Nets? Needed or not?

[luckydude]

I've been trout fishing for decades and have never felt the need for a net. And I always wondered if the net would take off more of the trout's immune system (which, if my ~25 year old schooling still holds, is on their skin, it's why you try and release in the water or with really wet hands. Has new info come to light or is that still true?)

Is the net thing because they make really nice nets and we want them or do you actually get into fish where you need one?

[Woodman]

It depends...

If you're catching fish that you can land quicly, and release without touching by backing out a barbless hook, then no net.

If you have to tire a fish more to land it, and then need to handle it (squeeze it) to remove the fly, then net may be in order.

I was like you for a long time. Then I bought a "measure net". For fish I really want to measure, photograph, etc., I think the net is less stressful

[Sammy]

Use a net. Get your fish sooner, release it easier, no need to grip it while removing the hook, keep it in the water while removing the hook, etc... This, in my opinion, is a no brainer.

There are many fly fisherman who don't use nets and thats fine. But cmon. You're trying to tell me that the extra 15 seconds of pulling the fish up to your feet by it's lip to land it, is BETTER for it then just netting it?

I feel strongly about this as i've seen too many steelhead go bellyup on my local river. Why? because everyone thought nets were illegal. Some vicious rumor that was completely wrong.

[luckydude]

I've always wondered if the net did more damage to them than a wet hand. Aren't they going to flop around in the net and rub off more of their immune goop?

I guess I know nothing about how one goes about using a net in a way that will protect the fish. Which is my goal, I'm 99.9% catch & release, the only time I'd keep a trout is if I ran out of food backpacking.

Anyone care to provide a description of how to net a trout in a way that is good for the trout, better than doing it by hand? If it matters, I tend to catch small fish, I can't remember the last time I got something bigger than 16".

[Bob Laskodi]

If the majority of fish you catch are under 16", you certainly don't need a net. If you catch big dudes like this, you need a net.
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v11/laskodi/043a.jpg
I echo what every one else says, if you can get the fish released in the net much faster go for it. The benefit outweighs the risk. The absolute best way to release a fish is to leave it in the water, never touch it, and use a hook release device to extract your fly. That's incredibly easy for a fish under 16" and incredibly difficult for a big dude like this. Rubber nets rock!!!

[Sammy]

That's a TOAD! I'd definitely use a net for that one :)

[Cmcculloch]

Rubber nets are easier on the fish than the older nylon style with knots. Less slime is rubbed off with the rubber nets. Also less chance of getting the fly caught up in the net.

[Rick J]

the shallow nets of rubber or soft nylon work well - I always use a net when spring creek fishing using really fine tippets - 7 and 6 x and sometimes for steelhead (mostly on the Klamath) but generally not for winter fish

[Terry Imai]

My Boy Scout motto of "always be prepared" would apply for this topic. If you have a dink and just need to get it close to pop it off the hook, then no net needed. However, if I'm fishing:

1. With long leader (more than 10') where you bring the fish so close with your fly in the
guides and the fish decides to make that one more run. Pop goes the leader. If you
can get the fish in the net ASAP, no problemo.

2. If you need to do a "shake and grin" picture, you can keep the fish to recover in the
net, take the fly out of its mouth, setup your camera and take a breath. Keep the fish
out of the water as long as you can hold your breath to take a quick picture.

3. I have two nets. The rubber one is great on my drift boat but it's a little heavy to tote
around and the "measure" net with the telescoping handle. Having that extra two feet
makes a big difference to net that whopper.

I went to Hot Creek Ranch with a buddy and he dismissed my rubber net and said that his superior fish fighting skills allows him to bring the fish it without a net. Little did he know that the two factors of no wading on the Ranch along with stinging nettles throughout the streamside made it almost impossible to quickly bring a fish in without a net. Being a nice guy, I helped him out on the first few fish but it got old dealing with someone who didn't bring the proper equipment, so I just ignored him when he wanted me to run down the creek to net another fish. He ends up catching the biggest fish he ever caught in California and I wasn't able to net the fish for him and he consequently lost the fish. He tried to blame losing the fish on me but I told him that he was responsible for bringing his own gear.

When we caught back that evening, he goes online to Cabela's and orders one of those rubber nets for $20.00.

[bigfly]

In my early days, bringing them to hand seemed romantic and in good style.
Then comes the day (hopefully), that you improve enough to hook the big guy.
When you find yourself falling on, and wrestling in the shallows with them, you may feel like an idiot (with any luck).
Respect the resource, and their existence.
Get a nice ghost net and quit worrying about it.
A frying pan/float tube is a good minimum size for the T. You don't want to have to fold them to fit.
The fish will thank you.
PS. get a tether of some sort, I find a couple of nets on the river, every year.

Jim

[Ben Kobrin]

I agree with Jim,

I carry this one... http://www.brodin.com/FryPanFT.html

Hangs right off my back perfectly, always within reach and it's BIG.

I have never caught a fish that was too small for a big net, but I have been fortunate enough to catch a few fish that were too big for a small one...never a good feeling.

-Ben

[Scott V]

If you were a fish would you rather be lifted by a hook in your mouth or cradled like someone cared about you in a net?

[Ralph]

Along the same topic, the absolute worst of all worlds is the "Landing Hand". It is a bag shaped net you put your hand in then grab the fish. The netting cuts through the protective slime so that you can enjoy the convenience of a nice tight grip. Unfortunately for the trout, that slime was put there for a reason and it can take days to regenerate. Landing Hands aren't much better than a gaff. Either land the fish in a rubberized net that cradles their weight or by unhooking it underwater.

[bigfly]

After more than a few years of flailing/searching for a good solution to this problem, I've settled on using, a Lrg. "Gear Keeper retractor".
After netting the fish, I lock off the retractor and the wooden net just floats as a underwater holding pen. My net can't float away, the fish isn't stressed, and I can use both hands to tend to business. If we want a client/fish picture, I just clip the retractor to them, and carry on.
Most of the time fishing barbless, the hook falls into the net and there's no need to handle them at all.
If they are hooked, do the removal under water as well.
When done, lower the net down and away...ez peze.
Using the FTFP net, with the gear keeper, I had to move my attachment point to the middle of the handle, instead of the end..
Couldn't stand it hanging down to my calves when walking! Bumpita-bumpita.......

Jim