Are keepnets really so bad, if so why?

[barry luxton]

The reason i mentioned john wilson putting large tench in a keep net, many years ago i fished a very small pond and was amazed that i caught at least half a dozen very large (to me they was) tench with a 13 foot rod with a size 16 hook and single maggot. All were released immediatly and it did not appear to stop them from feeding.

 

The question i asked was, the reason for wilson to use a keep net. Don't think anyone has hit the nail on the head yet, for the camera? I dunno.

Edited September 25, 2008 by barry luxton

[Steve Walker]

Interesting, but that would seem to imply that it may be a better idea to invest in some rather large tanks of some kind keep fish in rather than a net. How does a keepnet keep Schreckstoff out of the water? On a river I guess that one could deploy your keepnet downstream of your swim, but hey what if some other angler upstream of you has a keepnet full of fish all leaking their Schrekstoff into your swim? What about fishing in a small still water, the first couple of fish to be returned would have the pond reeking with Schrekstoff, resulting in no other catches until the Schrekstoff wore off.

 

I suspect the explanation is that it has a limited range. It wouldn't be much use as an alarm substance if the fish could smell it every time a pike munched a minnow somewhere upstream. I'm thinking more of the way you can tell that the person next to you on the bus had to run to catch it than the way you can tell that the person sat at the back had a Vindaloo last night!

[corydoras]

I suspect the explanation is that it has a limited range. It wouldn't be much use as an alarm substance if the fish could smell it every time a pike munched a minnow somewhere upstream. I'm thinking more of the way you can tell that the person next to you on the bus had to run to catch it than the way you can tell that the person sat at the back had a Vindaloo last night!

I'm still reading the article Steve it makes interesting reading, with plenty of references and citations to research. That should at least keep me busy for a wee while. It's good to see someone actually post a link to some kind of research rather than just give an opinion or recite some anecdotal evidence. Thanks. I love the word "Shrekstoff", the kids will never believe me when I tell them that fish squirt Shrek Stuff into the water to warn there mates that there is an angler or a predator about. Edited September 25, 2008 by corydoras

[Dick Dastardly]

Ive never noticed a problem when returning big bream straight away either but do have my worries with chub and perch.

[Guest Rabbit]

That statement would have come over better had you added that, was 'your opinion', still I suppose an unshakable belief in ones own rightiousness is useful in some situations, if not this one.

 

I will respond with equal confidence. There is 'no doubt about it' that I did precisely the right thing. I caught it, I wanted a photographic record, it is a fish, I am a human, so I got my way. The pike got out of it with it's life unlike the mackerel it took, who probably suffocated in a fish box after being dragged from the sea, of course it had the human given label 'bait' rather than one of 'specimen' so it's life isn't as important, is it?...what was that someone said about hypocracy in angling, perhaps that should be Hypocracy (capital H).

 

It's often stated that one learns something with each fishing outing, what I took away from that session was, never leave home without a camera, even when you don't expect a 'whopper' one might come along.

 

Right I need a new winter coat, where are those dalmation puppies?

 

I know you were looking or a response didn't what to disappoint, how on earth you can actually condone what you did is amazing, You were in your original post doubting yourself and know you fully back your selfish actions. You were gambling with a specimen pikes life so you could satisfy your own ego trip

Yes I am confident in what I said,it would be apparent to any angler worth his her salt that your actions were not of a considerate angler, you seem to wallow in you right to be

an advocate of the more brutal and dare I say cruder side to angling that should have passed you by some years ago

Still. makes for good copy I suppose, and I thank you for that.

Careful with the pups

[corydoras]

You were gambling with a specimen pikes life so you could satisfy your own ego trip

I think that's a wee bitty melodramatic. One gambles with ones quarry's life every time one puts ones tackle in the water.

