Catching smaller fish this year.......

Discussion in 'Stillwater' started by Vladimir Steblina, May 17, 2013.

  1. Vladimir Steblina Retired Forester...now fishing instead of working

    Posts: 724
    Wenatchee, WA
    Ratings: +236 / 0
    I started fishing out of my pontoon boat this spring instead of a float tube.

    So I finally broke down and bought a long handled net!!!

    Unfortunately, it was one of those measure nets. Looks like the typical fish I have been catching this year has gone down by two inches.

    So if your into catching larger fish, you might want to get a regular long-handled net.
  2. zen leecher aka bill w born to work, forced to fish

    Posts: 3,142
    Moses Lake, WA
    Ratings: +960 / 1

    With a good LDR I can get an extra 4-6 inches tacked on each fish.
  3. GAT Active Member

    Posts: 3,992
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Ratings: +2,561 / 0
    It's bad luck to carry any manner of measuring device when fishing.
    dfl and Mark Mercer like this.
  4. Kcahill Active Member

    Posts: 894
    Renton, WA
    Ratings: +262 / 2
    or a camera ><
  5. GAT Active Member

    Posts: 3,992
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Ratings: +2,561 / 0
    A camera is okay... as long as you know how to use PhotoShop... small fish can become very large fish :D
    Mark Mercer likes this.
  6. Roper Idiot Savant

    Posts: 4,285
    Glenraven Ranch
    Ratings: +770 / 1
    or a banana...
    Kcahill likes this.
  7. IveofIone Active Member

    Posts: 3,051
    .
    Ratings: +1,064 / 0
    Measure nets are the equivalent of computer mileage readouts on new cars. They both legitimize lying.

    Ive
  8. Drifter Active Member

    Posts: 1,626
    Ratings: +634 / 2
    I measure fish by pounds not inches - well unless im fishing the west side
    ;-(
    Kcahill likes this.
  9. Pat Lat Mad Flyentist

    Posts: 1,042
    Des Moines
    Ratings: +765 / 0
    Pretty easy to estimate the weight on those cookie cutter hatchery trout they dump in the lakes. Weigh the first one and the rest are about the same.;)
  10. GAT Active Member

    Posts: 3,992
    Willamette Valley, OR
    Ratings: +2,561 / 0
    I figure it this way... even if a guy claims he caught a 20-inch trout, he probably caught an 18-inch trout -- which is still a nice trout.
  11. Drifter Active Member

    Posts: 1,626
    Ratings: +634 / 2
    Well Pat, sounds like you need to spend a week at crane prairie like I just did. but our biggest was only around 4 pounds -we caught lots of wild bows in the 2 to 4 pound range and brooks to 18 inches - "oops" I mean 2 pounds ;-) lost one brook at the boat around 4 pounds (brooks are all wild) never caught so many brook trout at crane but I had never fished it this early either. lots of small bows in the one pound range, pesky little devils. alot of huge bows still in the upper deschutes in spawning mode.

    Gat, we hit some weak 20 inch fish that had a lot of color and only went about 2 1/2 pounds and a few real nice native crane bows with weight. strange mix of fish but it's still early. like I mentioned I never fished it this early - the earliest I have ever fished it was late June!

    If your not holding it with two hands why measure it? but than again big fish don't take kindly to being measured so why bother!

    We had a guy come in camp and talk fish, we told him we had landed a couple twenty inchers that day and he asked to see them like we were lying or something, I told him "go through the timber out past the cussers hole, turn left after the 1/4 mile of timber, go 1 1/2 miles to the left (avoiding the 1 1/2 mile of timber in and under the water on the left), turn at cops stumps (through the timber), head toward herculies pillar (through the timber), past leaning snags hole (through the timber) and go for a swim"

    I did show him where the Cultiss river bed was the next day, I have to quit being so nice.
    Pat Lat likes this.