|
|
Posts: 7067
Location: Northwest Chicago Burbs | Curious where everyone actually stands on this issue. | |
| | |
Posts: 1777
| I voted for it to be banned but I don't know in what context you were talking about. I oppose it for tournaments which I feel should have a level playing field. For every day use, if you have the coin go for it, just don't decimate the fishery. I guess I'm opposed to guides using it also. | |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | Get your bans off my bass boat! If the tech works and is available, folks should be able to use it. If the question is about who should and should not use it (guides, tourney participants, etc), that's up to the sponsors. But if the question is can I buy and use a new product, yeah. m | |
| | |
Posts: 574
Location: WI | mikie - 7/3/2024 11:39 AM
Get your bans off my bass boat! If the tech works and is available, folks should be able to use it. If the question is about who should and should not use it (guides, tourney participants, etc), that's up to the sponsors. But if the question is can I buy and use a new product, yeah. m
But some people might misuse it and I don’t want my fishing experience impacted so you shouldn’t be able to use it. It’s not fishing anyhow. Ban it. | |
| | |
Posts: 406
Location: SW Ohio | I wondered how long it would take something like this to come up. “If I don’t like it, ban it.” And if the reason for banning something is to “equal” the playing field or minimize the number of fish caught then ban all electronics including trolling motors, ban kickers and any boat over 16’. Limit the HP on boats all because not everyone can afford it or it increases catch numbers. Ban guiding and live bait because the two are too effective at catching fish.
Hell, let’s go to the extreme and close all state’s seasons from Dec to Sept to protect the fish. In Dec, females are full of eggs and should be left alone until after they finish spawning in May. Some say the 80* temp limit is too high and we should stop at 70*. So all fishing is banned from June thru Sept due to water temps MAY be too high. Leaves you only Oct and Nov. The numbers fishing will drop off as will club’s and organization’s participation and funding. They will dry up and fold. DNR efforts will drop and stocking will stop. But you’re protecting the fish so it’s all good, right? Ban FFS and where does it stop?
I think the effectiveness of FFS is over stated and blown out of proportion. But technological advances will not stop and better units are just around the corner. Let the DNRs study it and make recommendations. In the meantime, go fishing and live longer. | |
| | |
Posts: 1498
Location: Brighton CO. | I've fished a lot of places out of a lot of different boats over the years. I started out on a old wooden row boat with no motor or fish finder as we called them at the time back in the 70's. I had both 12' and 14' row boats (aluminum with) small engines and bigger 16' boats with big engines and all the bells and whisles, and all the different boats I rented. Over 30 years ago on my only trip to Lake Of The Woods in a rental boat we missed the cutoff back to camp and we found a buoy got the number off it and plugged it into our map and figured out where we were. In Canada fish buoy's and channel makers. (a good way to find spots) My dad did well beating the shore lines this time of year in both Wisconsin and Canada, I like to fish open water.
This could be fish down the middle of a smaller Lake in 15' of water or fishing 15' down in water 80-100', or finding deep reefs and fishing on them or fishing around them. What I have found that driving around with fish finder on or seeing bait on the surface with my eyes I mark those spots on my map. Over the years the bait is for the most part in the same places so I drive around and fish those spots. I don't have a boat but if I did and had FFS I could beat up on the fish in open water.
I rather look for fish casting them looking at TV. | |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | "But some people might misuse it and I don’t want my fishing experience impacted so you shouldn’t be able to use it. It’s not fishing anyhow. Ban it."
The same could be said for assault weapons in the hands of the public, and the harm of those being in the 'wrong hands' means we lose more than a few fish. They are not for hunting, anyhow. m | |
| | |
Posts: 542
Location: NW WI | mikie - 7/4/2024 10:00 AM
"But some people might misuse it and I don’t want my fishing experience impacted so you shouldn’t be able to use it. It’s not fishing anyhow. Ban it."
The same could be said for assault weapons in the hands of the public, and the harm of those being in the 'wrong hands' means we lose more than a few fish. They are not for hunting, anyhow. m
We're faaaar too good at repopulating and our species is spread around the globe is your difference there pal. The largemouth industry is accepting FFS with open arms. Hm, I wonder why? | |
| | |
Posts: 123
| im in minority, just another tool in the endless continuum of betters boats (worth pages alone), gas engine improvement (more pages of history, improvements, safety, efficiency, yada yada, trolling motors (same), gps, SI, superline, fluoro, AGM batteries then Li, better clothes than old cotton/wool, sunblock, cell phones, youtube, better baits (DBL10, Bulldawgs) MuskieFirst forum to learn from experts. I'm sure I left off tons of tech advances that allow us to fish longer, warmer/cooler, get there quicker, be on water longer, teach us exact technique, etc. etc.
Old guys like me, get over this one thing. Life is yin/yang. with FFS in the boat, I spend so much screen time I don't notice Striper boils 1/4mi away - an angler cannot do everything simultaneously. Time staring at FFS is time not doing something else we old cats do to catch fish. Yes the whuppersnappers will snipe big fish, but nobody can take your unique approach to fishing from you, and you know you catch big ones too!
only used mine half-dozen times but did catch a 25" reservoir Striper on a spoon and saw it in "real-time" on-screen. Wild sensation to see the fish move on the bait, get the hit, and see it fight real-time. Did I snipe it? I did move the bait higher in the water column to get it to the fish (luddites *gasp* the horror, he used tech to catch a fish!!, smfh!?, wtf!?, gtfo my lake!!). My side-imaging saw those fish first, that is why I stopped. I went to the spot b/c its a no-brainer, highway bridge in river/reservoir during high noon (lots of shade/shadows). So prob would have caught it anyways, I knew fish would be there and SI confirmed; FFS sealed the deal (OMG! WTF did he say! who is he to catch a F-kn FISH!?!?, ban this stuff NOW).
More important is post-catch handling. Some dudes woulda killed that fish in high-summer but mine swam away due to quick, expert handling.
So as to FFS bans, I say,
*Come and get it*
Edited by curdmudgeon 7/4/2024 2:05 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 574
Location: WI | mikie - 7/4/2024 10:00 AM
"But some people might misuse it and I don’t want my fishing experience impacted so you shouldn’t be able to use it. It’s not fishing anyhow. Ban it."
The same could be said for assault weapons in the hands of the public, and the harm of those being in the 'wrong hands' means we lose more than a few fish. They are not for hunting, anyhow. m
Could probably extrapolate to all kinds of broccoli to snickers scenarios if you wanted to.
