Okay,
I love fish, to look at, not eat, and so I don't know squat about fishing and collecting. I'm having a really hard time believing that a hook is kinder than a net. I can see this for some fish, you know if they have those whatchmacallits that get caught in the net and hooked and can't get unhooked without ripping their face off. Okay, those fish, I agree, a hook is better, but the rest of them. I just don't see how a hook is less painful than a net. I'm just not that into body piercing.
Would someone please be so kind as to enlighten me so I can feel good about the barb-less hook method.
Thanks,
Enjoy!
Squimish
Started by
Guest_mander_*
, May 10 2008 06:17 PM
6 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_nativecollector_*
Guest_nativecollector_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 May 2008 - 06:48 PM
I dont know about the pain that it causes, but I do know that there are certain species of fish (mainly game fish) that you can not catch in a net legally. A really good example of one is a largemouth bass, in North Carolina you have to catch them on a hook and they have to be either 8 or 10 inches in order to keep one. So it might not be so much of a better way as it might be the only way to collect certain fish. Besides have you ever seen a hook small enough to catch a pygmy sunfish, talk about needing a microscope and a pair of tweezers to bait it. 
#3
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 10 May 2008 - 07:16 PM
Mander,
I'm not really sure what the heck you are talking about. Who said anything about hooks being painless or the only alternative to nets to collect fish? The method of netting it sounds like you are describing is gill netting, which none of us are doing unless we are talking about our professional or scholarly activities. Yes certain, albeit very few fish, can be collected effectively, or must be caught on hook and line, to be collected and legally possessed. The rest of the time we are talking about nylon nets with very small mesh that does not rip the face off of fish. This and a few other of your recent posts have been really confusing, so please when starting a topic try and have a concise point or question.
I'm not really sure what the heck you are talking about. Who said anything about hooks being painless or the only alternative to nets to collect fish? The method of netting it sounds like you are describing is gill netting, which none of us are doing unless we are talking about our professional or scholarly activities. Yes certain, albeit very few fish, can be collected effectively, or must be caught on hook and line, to be collected and legally possessed. The rest of the time we are talking about nylon nets with very small mesh that does not rip the face off of fish. This and a few other of your recent posts have been really confusing, so please when starting a topic try and have a concise point or question.
#4
Guest_mander_*
Guest_mander_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 May 2008 - 09:55 AM
Mander,
I'm not really sure what the heck you are talking about. Who said anything about hooks being painless or the only alternative to nets to collect fish? The method of netting it sounds like you are describing is gill netting, which none of us are doing unless we are talking about our professional or scholarly activities. Yes certain, albeit very few fish, can be collected effectively, or must be caught on hook and line, to be collected and legally possessed. The rest of the time we are talking about nylon nets with very small mesh that does not rip the face off of fish. This and a few other of your recent posts have been really confusing, so please when starting a topic try and have a concise point or question.
Hi Ashton,
It is never my intent to be confusing, so please let me know when I am.
I've just heard several people say, a hook doesn't hurt the fish, catch and release is harmless. Personally, it doesn't sound harmless to me, unless compared to being eaten. A women recently "gave" me what she called a barbed catfish from her tank. She used a fine meshed net to catch him. The net became entangled in his barbs. I cut the net off him before fishing him out of the water, but the damage was done. He didn't make the transport. It was a little shocking that someone who had had the fish for a decade was so careless, but she was done with him and didn't really care. In this instance, a plastic cup would have worked so much better, but, like I said, she didn't care and wasn't interested in suggestions.
Thanks Native. So even something as small as a pygmy has a hook?
In regards to catching fish for home collection, is the hook requirement there for the benefit of the fish? Or to ensure one doesn't fish out an area by taking too many?
#5
Guest_ashtonmj_*
Guest_ashtonmj_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 May 2008 - 11:33 AM
The hook requirement varies by state and typically is in regards to species that are classifed as gamefish, not bait or non-gamefish. For example, some states say you can posses gamefish but they must be of legal legth and caught be legal means. You could not go out and seine a 8" largemouth bass in that case, but if there was a 10" minimum size limit you could catch one via hook and line and posses it. Some states, like western ones, flat out do not allow nets to be used to collect fish. There is typically provenance behind a regulation. For example "dip nets" cannot be used in Maryland to collect fish but locally a dipnet is a large umbrella/dip net on a lever historically used to collect anadramous fish. You're trying to compare apples to oranges by making a blanket statement that all fish species must be collected by hook and line when that is not the case. The hook and pygmy sunfish statement was completely sarcastic. The point was how would you catch a fish that rarely exceeds 1.5" on a hook.
No one hear has ever said hooks are painless and catch and release is harmless. That topic should not even be up for discussion with the amount of literature that exists about delayed and intial mortality following catch and relase.
No one hear has ever said hooks are painless and catch and release is harmless. That topic should not even be up for discussion with the amount of literature that exists about delayed and intial mortality following catch and relase.
#6
Guest_schambers_*
Guest_schambers_*
-
- Guests
Posted 11 May 2008 - 06:07 PM
I've had fish get tangled in nets, usually it's catfish that have spines that they stick out when frightened. Usually all you need to do is put the net in the water and give the fish some time to untangle itself. Never pull on the fish or net. I've never had one get stuck so bad it couldn't free itself, but maybe I've just been lucky. I do try to be careful. I agree that it's awful that someone would keep an animal for ten years and not care about it.
#7
Betta132
-
- NANFA Guest
- San Gabriel drainage area
Posted 23 February 2015 - 01:47 AM
Spiny catfish are not something to catch in nets, unless you're very careful. Most other fish are fine with nets. I had a young sunfish get mildly entangled once, but all I had to do was keep the net in the water and he wiggled himself loose. Same goes for small cories (teeny catfish) and other poky things that just get a bit snagged.
The only (legal) way to catch some fish is with hooks. Pain level probably depends on mouth style and if the fish is being lifted out of the water by the hook. I'd rather not catch something like a catfish on a line, given the fleshy mouths designed to pick through things. Their mouths are probably sensitive. Sunfish, though, I think might be okay. They don't have fleshy mouths, just sort of a skin/membrane around a framework of bone.
Barbless hooks are better in terms of being gentle, they don't cause any tears and they're easy to remove.
EDIT:
Oops. Accidental necromancy. Sorry about that.
Edited by Betta132, 23 February 2015 - 01:50 AM.
Reply to this topic
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
NANFA Youtube Channel 
