Are keepnets really so bad, if so why?

[poledark]

And, if I may, I would just add that for some of us the "line in the sand" can change from time to time. I livebaited as a young man, then I stopped as I considered it to be unethical to tether a live creature and deny it the right to flee. After many years believing that, I actually did a few sessions using live roach as bait. I now no longer livebait, but this is mainly down to the club rules.

 

Even during the period when I did a lot of livebaiting I drew the line at using anything much over 6". My line stopped at size, probably because I considered them to be "tiddlers" and expendable, but the bigger ones were to be admired for their size and beauty.....I still wonder at the beauty of a good sized Roach.

 

Den

[corydoras]

[Guest tigger]

but the bigger ones were to be admired for their size and beauty

 

Den

 

 

 

yeah I agree with you there Den

[gozzer]

For those that believe that catch and release is the only way angling can survive in the future.

 

Take a look at Bobj's thread in the conservation forum.

 

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/Europe-...rs-t725774.html

 

 

John.

[corydoras]

For those that believe that catch and release is the only way angling can survive in the future.

 

Take a look at Bobj's thread in the conservation forum.

 

http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/forums/Europe-...rs-t725774.html

 

 

John.

and for those who are convinced that the majority of caught and released fish live long and prosper afterwards may find this research interesting.

 

http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=16902969

 

 

of course it's not all bad news.

 

http://www.acuteangling.com/Reference/C&RObserve.html

 

http://www.acuteangling.com/Reference/C&RMortality.html

 

I could not resist quoting a bit from the third link

 

Landing technique – Fishermen have traditionally used various types of nets to “land” or secure a fish at the boat and to finalize the “catch”. Nets can cause a variety of injuries and tend to greatly increase the time required to release a caught fish. Depending on the type of material, nets can inflict varying degrees of damage to a fish’s sensitive fins, gills, slime coat and scales. Exposed hooks tend to snag in nets often exacerbating the time needed to remove hooks and release fish. The use of an alternative landing method, such as a Boga-grip tool can eliminate these hazards. The Boga-grip utilizes a pair of blunt jaws that can encompass the bony jaw edge or the fleshy area in the corner of a fish’s mouth without puncturing or applying pressure to the area. The tool’s rotatable component eliminates torque and an internal shock absorber dampens motion to help prevent injury to restrained fish (15).

 

 

6. Handling – Simple observation as well as experimental results indicate that minimized handling will reduce the probability of additional post-catch stress, the likelihood of physical injury to fish due to struggling and loss of body slime. The use of purpose-designed unhooking devices and handling tools that are designed to hold fish without physical damage and enable quick release, such as the Boga-grip dramatically reduces the amount of handling necessary prior to release (15).

 

Which implies that boga grips may actually be better than a landing net for some species.

Edited September 27, 2008 by corydoras

[Vagabond]

Thanks Gozzer for that link.

 

I have warned repeatedly about this kind of regulation reaching the statute book.

 

Catch and Release fishing will be banned in Switzerland from next year, it was revealed this week. And anglers in the country will have to demonstrate their expertise by taking a course on humane methods of catching fish, under new legislation outlined by the Bundesrat - the Swiss Federal Parliament. The new legislation states that fish caught should be killed immediately following their capture, with a sharp blow to the head from a blunt instrument.

 

That is why it is so important that we retain the right to "fish for the pot" That does NOT mean I am saying we should kill and eat everything we catch. Just that we would exercise that right, but still return most of what we catch as "too small" or "too big and part of the breeding stock" or "an inedible species - not what I was fishing for" In fact, just the way I fish now.

 

If we voluntarily surrender that right, due to the vociferous but misguided efforts of a minority of "politically correct" anglers, then a ban on "catch and release" will leave us with nowhere to go.

 

Do not imagine it could not happen here - it only needs a hung parliament with the balance of power depending upon the support of a handful of "green issue" extremists, and politicians being what they are.....

 

Thanks Bobj for that find - it was in Australia that I came across the phrase "The only true wilderness is the space between a greenie's ears" Too right mate

[Guest Rabbit]

So there you have it, plenty of reasons given as to why keep nets are so outdated and are consigned to Angling history along with the gaff and John Wilson.

