Are keepnets really so bad, if so why?

[Alan Stubbs]

Apart from match fishing, which I've always baulked at anyway, there's no reason to detain fish.

 

I thought best practice was 'catch and release' not 'catch and detain'.

Think about how stressed out you'd be if detained in close confinement for a period of time.

[Dick Dastardly]

Ive noticed a big improvement in the recovery rate of barbel just by keeping them in the water (in the landing net) for about a minute before lifting them out to unhook them. Gives them chance to get their breath.

 

Yes I would definately agree with that as well for both barbel and grayling.

 

 

No.

 

But a bit of common sense wouldn't go a miss.

 

 

 

The most relevant and important post on this whole thread IMO.

Edited September 26, 2008 by BUDGIE

[Steve Walker]

Apart from match fishing, which I've always baulked at anyway, there's no reason to detain fish.

 

What's your reason for catching them at all?

[the outlaw]

I gave up match fishing as a kid because of the dead fish I used to find in the keep net at the end of a long hot day, tiddlers will grow into bigguns one day and even they should be released asap.

I do fish in a small group nothing serious though, they only keep stuff for and hour if it is small and then they weigh up. Anything decent gets weighed straight away and released. I never win anything because I dont use the keep net. I dont believe in sacking fish either, not having ago at anyone but I dont see the point, I hold them in the margins and let them recover, then let them go.

 

Tony

[gozzer]

I agree with the "common sense" post, but, It has to be common sense from all sides.

 

If someone doesn't agree with, or is not comfortable with an aspect of angling, then don't do it.

If you control the fishing rights to a water, then then don't allow it.

 

But don't state that the welfare of the fish is the main concern in calling for a ban on something, when you support other aspects that are as bad if not worse.

There are things we all like and dislike, but so long as it's legal why stop someone else from doing it?

 

I dislike overstocked puddles, in fact I think they are an abomination, a form of pollution.

But I don't call for a ban on them, I just don't support them, I just don't fish them.

I don't like 'bolt rigs', so I don't use them, not call for a ban on them.

 

I don't believe that the proper use of a keepnet is a problem. Maybe the word 'proper' is the key.

I've seen unhooking mats used 'improperly' and cause damage to fish, should they be banned because of that?

The same applies to disgorgers, forceps, landing nets, hands, not to mention the use of 'over strong', unbalanced tackle to drag fish in and lose a lip in the process.

Should we advocate a ban on all thing that can be misused?

 

We wouldn't have much left to fish with if we did.

 

The only thing I would like to ban in angling is intolerance, and the kind of elitism that says, "I'm superior to you because I prefer to fish this way, or for this species", and, "I believe this should be banned, because I get no pleasure from it, or can't see a reason for it".

 

If anglers stuck to enjoying their own 'thing', and let others get on with enjoying their own different 'thing', then the angling world would be a happier and more united place.

 

John.

[the outlaw]

Read it how you like, but i wouldn't recommend putting chub back in your swim if you want yo catch many more. Chub are just about the only thing i use a keep-net for these days.

 

I have been fortunate to night fish sections of the Ouzel, and in those sessions I have taken up to 15 chubb on more than a few occasions. These fish were all taken from the same swim about 300 yards downstream of a wier, I was catching all night and missed a few bites too.

Maybe in slack water they could put each other off the feed but I have never found this to be the case where I go for them.

It could be if they do let off a scent, the fast flowing water carries it away. I release where I fish, mainly because it is so dark and slippery there I would fall and maybe harm the fish and spook the shoal by falling in

 

Tony

[Dick Dastardly]

The only thing I would like to ban in angling is intolerance, and the kind of elitism that says, "I'm superior to you because I prefer to fish this way, or for this species", and, "I believe this should be banned, because I get no pleasure from it, or can't see a reason for it".

 

If anglers stuck to enjoying their own 'thing', and let others get on with enjoying their own different 'thing', then the angling world would be a happier and more united place.

 

John.

 

 

100% agree

[corydoras]

...or can't see a reason for it".

If there is one thing that is guaranteed to get my back up it's the argument from ignorance. "I can't see a reason for it so ban it." or "I can't imagine how that can be true, so it must be false." Arrgh! :wallbash: Edited September 26, 2008 by corydoras

[Alan Stubbs]

What's your reason for catching them at all?

 

 

Pleasure and to satisfy the hunting instinct present in most humans.

 

To question that on an angling website indicates a suspicious lack of enthusiasm on your part for angling or a questionable intellect requring answers to the obvious, so it is legitimate to ask what's your motivation for going fishing?

 

If I'm wrong about you, then I apologise, but yours is a seriously loaded question.

[corydoras]

Pleasure and to satisfy the hunting instinct present in most humans.

 

To question that on an angling website indicates a suspicious lack of enthusiasm on your part for angling or a questionable intellect requring answers to the obvious, so it is legitimate to ask what's your motivation for going fishing?

 

If I'm wrong about you, then I apologise, but yours is a seriously loaded question.

OK Alan, what would you say to my 13 year old son, who has no problem at all going down to the shore, sitting on the end of the pier, catching a few mackerel, bringing them home and cooking them on the barbie. Hunting instinct and appetite sated, he will be happy as Larry, especially if he is allowed to wash the whole lot down with a glass of cider. His big sister likes all night fishing for carp, and I like having a go at the mullet. My son does not want to know about this. He says that there is NO justification in disturbing wild life just to have fun, just to have a look. He would point out that I would not go out and catch wild birds, take pictures, weigh them and then let let them go so why is it OK to do the same with a fish? I don't have a rational answer to that, can you help me out?