For all the discussion about FFS on this forum, I would say there is a case for some intervention in targeting fish over deep water(w/ or w/o FFS). Targeting Muskies over deep water does create an increased risk of mortality. We should probably be thankful for FFS creating this awareness. | |
| | |
Posts: 406
Location: SW Ohio | raftman - 7/4/2024 4:28 PM
For all the discussion about FFS on this forum, I would say there is a case for some intervention in targeting fish over deep water(w/ or w/o FFS). Targeting Muskies over deep water does create an increased risk of mortality. We should probably be thankful for FFS creating this awareness.
I’m curious how “intervention” would work? The fact that someone has FFS on their boat doesn’t mean they are sniping or targeting deep water fish. | |
| | |
Posts: 574
Location: WI | OH Musky - 7/4/2024 4:45 PM
raftman - 7/4/2024 4:28 PM
For all the discussion about FFS on this forum, I would say there is a case for some intervention in targeting fish over deep water(w/ or w/o FFS). Targeting Muskies over deep water does create an increased risk of mortality. We should probably be thankful for FFS creating this awareness.
I’m curious how “intervention” would work? The fact that someone has FFS on their boat doesn’t mean they are sniping or targeting deep water fish.
Simple. No throwing or trolling musky plugs over 20 feet of water regardless of FFS being on the boat. The too many floaters crowd will be at peace knowing these fish can’t be targeted and the FFS crowd can still use the technology. Some will probably be bothered that there are still people staring at a screen and missing that eagle flying around but that’s on them. | |
| | |
Posts: 2358
Location: Chisholm, MN | raftman - 7/5/2024 9:01 AM
OH Musky - 7/4/2024 4:45 PM
raftman - 7/4/2024 4:28 PM
For all the discussion about FFS on this forum, I would say there is a case for some intervention in targeting fish over deep water(w/ or w/o FFS). Targeting Muskies over deep water does create an increased risk of mortality. We should probably be thankful for FFS creating this awareness.
I’m curious how “intervention” would work? The fact that someone has FFS on their boat doesn’t mean they are sniping or targeting deep water fish.
Simple. No throwing or trolling musky plugs over 20 feet of water regardless of FFS being on the boat. The too many floaters crowd will be at peace knowing these fish can’t be targeted and the FFS crowd can still use the technology. Some will probably be bothered that there are still people staring at a screen and missing that eagle flying around but that’s on them.
That would be tough. Most places I fish have spots you could be in 40 feet and casting up to shore.
| |
| | |
Location: Athens, Ohio | My previous point being: if, as a society we can't ban assault weapons to save fellow men, women, and school children, how are you gonna promote a ban on a sonar rig to save a few stocked fish? m | |
| | |
| From a practical standpoint, in WI, enforcement of any ban would be extremely difficult. The DNR here faces a $15 million deficit for the upcoming fiscal year. Fees and licenses have for the most part have not increased since 2005. Of course, costs have not stayed the same but the legislature refuses to authorize increases. When I contacted my assembly rep, saying it was ludicrous that my senior license cost only $7, same as it did a decade or more ago, he replied that I should be glad. He did not respond when I said I live in the real world, where things cost more and we need to recognize that. He also did not respond when I said that perhaps he would be willing to take the salary he would have gotten in 2005, the mileage reimbursements from then and the staff salaries from 2005. I am sure he plans on getting back to me soon. | |
| | |
Posts: 2051
| One thing for sure..when there are serious talks of banning AR-15's.. sales go through the roof, I know I probably would have never bought an AR until the media started beating the drum with Obama in office.. I'll guarantee this banter on just this site alone has caused a few on the fence about FFS to run out an buy it... | |
| | |
Posts: 661
Location: Duluth | North of 8 - 7/5/2024 11:38 AM
From a practical standpoint, in WI, enforcement of any ban would be extremely difficult. The DNR here faces a $15 million deficit for the upcoming fiscal year. Fees and licenses have for the most part have not increased since 2005. Of course, costs have not stayed the same but the legislature refuses to authorize increases. When I contacted my assembly rep, saying it was ludicrous that my senior license cost only $7, same as it did a decade or more ago, he replied that I should be glad. He did not respond when I said I live in the real world, where things cost more and we need to recognize that. He also did not respond when I said that perhaps he would be willing to take the salary he would have gotten in 2005, the mileage reimbursements from then and the staff salaries from 2005. I am sure he plans on getting back to me soon.
Solving this problem would require some people to change.....ah forget it.
It's a shame that moronic fiscal policy is baked in. Situation isn't much better in MN either. | |
| | |
Posts: 406
Location: SW Ohio | raftman - 7/5/2024 10:01 AM
OH Musky - 7/4/2024 4:45 PM
raftman - 7/4/2024 4:28 PM
For all the discussion about FFS on this forum, I would say there is a case for some intervention in targeting fish over deep water(w/ or w/o FFS). Targeting Muskies over deep water does create an increased risk of mortality. We should probably be thankful for FFS creating this awareness.
I’m curious how “intervention” would work? The fact that someone has FFS on their boat doesn’t mean they are sniping or targeting deep water fish.
Simple. No throwing or trolling musky plugs over 20 feet of water regardless of FFS being on the boat. The too many floaters crowd will be at peace knowing these fish can’t be targeted and the FFS crowd can still use the technology. Some will probably be bothered that there are still people staring at a screen and missing that eagle flying around but that’s on them.
And who would enforce that? Don’t see it as something that will catch on or be enforceable. Hell, our local lake is 130’ at the dam with an average depth of 45’. Fish any main lake points, and you’re sitting over 65’ of water casting to the bank from 50-60’ away. Troll any open water and you’re in water well over 20’ deep. Jigging the outside edge of the timber and you’re in 45-65’. Yeah, not going to happen, at least in our reservoirs. | |
| | |
Posts: 63
| I’m not sure harassing individual open water fish using naval style radar is ethical or something that should be permitted by conservation authorities. It’s impossible to enforce but maybe it makes people think twice about sharp shooting or it makes their activities feel more sketchy to them. Some good points were made on this forum comparing it to unethical methods of deer hunting. It’s clearly not fair chase and fish that see baits all the time get conditioned and lose interest. I have concerns about this in areas I fish where the fish are low density but spend a lot of time suspended in contained basins. Heck even in numbers waters where they spend a lot of time suspended off the weedline and already receive pressure (but at least have some respite, or used to). It’s the fish and the resource that comes first and I personally would like to see FFS banned for musky fishing, even though that’s not going to happen. They’re not schooling fish like walleye or crappie or whatever that exist in high numbers and have a ton of reproductive success. I’m a younger angler for what it’s worth, I’m sure I’ll regret getting involved in this debate. | |
| | |
Posts: 1777
| Many of the people who constantly bang the drum on fish handling, proper tools and speed of the release don't seem to have a problem jerking them out of deep water. Would kind of make an outsider wonder don't you think?
