I make no comment ...

[AshbyCut]

... I simply report for your consideration ...

Taken from "Successful Angling. Coarse Fishing Tackle and Methods" ... by Walker/Taylor/Falkus/Buller. (Pub. Stanley Paul & Co. Ltd. 1977.)

(Speaking of landing nets) " As regards size, a round, oval, or triangular net of 20 to 24 inches in diameter suffices for most British freshwater species except large pike, salmon, carp, catfish, and exceptionally larger barbel and zander. For these larger species, a 30 inch net is desirable. Fashion rather than function has led to the production of nets as wide as 48 or even 60 inches, but this is affectation. The largest fish ever likely to be captured in British freshwaters will easily go into a 30-inch landing net."

Thoughts ?

[Loop Erimder]

You can never have too many nets......ash hoops of various sizes, the weight is also important. A couple of Walker style nets (the triangle shape) is also a must and I must get at least one maybe two. However, I do have a very large V shaped net with split cane arms, the only issue is that you can't see the split cane due to the modern-ness of the actual net.... I must replace

EDIT:
Oh I forgot I also have a large diameter foldy metal round net too

[Gord]

am i mistaken but didnt r walker use a larger net than 30 inches if it wasnt its the biggest 30 inches i have ever seen.

[Trevor]

The mesh should also be considered.
A 30" round net with a shallow mesh may not be suitable for larger fish, but a deeper mesh would make it more so.

[Gurn]

With regard to landing nets..
"Better to have too big, than too small."....Gurn 14/7/2015

[Northern_Nomad]

Dick Walker designed his net with 30 inch arms originally. He later remade them at 36" for the trip to Redmire, due to the size of the fish.

I'm currently away from home so can't clarify dates etc to see if AC's quote is pre or post this first Redmire trip. From memory he also states 30" in his letters to Maurice Ingham, immortalised in "Drop Me A Line" , so I would imagine like most of us he was not above changing his mind when circumstances dictated change was needed.

[Marc]

Quote from walkers still-water angling in the Carp fishing section, "mine is triangular with thirty inch arms and a mesh four feet deep".

[Beresford]

Long fish will bend a bit to fit in a net but I'd say 30" is too small to make it easy net such a large fish single handed. I've caught a 38" carp (I know as I measured it) – that fitted into a 36" net but it wasn't easy for me to net the fish. My own view is that I much prefer a triangular net over a round one because the widest part is furthest away from you giving you the best reach. Carp often get a strong second dash of strength if you mess up netting them. I use a 36" triangular net on a pole which is getting on for seven feet fully extended. This gives me a 36" opening at nearly 10' plus the stretch of my arm. A round net on say a six foot pole might typically give a 30" opening, back from the front edge. That equates to roughly a 30" opening at about seven and a half feet. I know which I'd rather have…

So I know many prefer a large round net but it's not for me for carp fishing. I'm more interested in protecting the tip of my rod so I'll forgo the aesthetics. I'm thinking of getting a six foot one piece handle made or a seven foot two piece handle so I can add the split cane net head I have. My current cane landing net handle is only 5' 6". However, weight may become and issue unless the pole can be bored out. Is that possible?

[Northern_Nomad]

[quote="Beresford"

So I know many prefer a large round net but it's not for me for carp fishing. I'm more interested in protecting the tip of my rod so I'll forgo the aesthetics. I'm thinking of getting a six foot one piece handle made or a seven foot two piece handle so I can add the split cane net head I have. My current cane landing net handle is only 5' 6". However, weight may become and issue unless the pole can be bored out. Is that possible?[/quote]

Yes.

[Beresford]

Thanks!