seems a bit silly to me Andy.

I can see you are furious Andy, and rightly so. Its a joke i aggree.
They say, 2 nets, and as long as they are both in use then thats fine. So as long as at least ONE fish is in one of the nets, then it doesent matter whats in the other!
And i have fished there for years, and thats what Pete Rice (former manager) told me.

I meant to say, if you have 2 nets in, there is no limit!

I have my net rule, one net for silvers, and one for carp.

UK Champs net rules, One net for silvers, 2 nets for carp.

No confusion, no limits.

Simples!

Some one once asked me what shall i do with a Tench? I said i dont care mate, use your common sense.

Same with little carp, use your common sense, stick em in with the silvers.

Maybe it should be a ‘delicate fish net’, and a ‘hard fish net’~clap

Barmy IMO

@NW Cut Angler wrote:

Barmy IMO

what that man said

out of order without a doubt

Bang out of order that Andy.

Still, at least Ipswich won to knock another nail into the coffin of The Mighty Posh.

might who? kev you must of given barry fry your ticket back by now~hand ~hand

andy was it a local person who won?

tell em to shove there rule book where you can all see it all the time no queries then

agree totally its a bad rule …..for me common sense should have prevailed

id find somewhere else to fish if i was you all
if thats what its like did he get a back hander for that

Bloody confusing Andy!!

Dave, its not confusing it plain wrong!
The elite select band of regulars will find themselves fishing matches with falling attendances. Having secret rules is not on.
I admire the way W/A manage this, rules are read out before every match, I was even shown a demonstation once of how to empty a keepnet properly.

In a Maver Pairs qualifier last year my mate had 212lb on canal pool but was knocked back to 200lb because he only had two nets in. It was my fault as I knew there was a 100lb limit in place which is made clear – don’t think this 50lb business is though. But neither of us thought he’d get a weight like that and it cost us a place in the final but we took the decision on the chin.

@fisky wrote:

In a Maver Pairs qualifier last year my mate had 212lb on canal pool but was knocked back to 200lb because he only had two nets in. It was my fault as I knew there was a 100lb limit in place which is made clear – don’t think this 50lb business is though. But neither of us thought he’d get a weight like that and it cost us a place in the final but we took the decision on the chin.

Easy to take on the chin if rules are clear Ben. TBF really need to update their posters!!!

Dave, this is not confusing its wrong.
If you operate strict rules I would have thought it polite to ensure everyone is aware.
You cannot assume that everyone is a reular and is aware of secret rule changes or silly rules.
Keepnet rules seem to be causing more fall out than anything this year with Makins anglers having similar arguments a few weeks ago on here.
If I recall these rules were stranger than TB and varied depending on which lake you were on with similar accusations of secrecy being rife.

I don’t see the problem here, I like tunnel barn and the owners, they run one of the most consistant fisheries in the country summer and winter, the rules are ‘two nets on all matches, it is also clearly states as discussed 100lb per net, now if somebody chooses not to bother putting two nets in Mike doesn’t disqualify the angler he allows up to fifty pound in the net which in my opinion is fair as I have been to many fisheries that won’t even allow you to weigh in if you breach the rules.

In my opinion he shouldn’t have to display a sub-rule to he’s main set of rules. You have already broken a rule by not putting two nets in.

I can’t believe there is an argument about another fishery trying to protect their stock, I personally wouldn’t want to cram 100lb of fish in a net and choose to split my fish even in the winter when most weights are 20-40lb.

@JohnH wrote:

Dave, this is not confusing its wrong.
If you operate strict rules I would have thought it polite to ensure everyone is aware.
You cannot assume that everyone is a reular and is aware of secret rule changes or silly rules.
Keepnet rules seem to be causing more fall out than anything this year with Makins anglers having similar arguments a few weeks ago on here.
If I recall these rules were stranger than TB and varied depending on which lake you were on with similar accusations of secrecy being rife.