Oh and the comment that the Bass guys don't have a problem with FFS proves that people only care about themselves on this subject. FFS has been the hottest subject in Bass fishing for the past 6 months. | |
| | |
Posts: 3155
| Well I don't have an AR 15,,but I do have an AK 47,,a real kalashnikov!!! How I would love to empty a 30 round clip into a FFS unit.
For people who have them stop targeting fish below 20 feet because that's what's happening. | |
| | |
Posts: 2358
Location: Chisholm, MN | I actually don’t think it matters what depth you pull them from because even if you mark a fish 10 feet down, it likely just came from 35 feet down. They don’t just sit in 10 feet for extended periods. They move up and down constantly. | |
| | |
Posts: 1777
| It seems by the poll that 87% of the voters have at least some doubts about it's use. | |
| | |
Posts: 5193
| Never sharp shot,and have been using it before most.i dont think having 4,,5, units linked together chasing fish is right.On a positive note this season ive seen 15 fish at.least following on screen i never seen casting shallow.maybe limit it to one livescope sonar per boat.
Edited by 0723 7/6/2024 10:06 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 542
Location: NW WI | Brian Hoffies - 7/5/2024 7:17 PM
Oh and the comment that the Bass guys don't have a problem with FFS proves that people only care about themselves on this subject. FFS has been the hottest subject in Bass fishing for the past 6 months.
U read entirely incorrectly. Keyword-INDUSTRY. Not COMMUNITY. Those making a dollar off it. From the Sonar companies, to the bait manufacturers, to various forms of Media. It's the hot new ticket for everyone to buy into, and understandabley so when you're talking about thee most popular,competitive, and pressured inshore species. Money money money.
Let's see what one of the biggest online retailers has to say for Icast 2024.
https://www.tacklewarehouse.com/catpage-ICAST.html
Edited by 7.62xJay 7/6/2024 11:01 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 3904
| Keep your rules off my lawn! Um, wait, boat!
Who was it, Keith Kavajecz, who won a walleye tourney in Little Bay De Noc by moving fast, passing over fish then throwing back a Shiver Monnow (like a jigging rap). Everyone else had fish finders, but he used his in a different way, running and gunning to target specific fish. He won.
An old timer would claim having a fish finder is breaking the rules. His grandpa would say having a motor is breaking the rules.
Me, I want a remote-control mini sub equipped with a camera. And harpoons instead of torpedoes. Drop it over the side of the boat and sit back sipping cold beer, driving my sub and watching my screen. Because I'm all about catch and release my harpoons will be thin and loaded with electricity to shock the fish and while stunned the sub will drag it back to the boat. Couple quick pics and then back in the drink so I can shoot it again later.
I got this idea from thinking about Slamr.
| |
| | |
Posts: 3904
| Just ****in with you, Andrew.
And I stole the idea from a sci-fi book called "Cemetary World".
Edited by Ranger 7/7/2024 12:21 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 101
| Kirby Budrow - 7/6/2024 7:45 AM
I actually don’t think it matters what depth you pull them from because even if you mark a fish 10 feet down, it likely just came from 35 feet down. They don’t just sit in 10 feet for extended periods. They move up and down constantly.
That's an interesting thought. I've often thought this about fish on structure too. They'll hang for a while, but they slide up/down constantly.
Has there been anything done around like how long it takes a fish to be accustomed/regulated to a certain depth? I feel like Wiebe's vids kinda touch on it, but let's say a musky comes up from 40 feet and is settling on a 10 ft reef or something like that. How long would it take for it to be a true 10 ft deep fish in that sense?
My personal completely non-scientific thought on it is that if it's making the decision to come shallow, it would be about instantaneous. The body can self regulate in that sense. If it gets hooked 40 down, it's coming up involuntarily and fighting for its life so the body may not react as it should to the change in depth. But I'd be curious if there's anything a little more proven than just my own thoughts/biases. | |
| | |
Posts: 2358
Location: Chisholm, MN | Tommy - 7/8/2024 9:06 AM
Kirby Budrow - 7/6/2024 7:45 AM
I actually don’t think it matters what depth you pull them from because even if you mark a fish 10 feet down, it likely just came from 35 feet down. They don’t just sit in 10 feet for extended periods. They move up and down constantly.
That's an interesting thought. I've often thought this about fish on structure too. They'll hang for a while, but they slide up/down constantly.
Has there been anything done around like how long it takes a fish to be accustomed/regulated to a certain depth? I feel like Wiebe's vids kinda touch on it, but let's say a musky comes up from 40 feet and is settling on a 10 ft reef or something like that. How long would it take for it to be a true 10 ft deep fish in that sense?
My personal completely non-scientific thought on it is that if it's making the decision to come shallow, it would be about instantaneous. The body can self regulate in that sense. If it gets hooked 40 down, it's coming up involuntarily and fighting for its life so the body may not react as it should to the change in depth. But I'd be curious if there's anything a little more proven than just my own thoughts/biases.
Right. In my opinion the harm comes from the fight and handling after. I've definitely caught fish off shallow spots that release tough, even though they are seemingly hooked lightly and not in warm water. Maybe it just came up from 40 feet. Or maybe it rose up from under the boat in deep water and you caught it, unknowingly it was way down there. They can see a long ways and chase a bait just below the surface from 40 feet down. I've seen it happen.
In Minnesota where I fish, I think people often don't understand just how many fish are using a spot and the open water around it. When someone says there's a fish on "x" spot is generally inaccurate from what I've found. There are actually a bunch of fish on and off the spot throughout the day. Up and down and out to the side. It's usually not a fish just hanging in a patch of weeds or tucked in some rocks for several days at a time. And when you get a follow, chances are when you go back to try and catch it at prime time, it's long gone. Maybe another fish has replaced it. Maybe it is still there. But since you saw a fish on a spot, coming back to fish it at prime time is a good idea since there was obviously one there for a reason earlier. You just may not see or catch that same one again. Also, there are often multiple large fish hanging together. So the 50 you saw earlier and came back to and caught at dark, could easily be a totally different fish. You would have no idea unless it had an obvious identifying mark you can see from the boat. | |
| | |
Posts: 101
| Kirby Budrow - 7/8/2024 10:04 AM
Tommy - 7/8/2024 9:06 AM
Kirby Budrow - 7/6/2024 7:45 AM
I actually don’t think it matters what depth you pull them from because even if you mark a fish 10 feet down, it likely just came from 35 feet down. They don’t just sit in 10 feet for extended periods. They move up and down constantly.
