Do you need a net?

[JohnScott]

Had he been wading, the fish wouldn't have been hooked in the first place in that small high-banked stream. The fish also would be likely just have wrapped around anyone in the water without a net and broke off. A net was a needed in that situation unless you wanted to seriously damage the fish. Better to carry a net than to not.

... patience, stealth, skillful presentation, and competent handling after hooking that bow, it could easily be landed without a net. It could have been released with no harm done to be caught by the next competent angler to come along.

John

P.S. Now stripers, smallies, and carp are another matter.

[Buddy Sanders]

I don't particularly like nets. The hooks get tangled in them, they get caught on everything, unless you buy the pricey rubber ones they are hard on the fish (I know those clothlike net bags are supposed to be 'catch and release' nets, but if you look at the bag after you take a fish out you can see all the slime that was taken off the fish and left behind). If a fish flops out of one and lands on the boat deck you get that nasty slime all over the place.

I have used them on occasion. I just prefer not to. Once I hook a trout, all I want to do is play it, then release it, preferably without touching the slimy thing.

As far as fishing from a high bank goes, unless you really have for some reason a need to 'land' a fish that's too big to lift, don't fish there. I've seen guides carry really long handled nets (helps their unskiled clients 'land' fish they would otherwise lose), but most fishermen don't carry anything but those stubby wood handled things. Wouldn't have helped on a high bank where you couldn't get closer to the fish.

You hooked the fish. You got to fight it. You 'won'. Break it off and go hook another one. That would do less harm to the fish than dragging it up the bank or dragging it up or downsteam to somepace where you could 'land' it.

I keep a net in the boat. Once in a while we'll hook a big pike and I have friend that loves to eat them. Sometimes I fish with novice anglers that aren't adept at removing a hook or they want to keep and eat their fish. Otherwise the fish gets unhooked in the water. On a stream, I just lead them close enough to grab their lip with a set of fish grip pliers and then unhook them. I don't photograph them so taking them out of the water is not important to me.

I just like to torture them a bit and then let them go, preferably unharmed (but I'm not anal about it).

Buddy

[Grubb]

I have found that I do need a net, reason for me is that I try not to squeeze the fish so as not harm there inards and I have dropped them. In the small streams I I fish even when I'v just pulled them a little bit out of the water they can still end up landing on a rock. I don't always need a net for release but if the trout are very feisty I will use a net so as to keep the little guy in the water and contained so I can reales'em gently...:

[fishdog54]

Buddy,

Are you saying that if I use a rubber net, after the fish is released, there won't be fish slime from that trout on the rubber net??? Can anyone verify this, because that doesn't sound feasible! It may be easier to clear/clean a rubber net of fish slime, but I have reservations as to it being any better than a wet cotton net?Sorry, but I personally believe we are being sold a bill of goods on this one. I will agree that it should be easier to deal with hooks, using a rubber net, but for now, I'm not convinced of any advantage to the fish. YMMV!

Best regards, Dave S.

[spinner1]

i have an old fashion net bag....buddy has a coated net...
his gets slime on it too but is not as abrasive as mine and
it only makes sense to me that less abrasive would me less
slime removed. Is it a significant amount less??

Who knows.

[DaleW]

For sure ... about the time I don't have the net with me is the time I'll need it most.

[jjtroutbum]

I carry a net and will use it more once I finally order one of the Brodin ghost bags for it. Mesh bags suck seems they can snag a debarbed hook.

[Buddy Sanders]

Dave,

No, I think there will probably be slime on the rubber net too, just not as much. What I said was "those clothlike net bags are supposed to be 'catch and release' nets, but if you look at the bag after you take a fish out you can see all the slime that was taken off the fish and left behind". At least with my 'new' cloth type 'catch and release' type wooden framed trout net, the slime left behind is significant. Enough to clog most of the holes in the mesh where the fish touched it. Plus they snag hooks really well, as Jon pointed out. I pitched the thing after the first use.

I had an old knotted nylon net, and it would take off a lot of the slime coat as well as quite a few scales....which probably wasn't very good for the fish either.

I'll just go without when I can.

Buddy

[Uncle Jesse]

I received the 2011 edition of the Bass Pro Shop catalog yesterday. In my quick review of products, I noticed several collapsible nets with telescopic handles as well as a series that were marketed as best for "catch and release" bags on the nets. It also appeared the price of the nets with the plastic bags had come down a little. At my house a lower price is just about always a good thing.

[Thunderthumbs]

The only time that I truly "needed" a net was to net a 50+ pound salmon on the Pierre Marquette in Michigan. There was a guy on the bank that had one, but the fish broke off just as he was scooping to net it. I land almost all my fish by just sliding my hand down the line until I get to the fly, grab the fly, twist and off they go. On occasion, I'll have to actually take a fish out of the water to get the hook out or to take a picture, I always wet my hands first, and then when I have it out of the water I turn it upside down...seems to calm them quite a bit and they don't wriggle as much.
Now, if I'm fishing from a boat on a river, then a net is handy and warranted. It really does make life easier.
As for the cloth vs. rope vs. rubber....I remember reading in a fly fishing magazine somewhere that some wildlife dept. somewhere did a little research on the different types of netting available. They reported that the rubber nets were much easier on the fish. I don't remember all the details, but that's what they said.
I have to agree with what John said, I think the person fishing should definately have tried to approach it from a different angle. This of course is in hindsight, but speaking from experiences similar to that, I think if it were me in his position, I would have spent a lot of time watching that fish for habits, and then would've gotten in a much more fishable postion before casting to it.
I had a situation like that fishing Flat Creek outside of Jackson Hole, Wyoming a few years back. I made sure before I made the cast that I had a clear path to get down to the stream to land it, and what a beaut it was.

TT.