aware I was only trying to show that sometimes matchmen are not necessarily cleaner than clean and dont have the right to adopt such a superior attitude.

However yet again I learned somethings and saw some other views

Thanks

Live and let live is the answer as Chesters said.

Peter

[Steve Burke]

The only time I've ever permitted keepnets on the Coarse Lake at Wingham was in the annual match I used to run. On match days stewards and I could keep an eye on things.

 

If the "Keepnet Code" is adhered to there shouldn't be a problem. However, the law of averages says it won't always be the case if there isn't supervision. A particular problem seems to be when the keepnet is lifted out of the water, when I've seen small fish get crushed by big ones. Some of these fish have died on the spot, others have been found dead soon after.

 

I've also found that big bream don't take kindly to keepnets even if by themselves. Usually I return them immediately, or if they need a breather let them have one in a sack. On one occasion a couple of years ago I experimented with a huge keepnet made entirely of sacking that I thought would be safe. Unfortunately the bream came out with a number of sores on it. So lesson learned, no more keepnets.

 

BTW, there's been no problem with sacks, even though the material is the same. It seems as though the fish stay still in the darkness of the sack rather than rubbing against the keepnet, and it may be it feels more secure with the sack enveloping it. I say "it" as you should only ever have one fish per sack.

 

So please remember if you come to the Wingham Fish-In - no keepnets!

[John Weddup]

Keepnets depend on the fishing you are involved in

 

Specimen fishing is about the individual fish. No net required.

 

Silver fish, generally small roach and skimmer bream is about the bag of fish. Keepnet required

 

john

[kleinboet]

What I will add is that modern match anglers (I might fish 2or3 matches a year, so I see both sides) HAVE to to fish TWO nets, One for Carp under 3 (in some fisheries 5) pounds in weight. Anything over will be weighed and returned immediately and any person "bagging up" will have the contents of their nets weighed and returned hourly.

[sam-cox]

sounds like a sensible aproach, maybe sea anglers could lean something from this!

[Newt]

Possibly Sam but in general, I think sea fish (other than the ones that spend time in tide pools) are less able to tolerate conditions such as you would find in a keepnet so I'm not really sure they would survive handling that does no harm to coarse fish.

 

The folks who keep fish tanks can certainly tell you that maintaining a salt water tank is much harder than maintaining a fresh water setup.

[david t]

Found this in the journal of fisheries management and ecology

 

 

 

Fisheries Management and Ecology

Volume 4 Page 341 - October 1997

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2400.1997.00058.x

Volume 4 Issue 5

 

 

Changes in water quality within anglers' keepnets during the confinement of fish

T.G. POTTINGER

The influence of mesh size and loading density on conditions within keepnets during the confinement of fish was examined. The performance of a mixed-mesh net was also evaluated. Confinement of fish within nets of a standard diameter and length and of three different mesh sizes for 5 h resulted in no deleterious changes in levels of dissolved oxygen, un-ionized ammonia, carbon dioxide, or pH at any of three sample points within each net. Transfer of fish to similar nets at a similar, and a higher, loading for 5 h resulted in a depletion of oxygen, and accumulation of ammonia, in the high-load nets. No changes in carbon dioxide levels or pH were observed in nets containing either moderate or high loads. Confinement of fish in mixed-mesh nets for 5 h resulted in a depletion of dissolved oxygen in the lower section of the net and an accumulation of un-ionized ammonia. There were no changes in carbon dioxide or pH. These results are discussed with reference to the water quality requirements of freshwater fish. It is concluded that changes in water quality within anglers' keepnets during the confinement of fish are not of sufficient magnitude to adversely affect the confined fish.

 

 

 

 

I still dont use keepnets that often, but thought that it was relevant. I think common sense should reign when using keepnets, ie dont overfill, use in hot/deoxygenated conditions, or with large or spawn filled fish.

dave.

Edited February 18, 2006 by david t

[slodger]

I don't fish matches, I don't need a keepnet.

 

You don't 'NEED' to fish full stop. It's got nothing to do with 'NEED' and everything to do with pleasure.

 

How anyone can believe that a fish swims so aggressively against the mesh of a keepnet, that it removes it's own mucous is beyond me?? Watch fish in a keepnet, provided they are'nt being spooked, the worst they'll do is to nose gently against the mesh. They'll undergo just as rigorous 'grating' in their everyday lives when pushing through weed and reeds etc.

 

It also baffles me how a sack is percieved as being a better option. The fish is still contained inside alien material, only in this instance it may not have anything like the oxygen flow that a keepnet provides. It's still in the margin, often during summer and low oxgen levels. How is that 'better' for the fish?

 

Provided they aren't overcrowded, and they are correctly submerged and pegged out, keepnets are, and should be as valid a procedure as any other recognised fishing practise. Possibly the point at which the housed fish are most susceptible to damage is when the net is removed from the water. As long as it's done carefully damage will be minimal.

 

Crying for keepnets to be banned is tantamount to admitting that what we do is somehow morally flawed. If you don't want to use a keepnet then fine, I seldom do either, but don't try and tell another angler that he can't! Any fishery manager that bans them is completely misguided IMO.

Edited February 19, 2006 by slodger

[rob.imk2]

I havent used a keepnet for quite a few years now .My reason for not using one ia I dont catch many fish so a keepnet is not needed [smile] Seriously though its just another thing to snag on trees bushes ,barbed wire ,and the smelly net syndrome in the car is enough to put anyone off using one

[Steve Burke]

It also baffles me how a sack is percieved as being a better option.

 

Slodger, I can see why you may think this. I did too at one time! However, years of experience has taught me otherwise. And when theory and practice don't co-incide I believe we have to re-think the theory.

 

I agree with you though that no fish should be kept in a sack in warm water for very long. Indeed it's part of the SAA/NAA Code of Conduct that's incorporated in my rules at Wingham. See http://www.saauk.org/

 

In fact I go further than this, fish may be sacked for only 10 minutes whilst photographic equipment is set up. In practice, unless I'm roving, my camera is permanently set-up on a tripod facing the unhooking mat.