That's an interesting thought. I've often thought this about fish on structure too. They'll hang for a while, but they slide up/down constantly.
Has there been anything done around like how long it takes a fish to be accustomed/regulated to a certain depth? I feel like Wiebe's vids kinda touch on it, but let's say a musky comes up from 40 feet and is settling on a 10 ft reef or something like that. How long would it take for it to be a true 10 ft deep fish in that sense?
My personal completely non-scientific thought on it is that if it's making the decision to come shallow, it would be about instantaneous. The body can self regulate in that sense. If it gets hooked 40 down, it's coming up involuntarily and fighting for its life so the body may not react as it should to the change in depth. But I'd be curious if there's anything a little more proven than just my own thoughts/biases.
Right. In my opinion the harm comes from the fight and handling after. I've definitely caught fish off shallow spots that release tough, even though they are seemingly hooked lightly and not in warm water. Maybe it just came up from 40 feet. Or maybe it rose up from under the boat in deep water and you caught it, unknowingly it was way down there. They can see a long ways and chase a bait just below the surface from 40 feet down. I've seen it happen.
In Minnesota where I fish, I think people often don't understand just how many fish are using a spot and the open water around it. When someone says there's a fish on "x" spot is generally inaccurate from what I've found. There are actually a bunch of fish on and off the spot throughout the day. Up and down and out to the side. It's usually not a fish just hanging in a patch of weeds or tucked in some rocks for several days at a time. And when you get a follow, chances are when you go back to try and catch it at prime time, it's long gone. Maybe another fish has replaced it. Maybe it is still there. But since you saw a fish on a spot, coming back to fish it at prime time is a good idea since there was obviously one there for a reason earlier. You just may not see or catch that same one again. Also, there are often multiple large fish hanging together. So the 50 you saw earlier and came back to and caught at dark, could easily be a totally different fish. You would have no idea unless it had an obvious identifying mark you can see from the boat.
Edited by Tommy 7/8/2024 10:30 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 101
| Kirby Budrow - 7/8/2024 10:04 AM
Tommy - 7/8/2024 9:06 AM
Kirby Budrow - 7/6/2024 7:45 AM
I actually don’t think it matters what depth you pull them from because even if you mark a fish 10 feet down, it likely just came from 35 feet down. They don’t just sit in 10 feet for extended periods. They move up and down constantly.
That's an interesting thought. I've often thought this about fish on structure too. They'll hang for a while, but they slide up/down constantly.
Has there been anything done around like how long it takes a fish to be accustomed/regulated to a certain depth? I feel like Wiebe's vids kinda touch on it, but let's say a musky comes up from 40 feet and is settling on a 10 ft reef or something like that. How long would it take for it to be a true 10 ft deep fish in that sense?
My personal completely non-scientific thought on it is that if it's making the decision to come shallow, it would be about instantaneous. The body can self regulate in that sense. If it gets hooked 40 down, it's coming up involuntarily and fighting for its life so the body may not react as it should to the change in depth. But I'd be curious if there's anything a little more proven than just my own thoughts/biases.
Right. In my opinion the harm comes from the fight and handling after. I've definitely caught fish off shallow spots that release tough, even though they are seemingly hooked lightly and not in warm water. Maybe it just came up from 40 feet. Or maybe it rose up from under the boat in deep water and you caught it, unknowingly it was way down there. They can see a long ways and chase a bait just below the surface from 40 feet down. I've seen it happen.
In Minnesota where I fish, I think people often don't understand just how many fish are using a spot and the open water around it. When someone says there's a fish on "x" spot is generally inaccurate from what I've found. There are actually a bunch of fish on and off the spot throughout the day. Up and down and out to the side. It's usually not a fish just hanging in a patch of weeds or tucked in some rocks for several days at a time. And when you get a follow, chances are when you go back to try and catch it at prime time, it's long gone. Maybe another fish has replaced it. Maybe it is still there. But since you saw a fish on a spot, coming back to fish it at prime time is a good idea since there was obviously one there for a reason earlier. You just may not see or catch that same one again. Also, there are often multiple large fish hanging together. So the 50 you saw earlier and came back to and caught at dark, could easily be a totally different fish. You would have no idea unless it had an obvious identifying mark you can see from the boat.
Oh for sure. I fish in your neck of the woods assuming your on V most of the time. I bought a place on the lake 3 years ago.
If I've got 2 people casting, I generally have a bucktail or topwater or something going shallow, then me in the back casting over deeper water with rubber. Fish come from either direction. | |
| | |
Posts: 222
| I used my livescope for 2 days in the Boulder Junction area and caught 0 muskies with it, it ain't all the great  Lol
Darren | |
| | |
Posts: 2358
Location: Chisholm, MN | musky1969 - 7/8/2024 3:18 PM
I used my livescope for 2 days in the Boulder Junction area and caught 0 muskies with it, it ain't all the great Lol
Darren
Lots of reasons for that...the effectiveness of FFS is not one of them. | |
| | |
Posts: 10
| I have active Target 2 waste of money for me but I like it for locating Pan fish. If your an experienced angler on a body of water should know when conditions are favorable and the spot on the spot hits likely come from. So for me It does not get used for Musky would be waste of time when I could be placing my lure in the money spots. I met a guy couple years ago on St.Croix River said he does not fish unless he see fish on his live scope. End of of day it was 3-0 and he was the one with no fish. If we wanted to take some pressure off Musky I would ban night fishing. It seems to have worked fine on Eagle lake. | |
| | |
Posts: 1295
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin | I had an interesting conversation with a gentleman highly involved in the tournament world and he made some very interesting points.
ALL sports have RULES:
Golf; only so many clubs allowed, groove depth on clubs mandated, etc.:
Baseball; no corked bats, no spitballs or other material for pitchers, etc.'
Hunting; no DRONES, no hunting on fly in day.
FFS is like a DRONE but underwater. Major difference from hunting is that even with DRONES, a big game animal can boogie out of the area to safety. With FFS muskies cannot escape!! Load the boat with food and find a BIG muskie and chase if, for days if necessary, until you get it to bite!
Food for thought!! | |
| | |
Posts: 101
| Does anybody actually chase individual fish for hours at a time? Maybe I could see that in a tournament when 1 fish could win it, but I've never seen anybody chase an individual fish like that in normal settings.
I've only seen people take like 2 casts at a fish and move on. Doesn't mean it's not happening, just don't think that's a very prevalent method. | |
| | |
Posts: 424
Location: MN | I highly doubt anyone does that. I have casted at and caught quite a few muskies sharpshooting. One thing you learn very quickly is that if you don't catch it right away, continuing to cast at it is a waste of time. It is very clear in the attitude of the fish. Doesn't matter how many baits you cycle through - it may continue to follow, but the movements get slower, it travels less far before falling back, etc.