 

And yet there is a hard core following on here as to there merits. and a refusal again to embrace a modern and more acceptable face of angling. Let me tell you that this thinking is not representative of angling as a whole,

 

I rarely see keep nets used amongst pleasure anglers these days. and for that I am grateful, for any practise that actually reduces the risk of further stress and injury I will support.

 

The real mystery is that some on here refuse to see as described earlier Common Sense, and prefer to muddy the waters with reasoning that is desperate and like so many other times uses the act of catching as unreasonable to the fish so does it matter therefore to keep the fish in a net for a longer period that is necessary?

 

So those who defend the use of keep nets, you will need to keep thinking up some more reasons and excuses for doing so because the rest of the Angling world is moving on without you.

[Vagabond]

Which implies that boga grips may actually be better than a landing net for some species.

 

True. I owned an excellent pair of Boga grips, which I used for a variety of toothy critturs in various places abroad. Safer for the fish, safer for the angler.

 

They had the blunt jaws advocated in the quote you give.

 

In Brazil on the Xingu river, my guide had a decidedly dodgy pair of grips (they often failed to grip) , so I left him mine at the end of the trip.

 

I expected to be able to replace them back in this country, but to my dismay found that particular make was discontinued, and the replacements all had toothed jaws. I asked the seller (a well-known pike fisher) if he would be prepared to use them on a pike. To his credit he said "No" and understood why I would not use them on paraya, tigerfish or barracuda either.

 

So I still haven't found a replacement. I've forgotten the make of my originals, but they were bright yellow and black. Anyone know of a tackle shop that still has a pair ?

 

Here is a pic of the Boga grips, showing how safely they hold a piranha - this fish was caught, unhooked, photographed and released with being touched by net or hand. If you look closely you can see the piranha's teeth.....

 

Edited September 27, 2008 by Vagabond

[captain cojones]

Thanks Gozzer for that link.

 

I have warned repeatedly about this kind of regulation reaching the statute book.

 

 

 

That is why it is so important that we retain the right to "fish for the pot" That does NOT mean I am saying we should kill and eat everything we catch. Just that we would exercise that right, but still return most of what we catch as "too small" or "too big and part of the breeding stock" or "an inedible species - not what I was fishing for" In fact, just the way I fish now.

 

If we voluntarily surrender that right, due to the vociferous but misguided efforts of a minority of "politically correct" anglers, then a ban on "catch and release" will leave us with nowhere to go.

 

Do not imagine it could not happen here - it only needs a hung parliament with the balance of power depending upon the support of a handful of "green issue" extremists, and politicians being what they are.....

 

you are 100% correct in what you say, i too have argued this case with people.

many people respond to the green threat by replying "but they will never get a majority!"

they dont NEED a majority!! one person to hold balance of power would be sufficient,as you rightly point out.

hopefully this will gradually be understood by the majority before its too late.

[ColinW]

So there you have it, plenty of reasons given as to why keep nets are so outdated and are consigned to Angling history along with the gaff and John Wilson.

 

And yet there is a hard core following on here as to there merits. and a refusal again to embrace a modern and more acceptable face of angling. Let me tell you that this thinking is not representative of angling as a whole,

 

I rarely see keep nets used amongst pleasure anglers these days. and for that I am grateful, for any practise that actually reduces the risk of further stress and injury I will support.

 

The real mystery is that some on here refuse to see as described earlier Common Sense, and prefer to muddy the waters with reasoning that is desperate and like so many other times uses the act of catching as unreasonable to the fish so does it matter therefore to keep the fish in a net for a longer period that is necessary?

 

So those who defend the use of keep nets, you will need to keep thinking up some more reasons and excuses for doing so because the rest of the Angling world is moving on without you.

 

More condescending claptrap.

If I want to use a keepnet I will use one.

If I want to livebait I will livebait.

I won't need to "keep thinking up some more reasons and excuses for doing so" because, frankly, I don't care what a small minority of patronising, narrow minded, holier than thou pricks think about what I do.

There are people who are, in their own minds, better than me in every walk of life. I can live with it.