[poledark]

As someone who regularly weighs and photographs all the "specimen" sized fish I catch, then the retaining of them, if done with care, is not a problem. I feel you owe it to the fish to show it the respect of being worth catching. Also does away with those nagging doubts about how big it was

 

I have put a 100lb of Tench in a keepnet, and yes it was for a photo, and no, I have no regrets; but I no longer put Roach in any net if possible as they get scales knocked off very easily, and can look very tatty afterwards. I would still sack a PB carp/tench/pike/barbel if no one was around to witness it (I can take any photos of myself and the fish)

 

I would not keep fish for any longer than I thought safe, and this comes down to the conditions at the time, and the type of fish being kept, this I'm afraid comes down to my personal judgement at the time, backed up by previous experiences.

I don't use a keepnet any more, but if I livebaited then I might get one, but I do remember the pleasure that checking the contents gave me when I was a youngster, but of course we didn't catch many fish approaching what is commonplace for kids today. Interestingly enough, most kids I see don't even own a keepnet!

 

There is a standard for keepnet size and mesh type which I assume all tackle dealers stick to, a standard which anglers came up with to ensure the minimum of damage to fish. Most commercial fisheries insist on more than one net, or the emptying of them at short intervals, again the fish's welfare is paramount.

 

Despite the vociferous comments of a few on here, the vast majority of anglers will weigh and photo there fish, especially the big ones, one of the reasons we don't have to kill a potential record any more, and yes, it does feed my ego,when I am asked "did you get a picture of it?" I have several 10X8 pics of big fish on the walls of my study, I still get a kick out of showing people the video of my 40lb carp.

'tis not I who is odd

 

Den

[Guest tigger]

That statement would have come over better had you added that, was 'your opinion', still I suppose an unshakable belief in ones own rightiousness is useful in some situations, if not this one.

 

I will respond with equal confidence. There is 'no doubt about it' that I did precisely the right thing. I caught it, I wanted a photographic record, it is a fish, I am a human, so I got my way. The pike got out of it with it's life unlike the mackerel it took, who probably suffocated in a fish box after being dragged from the sea, of course it had the human given label 'bait' rather than one of 'specimen' so it's life isn't as important, is it?...what was that someone said about hypocracy in angling, perhaps that should be Hypocracy (capital H).

 

It's often stated that one learns something with each fishing outing, what I took away from that session was, never leave home without a camera, even when you don't expect a 'whopper' one might come along.

 

Right I need a new winter coat, where are those dalmation puppies?

 

 

I really don't see that you did anythnig wrong. I don't see how holding the pike in a net would do it any harm whatsoever. If anything it would let get it's bearings and senses back to normal before it was released.

[Emma two]

I You were in your original post doubting yourself and know you fully back your selfish actions.

 

No, never in doubt, I related the story after reading that Wilson was criticised for using a keepnet. given the same circumstances I would do it again. We go with what we feel is right, or at least accaptable to our own code of ethics. If faced with clear evidence that a pike so handled would die, then I wouldn't have done it. In the absence of it, it becomea a chance which I am prepared to take. Life is packed with such decisions. Why does it make a difference (to you) that it was a 'speciemen' pike? are lesser fish less worthy of concern?

 

Fishing must be highly stressful for you, as Corydoras has pointed out we 'gamble with the quarry's life' each time we go out to fish. You take a very high moral stance, don't you worry that a fish might die as a result of your actions? Or perhaps you just tie bait (your concern for other species prohibits you from killing fish, worms, maggots etc of course?) directly to your line and count a bite as a catch?

 

'Selfish actions'?, of course I'm selfish, if you consider risking a fish's life for our own amusement is selfish then we all are, we don't HAVE to go fishing, the difference is that some of us have an honest approach to that while others throw up a smokescreen of of being super-ethical.

[Peter Waller]

At the end of the day it boils down to why do you need to put fish in a keepnet? I suspect that John Wilson does so so he can select for the camera. After his piking programme on my local broad, and it concerns fish retention, I have to say that he went down in my estimation. Personally I have stopped using them as I feel that I have no need, my decision.

 

Also, as an experiment, rather than use a keepnet try using a large bucket, after half an hour take the fish out, and surprise yourself at how much slime is in the bucket, slime that should be protecting the fish. Is your need to retain the fish greater than the need of the fish for its coating of protective slime? Just a thought.