The drone underwater analogy is a little comical too. If the fish are in weeds or tight to rocks, most of the time you can't see them. Driving around trying to sharpshoot in that case is far less productive than just fishing normal. When I fish in Canada in summer, I do very little pure scanning. The same thing holds for me fishing in MN starting around August going until turnover. It's really just early and then late in the MN season that sharpshooting is effective for me on the lakes I fish. Even then, on a normal outing it's not usually the only tactic used.
Most of the descriptions given by people who have never used FFS or tried sharpshooting are caricatures of reality. It is a powerful tool when used by someone skilled, but it is far from automatic. | |
| | |
Posts: 398
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Geez, sorry, Nar160 that it is not "automatic" for you. Yes, it is really unfortunate that FFS doesn't inform neutral muskies to be more aggressive and always bite. Apologies for those of us who gave that impression.
You better go get the "FFS track-cast" or whatever the heck this gadget is - will make your FFS fishing more effective:
https://youtu.be/0eZBwdiJJ6I?si=IAyIh6outBEipA_y&t=80
My sarcasm aside, you seem to be interpreting exactly what you want to hear into what folks have said about FFS. You are right about one thing - folks that don't know FFS (but do know muskies) would not really be able to conceptualize what its potential is. You do have to use it. But you are naïve to think that those who are most vehemently against it have never used it, or never "sharpshooted" muskies or other species of fish using other types of tech (ie jigging, side-imaging) prior to FFS.
You are also right about those that are effective musky anglers would be able to use FFS to its full potential -- this is reflected in exceptional (read: excessive) catch rates (e.g. Sprengler - Jimmy Houston video, among others that are not shy about saying so).
What is also true that is that folks that do not have the patience, energy or simply care enough about muskies or what musky fishing represents (and ill-equipped to handle them) now have the capability to catch muskies with very little effort other than driving around spot-lighting. These same folks would not enter the fishery as muskie anglers given the level of difficulty and expense (ie the bass buy who caught 3 fifties). Sure, FFS doesn’t make it "automatic", but there is nothing hard about it and it is a zero skill, zero fishing knowledge exercise.
Larry is absolutely 100% correct. The drone analogy is dead on. If you don't know anything about deer hunting big bucks, your chances of finding and planning and executing a successful trophy buck hunt is zero (I was going to say close to zero, but we are talking lottery probability). Using a drone to find a big buck changes that equation completely in the favour of an otherwise unskilled hunter. Likewise someone that knows nothing about muskies that comes up and fishes where I fish has a lottery probability seeing a musky, never mind catching one (I mean locals that live there for years have never caught one) -- FFS reduces the learning curve down to the catching part if they simply know how to use FFS, just like the bass guy demonstrated.
If you don’t know what Larry means by chasing a fish around for days -- well then you don’t know. Many of us that focus on chasing after big fish we locate using "classic" methods know exactly what he means. Days can mean weeks, months, years actually. Add FFS as a tool to someone with the already acquired knowledge and skills, well, as Larry said, the fish is not going to elude them.
The poll to me is surprising (I am surprised the "do what you want with FFS" crowd is over 10%). This is a group that has all the info they need, they understand where they majority sits yet are still comfortable with a selfish me-first position. What should not surprise the pro-FFS crowd though is that there is never going to be some sort of shift where FFS sharpshooters are not considered as pariahs in the musky fishing community. There is just too much respect for musky as a fish and the desire for the conservation and preservation of quality musky fisheries for that sentiment to ever change.
Edited by Angling Oracle 7/27/2024 11:11 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1359
| Dennis Anderson of the Star Tribune weighed in with his thoughts on an article in Friday's paper. Worth the read. | |
| | |
Posts: 398
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | TCESOX - 7/28/2024 11:41 AM
Dennis Anderson of the Star Tribune weighed in with his thoughts on an article in Friday's paper. Worth the read.
Yes, saw the headline "New Sonar Gadget is a Futuristic Death Ray for Muskies," although not able to read it yet. I note he has some thoughts on it in the MN opener too a month or so ago. Heck of an outdoor advocate - we know him well up here in Manitoba as he really didn't like our duck reg changes...
Edited by Angling Oracle 7/28/2024 5:29 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 424
Location: MN | Angling Oracle - 7/27/2024 9:53 AM
What is also true that is that folks that do not have the patience, energy or simply care enough about muskies or what musky fishing represents (and ill-equipped to handle them) now have the capability to catch muskies with very little effort other than driving around spot-lighting. These same folks would not enter the fishery as muskie anglers given the level of difficulty and expense (ie the bass buy who caught 3 fifties). Sure, FFS doesn’t make it "automatic", but there is nothing hard about it and it is a zero skill, zero fishing knowledge exercise.
This is not even remotely close to the reality of the situation.
First off, the bass guy in the video is a very very unusual example. He was fishing in a location with multiple big fish, during a time when they were using open water, and they were actually biting throughout the day. Those are not common conditions, even if you know the lake, know where to look, are good at presenting lures, etc. He's also probably a very good fisherman in general and skilled with his electronics. We've all heard of examples of newbies lucking into a big fish or even a couple big fish very early on, and of course that happens when they are fishing with guides. I wouldn't read much more into it than that.
The idea that a random casual fisherman equipped with FFS can just drive around and catch muskies at will is ridiculous. Lots of factors need to align in order to actually catch one sharpshooting:
- muskie need to be out in open. Even during an open water bite, this is only usually true during part of the day.
- need to know where to look (units can see ~100 ft out, can drive 2-3 mph). You just can't see very far and it's easy to burn up time looking at nothing
- need to identify muskie (many lakes debris, carp, etc make this nontrivial and you can miss them if angle is not right)
- need to be fishing when the fish are active enough to bite
- once you find one, you need to control the boat, point the transducer at the fish, make a precision cast, and trigger the fish once it has engaged
- hook and not lose before netting
The idea that there is no skill involved here is just wrong. I've caught many fish using most all techniques used for muskie fishing. Sharpshooting is less physically taxing than casting all day, of course, but it is tedious and it takes experience and skill to become consistently effective at it. Compared with dragging a sucker down a weed line or trolling down a break, maintaining your boat heading and transducer angle in wind while making a precision cast is significantly more difficult.
Generally speaking, most of the skills are actually the same as all other muskie fishing - location, timing, presentation. Many people have this technology but are not successful in using it in this manner. Just like every other type of muskie fishing, you need to be on fish when they are biting and you need to present a bait they will eat. It's very easy to fail at at least one of those.