There’s no secrecy at Makins. The net rules are very simple and straightforward

dont fish tunnel barn very often but i was always told to use 2 nets. if in doubt just ask would be the best option and the one i use

when I went last week the guy in the tackle shop told me 2 nets 100lb each, or 1 net 50lb tops

I didnt really look at the rules for nets I always prefer to ask to make sure

Craftytaffy, I dont fish Makins so can make no comment but on here in the last 12 months posters have confirmed the following.
A fisho qualifier was disqualified for breaking the keepnet rule (at Barford if I recall).

An angler whos name escapes me, but he is a known angler, had his weight docked at Makins for breaking the keepnet code missing out on a significant payout. Several regulars posted their own ignorance of the rule.

Now Tractor boy who is obviously a very good angler falls foul of the rule at TB.

I understand that you can ask what the rules are so you only have yourself to blame BUT if the rules are posted why would you ask? Imagine a match organiser having to explain individually complex rules to everyone fishing, even a 50 pegger.

I organise matches and always run through the rules at the draw so no one can claim they did not know.

The only loser in the end is the fishery as I for one would not be going back to TB if I was Tractor boy.

I agree

rules should be made clear.

A covered up note at the back of the cafe back door or whatever it was is just not good enough

When Border Fisheries had opens, Jeff had it spot on. Spent a couple of mins before draw regarding rules. Everyone knew the score and I never heard of any problems. Simple.~clap

what strikes me as hard to believe is….how can you have a 100lb per net rule if using 2 nets yet the weight drops to 50lb (i wont say per net) when using one net???

How can you have that rule?? it doesn’t make sense.

1 net = 50lb

2 nets = 200lb = 1 net at 100lb..yet you are not allowed 50lb in a net?

im all for fish welfare i think it shoud be top of our list for things to consider! and even in winter i will always use 2 nets wherever i go! but thats just the way i am. if i go to a new venue or 1 i havnt fished for a while i will make every effort to find out the rules but the problem occours when fisherys have changed there rules but still have old rules up as well, contradicting rules! this happens at quite a few places. most cases i will ask the organiser or a regular to clarify. if there are conflicting rules posted and a competitor has only read the old set then that is not there fault!! it is the owners responsibility to ensure there rules are up to date. in my opinion if there are conflicting rulkes at a fishery then the angler should not be at fault!

i also think that we should look after and protect the fish we catch so they can be returned safetly and caught again at the end of the day thats what we all want to do! and fishery owners would not have to impose rules if we were all sensible!

What Mike H says is spot on. This is barmy. Even if you have such a rule, who can calculate perfectly how much they are putting in their net. Fair enough if somebody goes a long way over but if somebody weighs 51lb, 52lb, 53lb then common sense should apply. If TBF are so concerned they should weigh and return fish as they are caught or at set times during the match.

I defy anybody to dispute what Mike H says though.

Ah, but do the rules state you must have 2 nets, have 2 nets in the water or have 2 nets in the water and in actual use with fish in each ??????

I’ve just read this and, assuming that the account which started the post is 100% accurate, the person or persons responsible for the signage should be ashamed of themselves. Incompetent. Utterly ridiculous on many levels.

I mean, max 100lb per net with 2 nets in use or 50lb a net with one in use ?? How illogical is that ??

if TB had two nets in the water and had his fish in one net and not used the 2nd net due to not having 100lb would he have still been docked back to 50lb???

It’s a total farce.

But, I have to say tractorboy, I admire your ‘final’ attitude towards this. You must have a big chin !!

No common sense, sadly its becoming a reoccuring theme with fisheries.

I had 55lb at lindholme last winter when it was mega cold, I wasnt aware you need 2 nets over 50lb

Neil weighed me in and just said ‘can you put 2 nets in next time please Andy’

COMMON SENSE PREVAILED!

Gary thorpe had 360lb at Alders last autumn and had 4 nets in but 1 net went 101lb (100lb limit in 1 net) he was completely disqualified.

COMMON SENSE DIDNT PREVAIL!

TB i know the feeling of not having the right names down for results in papers, me and rob have had this no end of times i nopens around the country. as for the net rule that just sucks. but well done for the 2-3 places, next time it will be a 1-2~clap ~clap