How much Landing Net is really needed?

C

Chris Bettis

New member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
When I came back to Angling a little less than a year ago I was surprised just how many changes there had been.

A Carp Landing net was one with triangular arms about 30inches long.That was what RW used and although he was, at the time hoping to catch 20lb fish, a 44lb fish was landed in a net of that size.

I agree that if your waters contain fish of 50lb or 60lb then a 42inch net may well be a good idea, but, if your waters contain fish, as mine do, that never reach 30lb then 42 inch nets have a lot of disadvantages.

The only alternative that I have found is a 36 inch net, described as a stalking net.

If a net is suitable for stalking then it must be OK, for all carp fishing.

Are the 42 inch nets simplywhat the tackle trade have decided we should all use or am I missing something?
 
R

Roto Fryer

Guest
big fish are very expensive and you shouold be prepared to catch the biggest fish in the lake and support it correctly if you catch it. 50inch all the time
 
F

Frothey

Guest
i cant see the point in a small net - its easier to net them in a big net.
 
L

Les Clark ( not too proud to nick a good idea fro

New member
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
0
Reaction score
0
I use a 42 inch net for carp , which seems ok for the size of carp on the " average" water , with carp up to 30 lb , 40`s & 50`s , I can see the need for a 50 inch net .

But I don`t see the need to use deep nets for pike fishing , which I see all the time , to me the use of deep carp nets for pike are a danger to the pike and the reason behind this is : you net a pike with a deep net , the chance `s are that as you net the pike , the hooks get caught in the net high up , with no support , hence a hanging pike with a ripped jaw .

A bit off thread with this post Chris but something that I get pissed off of seeing .
 
W

Wolfman Woody

Guest
<blockquote class=quoteheader>Roto Fryer wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>big fish are very expensive and you should be prepared to catch the biggest fish in the lake and support it correctly if you catch it. 50inch all the time</blockquote>

Oh well, my 15" pan net will always suffice my needs then. /forum/smilies/confused_smiley.gif

A 42" is more than enough for most waters in this country, I would have thought. I've seen carp to 30lbs landed in a 24" net and although they look a bit cramped, they haven't suffered any ill effects when returned. John Wilson nearly always uses a 24" pan.

My mate used a 36" for years until it fell apart - with a 40 in it. Tut-tut! Should have renewed it earlier - that was the greater sin.
 
Mark Wintle

Mark Wintle

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
4,479
Reaction score
841
Location
Azide the Stour
Having once netted a 16lb pike (followed shortly by a 10lber) in an 18" pan - tricky but possible I find it hard to believe that a well designed 24" net (I use the JW designed Masterline ones) wouldn't handle 98% of the carp landed in this country. As for such large nets in fast rivers - forget it. I was struggling with the 24" net on the Avon at the weekend and a 42" carp net would be impossible to hold.

Furthermore the drawstring net is a lousy design for a number of reasons.
 
Mark Hewitt

Mark Hewitt

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2006
Messages
2,536
Reaction score
3
Location
Wolston
<blockquote class=quoteheader>Les Clark ( not too proud to nick a good idea from anybody ) wrote (see)</blockquote><blockquote class=quote>A 24 pan Woody ? No way mate , that is way too small ./forum/smilies/surprised_smiley.gif</blockquote>


Les - Why?

24" is only the size of the opening of the net. If its a deep one (as JW uses) the fish easily fits comfortably inside. Its also much easier to control in the water. For me first choice when stalking.

I Will say though if I'm fishing overnight in a big open swim then a 32" to 40" triangular net would be first choice.
 
C

Cakey

Guest
remembering were on the carp forum so I assumed were talking carp Id stick with 42" or bigger
 
P

Philip

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 3, 2008
Messages
5,759
Reaction score
3,166
Chris Yates used to net some really big ones in a tiny net..I think they even had some footage on the Passion for Angling series of a 30+ going in his tiny net if I remember correctly.

Although I would not go as small as Mark is suggesting I think hehas a point. In a river for example it can be a liability. I fish some places with some really big fish (sorry I don’t want that to sound macho it’s just a fact). I use a 42 inch net most of the time. In acurrent you try and handle a big fish and a big net…I have seen two anglers struggle…. even worse when most of your fishing is alone. One of the most laughable things I saw was a guy who whilst spouting off to me about the virtues of his brand new mega massive cat net(the thing was big enough to net Moby ****)he hada run and then found it totally impossible to net itin the current as the net was too big, he simply could not hold the net and the rod. Someone should design a proper river Carp net unless someone out there already makes it….sure I could come up with a pretty good spec for one if any ones interested.

I guess if you’re on a clean Stillwater with really big fish then a big net can be an advantage but even then I can think of occasions when a 42 inch net was almost too big to get between weed and the like.
 
W

Wolfman Woody

Guest
Yes, if you'd have dipped a 42" net into the Thames just a couple of months ago, you'd have been clinging to the Thames Barrier before you could have netted any fish.
 
Mark Wintle

Mark Wintle

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 10, 2002
Messages
4,479
Reaction score
841
Location
Azide the Stour
As maths was my strong point I have just drawn a to scale 42" net frame. A 24" round (slightly spoon shaped) just fits inside the 42" frame which has three wasted corners. A 30" spoon is actually bigger in practical terms. Furthermore you don't have the disadvantage of the cord which can bow under pressure and the spoon type net is far better in weedy water. The 42" nets looks big but it is an illusion.

I also stated 98% of carp landed. I see huge nets constantly being usedon waters where a 20lb fish is a miracle if not a mirage and the average carp is often 6lbs with plenty of 10lb fish. These fish are much, much more common than 40lb fish that are not necessarily that much bigger in length terms than a long lean 15lb fish. I had a 19lb fish a few days ago that was probably longer than most 35lb fish caught in this country - it was long and lean (and mean!).
 
F

Frothey

Guest
does it really matter what net people use? i quite often use one ofmy carp nets when trout fishing, just to raise a few eyebrows.....

what else can we moan about..... oh, i know

in the seventies, i used to use 4ft long banksticks. after some time away from the sport, i notice that people are using 12" ones. what is the world coming to?
 
C

Cakey

Guest
last week unhooking mats

this week landing nets

cant wait till next week to see what us carp anglers dont need !
 
F

Fred Bonney

Guest
I don't know these people they creep across all Sections/forum/smilies/smile_smiley.gif/forum/smilies/big_smile_smiley.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top