It's not magic. To put some numbers on it, I figure you can search an open water area ~3x as fast as if you were blind casting. Blind casting you might run the boat ~1 mph, making casts of ~150 ft or so off one side, or go half speed and alternate off both sides. Scanning you can move faster, 2-3 mph and scan roughly 100 ft out each side. Trolling with a 4-6 line spread would cover roughly the same water per time. Of course this is faster than blind casting open water, but it's really not that fast compared to fishing structure normally. Imagine, for example, you have 30 minutes. You can thoroughly fish a good point and a good reef, or you could scan a mile x 200 ft swath of open water. If you're familiar with the water, you can almost certainly put your bait in front of a couple muskies in that time using the structure approach. In my experience, picking open water to scan would only be productive during certain times of year and times of day. No doubt, there are definitely times when that is a better approach, but it's not the norm.
Angling Oracle - 7/27/2024 9:53 AM
Larry is absolutely 100% correct. The drone analogy is dead on. If you don't know anything about deer hunting big bucks, your chances of finding and planning and executing a successful trophy buck hunt is zero (I was going to say close to zero, but we are talking lottery probability). Using a drone to find a big buck changes that equation completely in the favour of an otherwise unskilled hunter. Likewise someone that knows nothing about muskies that comes up and fishes where I fish has a lottery probability seeing a musky, never mind catching one (I mean locals that live there for years have never caught one) -- FFS reduces the learning curve down to the catching part if they simply know how to use FFS, just like the bass guy demonstrated.
IF the fish is in the open water, it makes finding it slightly more efficient. That doesn't make it easy. Also, that is a big IF! And note you can only tell roughly when it is a big one - some big ones don't look huge on the screen and some small ones look big on the screen.
That bass guy was fishing in MN BTW. Some lakes here have a very specific bite where a number of big fish move into confined open water areas post spawn. He hit the jackpot both in location and time. That is absolutely not typical on an arbitrary lake at an arbitrary time. Even in MN when that does happen, those areas often get pounded so hard by fisherman that the fish quickly become extremely difficult to catch.
My experience in Canada, even during an analogous season, is that you don't see the same thing. I've caught a few open water fish, with and without FFS. By and large though, scanning has not been super effective, and really the only place I've found it to be effective is right next to structure. If I know there are fish using a spot and when I cast it I don't see anything, I might scan around the spot before leaving. I've caught 4 fish (no big ones) over the last 3 years doing that (out of 57 total in Canada).
Obviously I'm not familiar with all lakes and rivers and scenarios in NW Ontario. There may be some situations where fish are packed up into confined open water areas where they can be efficiently targeted using FFS.
Angling Oracle - 7/27/2024 9:53 AM
The poll to me is surprising (I am surprised the "do what you want with FFS" crowd is over 10%). This is a group that has all the info they need, they understand where they majority sits yet are still comfortable with a selfish me-first position. What should not surprise the pro-FFS crowd though is that there is never going to be some sort of shift where FFS sharpshooters are not considered as pariahs in the musky fishing community. There is just too much respect for musky as a fish and the desire for the conservation and preservation of quality musky fisheries for that sentiment to ever change.
This is being overly dramatic. Most people are not overly familiar with the capabilities and limitations of the technology. Almost everyone in muskie fishing is generally concerned with the conservation of the resource. I am a member of the local chapter (01) of Muskies Inc and spend countless hours each year raising money (tens of thousands over time) for stocking fish. I use FFS for sharpshooting when I think it is an effective tactic. There's nothing contradictory or unethical about that. Over the last 3 years, roughly 25% of the fish I've caught have been caught in this manner. I don't target fish deeper than 25 ft down or fish blind deeper than 15 ft down, or fish in hot water.
According to you, someone like me should be drug out into the street and shot. Seems a bit childish. I'm just a guy using the tools at my disposal to catch muskies. FFS is another tool in a long sequence of electronics improvements over time. It makes us more effective at catching muskies. Under most circumstances, the improvement is a long ways from as dramatic as you imply. | |
| | |
Posts: 161
| Lowrance has introduced a new version that will be available this fall. Its called the Eagle Eye 9 kit. It has live down and forward facing sonar, and comes with a 9 inch graph for 1000 bucks.
Every person who could not afford the latest version of livescope or active target could go for this instead. It does not appear to be as powerful or sophisticated as the other ones though. But for 1000 bucks, I could see a lot of people saying "why not."
Also, you do not need a sonar hub module (the black box) either. The transducer connects directly to the graph. | |
| | |
Posts: 32911
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Either way, FFS is here to stay and is exactly what it is, no matter how one attempts to paint the subject. This discussion is following the pattern already well advanced in the crappie world where the tech is now as commonplace as not.
I have a new trolling motor with a Mega SI built-in. It's amazingly clear on a 13" Apex.
Use it 'ethically' or don't and talk about it and you will be subject to those who agree or disagree with you, and then you can defend it or bash it, and so on and so on. It's already the new normal.
There are a number of improvements from various electronics players on the way. One in particular is a real 'wowser' for sure. As soon as a presser is released, we'll publish it. | |
| | |
Posts: 1359
| sworrall - 7/29/2024 4:49 PM
This discussion is following the pattern already well advanced in the crappie world where the tech is now as commonplace as not.
Which has directly led to changes in daily and possession crappie limits in Mississippi.In a 3 year study period, Mississippi saw FFS use for crappie, go from 20% to 70%. Even now, it doesn't really cost as much as it appears, because many already have the sonar unit needed, just need to get the transducer, which isn't out of reach for many.
The technology certainly ain't going away, but the fish may very well be.
Edited by TCESOX 7/29/2024 10:23 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1359
| "According to you, someone like me should be drug out into the street and shot. "
I read all the posts. Not a single one suggested shooting anyone. Now who's being dramatic. | |
| | |
Posts: 20
| Ignoring repercussions on the resource, I'd be interested to know if the FFS supporters believe that FFS is really a net positive to your fishing experience, or if you are just ideologically opposed to some sort of ban/regulation. From my point of view, if you're already an above average musky fishermen, the extra bump in efficacy that comes with FFS will inherently be smaller than the benefit provided to other fishermen competing for the same finite resource. It'd be different if everyone had their own private lake to fish but I assume most are fishing public waters.
As an example, FFS might help you eliminate dead water but if everyone becomes more efficient at eliminating dead water then that's not really a net benefit. I think there is a lot of confirmation bias where if you catch a fish with the help of FFS you view that as a fish you otherwise would not have caught but you don't know how many other fish were caught/educated by other anglers using FFS that you've missed out on. The old adage is that 10% of the anglers catch 90% of the fish but as increased technology raises the baseline fishing ability of the common angler it seems inevitable that the gap between the 90% and 10% (I'd suspect most posters fall within the 10% category) will be reduced.
