|
|
Posts: 100
| When accounting for follows and fish lost before the net, what would be your guess for a percentage that hit the net? Just curious. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 7
| 20%
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 4269
Location: Ashland WI | 10% at best. |
|
| |
|
| I am thinking this could be greatly impacted by the type of water you fish. The water in the chain where I live is very dark stained and follows are not easy to see. I was throwing a top water last week and for at least 30' I could see a big secondary wake behind the lure but couldn't see the fish. Right at the boat as I started into the figure 8, the fish rolled and I could see it was a very nice musky but I could not see it before that despite knowing it had to be there due to the wake. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 69
Location: Royalton, MN | Small sample size: less than a full season of musky fishing.
I'd say about 10%. Depends largely on the lake and how smart/pressured the fish are. One local lake, it's about 30%. On another, Miltona, I've had about 30 follows and only 1 fish to show for it. |
|
| |
|
Location: Contrarian Island | one year a few yrs back like 2012 I think I kept track of all contacts (follows/hits/lost/in net).. for the season that year I put in about 450 hrs on water. Action was from around 800 total.. 92 hit the net. In general the last 10 yrs, I'd say that is about the % for the boat that end up in the net.. about 10 -13% of total contacts find the net. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1188
| When I saw this question, at first I was thinking maybe 20%, but after thinking about it, it is probably less than 10%. I think the reason for my initial thought, is due to what was mentioned about different lakes. One of the small lakes I fish frequently, is fairly clear, but you don't get a lot of follows in the classic sense. The few follows you see, usually veer off well before the 8. You still catch fish on the 8, but they usually come in out of nowhere, like under the boat. Others you catch are farther out on the cast. So on that lake, you probably have a higher catch rate to fish you see, because you don't see too many fish until they hit. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 343
| Depends on the waterbody and whether you are chasing tigers or purebreds. Tigers are a little higher percentage as they are less likely to follow, and uncommon on figure eights. Clear water about 10%, 15 to 20% on less clear systems. 20 to 30% on tigers depending on water clarity and temperature. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1188
| The lake I mentioned is a tiger lake. Makes sense. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 53
Location: Chicago, IL | I've been keeping track off all activity (follows, hits, fish on but lost before netting, catches) since Sept '17. And the number I have is .088%. So basically 9%. Right in line with what others are saying as well. |
|
| |