This will especially be true with future iterations of FFS that are much more powerful, user-friendly, and easier to interpret than the current versions which definitely takes skill to operate and interpret. Just like cellular trail cameras in hunting, the quality will go up and the price will go down as time goes on.
Add in the repercussions of more and increasingly efficient anglers on the resource and it's hard to believe musky fishing (and the musky species as a whole) will be better off in the future than it is today if we keep going down the path we're on.
Edited by xcskier_hunter 7/30/2024 3:14 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 398
Location: Selkirk, Manitoba | Steve is right, we are tending to go around arguing in circles a bit here arguing minutiae - that being said, it is very useful to understand perspectives on the issue.
First off, Nar160, not personal at all - I honestly am empathetic with your mindset given I've certainly been in your position once or twice in the fishing realm and otherwise. I get that you (and others) potentially feel persecuted for something you are doing legally and using it no more or less ethically than perhaps other fishing methods. As previously discussed, other tech advances have made things much easier for us and more effective in increasing our catches. You have sort of outlined what FFS can and seemingly can't do for you. I am not sure who the audience is for that but if you've read my threads I have been simply unwilling to "sell" these units to outline all I perceive one can do with them -- efficiencies much further than what you have revealed. There is plenty to find elsewhere with regards to what one can do with it, but the example videos were just sort of for those who seemed to be completely unaware of what we were talking about with regards to the open water scenarios. We are only at the tip of the iceberg of where FFS and related tech is going.
Ultimately though, individually your personal catches (FFS related or otherwise) are not significant in relation to the overall issue at hand -- it ultimately is a big picture, creeping increase in additive FFS mortality (additive increases to current rates of handling mortality, barotrauma, temp shock) that is the issue. Small percentages make a big difference with rare, old fish like musky.
This tech (and whatever is to follow) is such an advancement that it is inevitable that mortality rates will increase to unsustainable levels. A simple actuarial table is all one needs. There are too few big fish, and these few fish are really old. It really is a simple math exercise. Even with good fish handling and not catching out of deep water, X number of fish that are hooked/caught/lost are going to die for whatever reason. Add in the deep fish, poor handling, more fish caught (per hour effort) that the use of FFS has brought, well, the fishery is going to decline. Note that the hours effort is both more efficient/effective with FFS with regards to the catch per hour, and the total hours fish is supplemented now by fishers that were never going to be musky fishers without this advancement or are opportunistic temporary entries to the musky fishery (e.g. walleye FFS reef anglers up here). We already have enough historical examples of the effects of mortality on big muskies to know that we need to be especially risk adverse.
This may not be an issue on some water bodies and some fisheries, but the FFS "sharpshooting" concept seems to be reviled in many fisheries worldwide at the moment.
The answer to this problem is very simple and clear to most: don't sharpshoot, get better at handling, educate... Will slow it down.
Creating refuges or legally imposed bans really is the sure-fire way to ensure quality muskies long-term in combination with more education on handling.
Edited by Angling Oracle 7/31/2024 12:34 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 161
| TCESOX - 7/29/2024 9:41 PM
sworrall - 7/29/2024 4:49 PM
This discussion is following the pattern already well advanced in the crappie world where the tech is now as commonplace as not.
Which has directly led to changes in daily and possession crappie limits in Mississippi.In a 3 year study period, Mississippi saw FFS use for crappie, go from 20% to 70%. Even now, it doesn't really cost as much as it appears, because many already have the sonar unit needed, just need to get the transducer, which isn't out of reach for many.
The technology certainly ain't going away, but the fish may very well be.
Minnesota lowered their daily sunfish bag limit on over 100 lakes last year from 20 to 5. Too much angling pressure and increased usage of live sonar while ice fishing is the main culprit.
There will be more of this coming in the future.
Edited by gimruis 7/31/2024 12:00 PM
| |
| | |
Posts: 1145
Location: Minnesota. | Kirby Budrow - 7/8/2024 10:04 AM
In Minnesota where I fish, I think people often don't understand just how many fish are using a spot and the open water around it. When someone says there's a fish on "x" spot is generally inaccurate from what I've found. There are actually a bunch of fish on and off the spot throughout the day. Up and down and out to the side. It's usually not a fish just hanging in a patch of weeds or tucked in some rocks for several days at a time. And when you get a follow, chances are when you go back to try and catch it at prime time, it's long gone. Maybe another fish has replaced it. Maybe it is still there. But since you saw a fish on a spot, coming back to fish it at prime time is a good idea since there was obviously one there for a reason earlier. You just may not see or catch that same one again. Also, there are often multiple large fish hanging together. So the 50 you saw earlier and came back to and caught at dark, could easily be a totally different fish. You would have no idea unless it had an obvious identifying mark you can see from the boat.
It's not all that often that I read and then re-read an entire post, esp. one with a lot of info contained therein. That's mainly b/c I'm lazy and skip around a lot but this bunch'a words just hit my "hot button". It touched on a few feelings I've had over 3 decades of pitching baits and trying - mostly in vain- to figure out things as best I could... And it made me smile!
BTW for whatever it's worth I'm not in favor a FFS but who cares what I think! | |
| | |
Posts: 3904
| "Does anybody actually chase individual fish for hours at a time? Maybe I could see that in a tournament when 1 fish could win it, but I've never seen anybody chase an individual fish like that in normal settings."
I found a spot on a spot on a spot, a few feet wide, in the deep bed of a river's fast current. Took me like 30 hours of fishing to figure out how to get my bait correct for the fish I was sure was there. Turned out PB. That's all I did for days, that one spot.
So, some fool chasing an individual fish, sure, I would have done that back then. | |
| | |
Posts: 42
Location: Lakeville, MN | I was musky fishing LOTW a couple weeks ago and saw a boat sharpshooting in deep water. No fishing, just moving slowly staring at the screen(s) for 20 min. Found a musky, one guy casts at it, catches a musky, they high five each other. Back to staring at the screen(s) another 30 min, then off to another deep water spot maybe a half mile away. I know it happens all over MN. Seeing it there made me sad. | |
| | |
Posts: 661
Location: Duluth | I expect to see new Lake Trout Regs on Lake Superior. Jigging them used to be a challenge between boat control, location and knowing how to rig with the currents. Scope eliminated that learning curve and the fish are getting absolutely pounded on what used to be little known reefs and bumps. | |
| | |
Posts: 31
| So if I was to purchase an electronic fish shocker to use in the pursuit of muskies, which I would guess is illegal/banned from public use almost everywhere do you think I might get away with using it since enforcing the ban is too difficult? However if I was to go forward with using an electro shocker, in order to preserve the "spirit of the chase," I wouldn't just net the largest muskie I see floating for photographing and posting on social media. After shocking an area, I would certainly try to cast at the largest muskie spotted and snag it in the mouth... for a small measure of sport. Electro shockers are just electronics. I mean where do you draw the line? I'm tired of that argument and will quote Dick Pearson from earlier this year.... "Just a comment on the ‘where do u draw the line?’ argument.
U just draw it!!!
Whether a baseball bat,golf ball interior or the draw weight or type of bow,just draw it."
He's basically saying don't be scared. Use common sense (an uncommon commodity in 2024) and take appropriate and reasonable action.
Of course using an electro shocker is an extreme and stupid example. However, halfway between the use of and electronic GPS and an electronic shocker is where you find the use of FFS. And what is the next electronic tool to emerge on the market after FFS? At some point we have to decide as a group what is the definition of muskie fishing to the majority. That is why I voted to ban FFS.
| |
| | |
Posts: 504
Location: Ludington, MI | It does need some limits somewhere between "Congress shall make no law" and an outright ban. But, if you're gonna slap together a poll and I get presented with 50-50, it's gonna be 51 percent ban. | |
| | |
Posts: 88
Location: Des Plaines, IL | Just as an example of why you'll have to pry the LiveScope from my "cold, dead hands", I was on LOTW for the first time last week, got back last night.
My boat, which I spent a lot of money on, has no rock damage. Why? Because when we got a bait snagged on a rock, which happened a good bit, I knew where I could and couldn't maneuver to free the bait.
As I'm running my routes and casting, I can see and adjust to what's in front of me so I didn't run myself onto a rock reef, which could have happened a couple of time, the maps aren't perfect, and sometimes aren't even that close.
That LiveScope saved probably a dozen bait snags and potentially a new trolling motor or skeg/motor damage, fiberglass damage, etc.
If we aren't banning guns in this country, which we aren't (and I don't think we should necessarily, and it's certainly not possible) there is no way on earth we should ban LiveScope.
As many have stated, this is about understanding that the ecological system is bigger than us, and taking limit after limit is not good for sustainability. Catching fish and dragging them up 30-40 feet is bad for the fish. Teach people these things, hope that they understand that it's not always about "my freedom" and sometimes we have to make sacrifices for the collective good. If we could ban our way out of things, I've got a long list and LiveScope wouldn't be the first thing on it, that's for sure. | |
| | |
Posts: 161
| First time I've ever heard of someone using livescope for safety or navigational purposes. So while you're running around at 35 mph from spot to spot, you use your livescope transducer to tell you where shallow water is? Interesting.
I use my GPS mapping and 2D sonar for that. While I do agree that some mapping is not exact, if I don't know how deep it is, I'm definitely not throttling down from one spot to the next. I'll let the recreational boats haul around the lake in shallow water instead and risk their lower units.
Edited by gimruis 8/13/2024 10:53 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 101
| I think he meant while using the trolling motor. Kept him from running into the reefs he was fishing with the trolling motor, turning around and hitting the prop etc.
I've run into plenty of reefs up there while casting due to incorrect mapping, so I'm just assuming that was the case here too. Could be wrong though.
Edited by Tommy 8/13/2024 11:24 AM
| |
| | |
Posts: 661
Location: Duluth | FFS as a means of boat preservation is, well....rich.
Its long been a thing on yachts, maybe not as expensive as some fisherman's boats, but the last one I quoted was a cool 70k for the transducer. | |
| | |
| CincySkeez - 8/13/2024 10:08 PM
FFS as a means of boat preservation is, well....rich.
Its long been a thing on yachts, maybe not as expensive as some fisherman's boats, but the last one I quoted was a cool 70k for the transducer.
Cincy, that is not a typo, $70 thousand just for the transducer??? | |
| | |
Posts: 661
Location: Duluth | Not a typo, that was also almost 5 years ago before the tech had really improved. I will clarify that the transducer and housing comprised that 70k. Was a really robust module that would telescope out of the hull and then retract back in when not in use. Things designed for yacht's and the environments they inhabit tend to be robust and quite expensive. | |
| | |
Posts: 88
Location: Des Plaines, IL | Thank you Tommy, yes, that's exactly what I meant. We'd be casting in anywhere from 12 - 18 feet of water and then you have a rock reef pop up that is a foot below the surface and when the waves are rocking you can't really see the water disturbance.
So there were times where I'd get 20 feet from one and be able to veer off and move around it. I would even say that helped us get one of the nice fish we caught, because I could stay off the rock and actually cast towards it instead.
As for being "rich", sure, I guess. But I'll easily put a $1K investment into a fiberglass boat that costs around $100K or more in order to preserve the motor, hull, etc. I just got the Garmin Kraken trolling motor. You think I want to run that into a rock and break the shaft on something that costs $4K? Or ruin the $500 transducer on the bottom of it immediately?
I invite anyone to come fish with me to see how I use LiveScope. Because I'm not purposely scanning for fish or following a fish. It's to maintain precise boat control. That's why I have it mounted directly on the trolling motor. So while I'm moving, I can't just turn it around and search for fish, it's pointed the same way the motor is. And that allows me to stay on/off weed lines, rock reefs, etc.
As I've said, the other way is when I'm trolling. It's fantastic for finding precise depth curves for baits. And then staying on/off structure/cover elements. I guess I'm resigned to the fact that people find this objectionable. It helps me catch a few more fish, so I guess I'm hurting the fishery. I get to fish between 20-40 times in a good year. Once in a while, I like to catch a fish, and this helps me be better at that. | |
| | |
Posts: 2358
Location: Chisholm, MN | CincySkeez - 8/14/2024 9:05 AM
Not a typo, that was also almost 5 years ago before the tech had really improved. I will clarify that the transducer and housing comprised that 70k. Was a really robust module that would telescope out of the hull and then retract back in when not in use. Things designed for yacht's and the environments they inhabit tend to be robust and quite expensive.
The guide I had down in Destin FL told me his transducer was 20k. 70 wouldn't surprise me. | |
| | |
| CincySkeez - 8/14/2024 9:05 AM
Not a typo, that was also almost 5 years ago before the tech had really improved. I will clarify that the transducer and housing comprised that 70k. Was a really robust module that would telescope out of the hull and then retract back in when not in use. Things designed for yacht's and the environments they inhabit tend to be robust and quite expensive.
Thanks for the response. That is quite a chunk of change but then, I am sure it is a low volume production and that always will cost a lot more than common items like fishermen FFS. | |
| |
|
FFS Poll - What Is Your Stance?