Posted 4/5/2012 1:02 PM (#551042) Subject: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
Over the years we have all heard many times that muskies have the brain the size of a pea. Therefore we should all be much more intelligent than them, and basically it shouldn’t be that hard to catch them. I for one never believed in the size of the brain dictating how smart the animal is. Perhaps “smart” isn’t the correct word though, and maybe instincts should be used instead. Some believe fish get conditioned, and some don’t. So has the decline in fish being boated on double 10’s due to conditioning, or other environmental factors?
Here is a clip that perfectly illustrates conditioning in fish. After enough events, whether positive or negative, a fish will learn a certain behavior. In the case of the video a positive result from doing something has conditioned the fish to know that if it does something a certain way it will be rewarded with food.
Fish are also known to, as a friend put it in a seminar, use tools. The example given was a bass would pick up some pebbles in it’s mouth, swim up to a rock wall with a crack in it, and spit the pebbles into the crack. The result was a crayfish would shoot out of the crack only to be eaten.
It is items like this that should have us asking ourselves “How does this apply to our approach to fishing”. To me the number one take away is to think outside of the box.
Something to think about. Here is just one video of many.
Posted 4/5/2012 1:35 PM (#551048 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
I think intelligence is indeed relevant. When you only have to process a few things, you don't need much of a brain. It's really no different than a computer processor in that respect--single-threaded CPUs can process one thread at a time, so there's a limit to how many instructions they can execute per second. Now contrast that with a quad-core CPU with hyperthreading, and you have eight potential threads of execution that can occur simultaneously. It's a crude analogy I'll admit, but I don't think it's all that far off. The point is that both systems work fine, but one cannot process nearly the same amount of information as the other. The little single-thread microcontroller in your GPS/fish-finder is nowhere near as capable as the quad-core processor they are now putting in even small laptops. But it doesn't have to be, because it isn't intended to do all that much.
Fish don't really need to process all that many things, when you think about it. They have an autonomic nervous system to handle their general housekeeping functions, and they have a much less demanding need to muscle control than mammals. Of course they have to process neurological stimuli from their sensory system, but even that is (apparently) much less sophisticated than that of a mammal. So when you think about it, they really don't need much of a brain in that sense.
Heh...come to think of it, maybe they aren't smart enough for most anglers to figure out! LOL...
Posted 4/5/2012 2:16 PM (#551060 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Well, for one thing...getting hooked and/or caught. Fish condition on lures apparently, which is why there always seems to be a market for the next greatest thing. Obviously if a fish was harvested, they wouldn't get a chance to not that mistake (falling for the lure) again. But in the C&R world of muskellunge, I'd bet there is quite a bit of negative reinforcement towards lures.
Posted 4/5/2012 2:24 PM (#551063 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
Do fish become conditioned? They certainly do, and I don't think that can be argued. Just like your fish at home that all swim to the top of the tank when you open the lid, or the fish in trout farms that flock to the shorelines when they see someone approach in anticipation of a meal, sport fish become conditioned as well. I think much of what we refer to as "learning" is just a result of lures becoming part of the environment. Fish eventually become conditioned to ignore them. The old addage of "if it moves, it's food" still holds true in an environment where everything that moves actually IS food, but on highly pressured waters, it's not a stretch to assume that muskies (and other game fish) eventually figure out that lures are not food. It would explain why the small ones almost always eat and the big ones often just look. For active fish, I think that conditioning is overridden for the most part by the biological need to feed. That's what we call a "reaction strike". The real question is how many times does a fish need to see a lure before it eventually becomes conditioned to ignore it, and just as importantly, how long does that conditioning last? A week? A month? The rest of its life? Do they "forget" that lures aren't food between the end of the season and the opener? The fact that fish can be caught multiple times proves that whatever conditioning that takes place is not 100% effective. More importantly, how does (or should) this change the way we fish?
AndyM
Posted 4/5/2012 2:52 PM (#551067 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posted 4/5/2012 3:09 PM (#551069 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
EA I believe the strike you are talking about is actually a feeding strike based on it wants/needs to eat. Getting one to eat when it is not required would be a reactionary strike, and a good prelude into what we can do to change our game. Why try to find muskies that are hungry and try to get them to eat when the majority of the time they aren’t hungry? We need to start thinking about retrieves, bait actions, and colors to get a reaction strike rather than a feeding strike. Why? Because then you are targeting to change neutral fish into eating as well as the hungry fish versus just targeting hungry fish. Better odds. How does everyone fish tails/spinners for the most part? Continuous retrieves. Fish get conditioned to that same old dance. However what will the fish think when all of a sudden that tail jerks forward, and stops to sink, and then takes off again?
Also with conditioning is we need to think about how are they being conditioned, or in our case what lures. The guys that continue to be most successful are usually the ones setting the patterns for everyone else, and are one step ahead. Leaders versus followers. Think about how do you go from being a follower to a leader. Does that mean rather than throwing a Mag dawg with the big flowing tail to throwing a Hardhead with a paddletail? So if your dog bite has fizzled try a hardhead. If that fizzles try one with a paddletail. If that fizzles then…you get the idea.
Like some people some fish just never learn, and will continue to do the same thing over and over and not learn…or should I say get conditioned. We all like to find those kind of fish but that number is limited. So we have to deal with the conditioned fish. How long does it take for a fish to become conditioned? Depends on the individual fish. No different than how quickly it takes us to learn. Circumstance in the negative circumstance also plays a large roll I think.
So what can we due to prevent, or minimize the conditioning of our fish? We can start at thinking about how do we reduce the level of negative experience for the fish. For example rather than netting a 32” fish, letting it thrash about, lifting it out for a picture, and then releasing it we could just pop the hooks out of the fish, if feasible, and letting it swim away without it ever leaving the water or touching a net. You could net fish, but don’t take them out for pictures. I could go on but will stop there.
***
Edited as the study I originally referenced appears to have invalid data, or never to be accurately proven out. If you are interested in the study, and the counter artcile questioning the original results, I will gladly give you the links.
Posted 4/5/2012 3:19 PM (#551072 - in reply to #551063) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
"The real question is how many times does a fish need to see a lure before it eventually becomes conditioned to ignore it, and just as importantly, how long does that conditioning last? A week? A month? The rest of its life? Do they "forget" that lures aren't food between the end of the season and the opener? The fact that fish can be caught multiple times proves that whatever conditioning that takes place is not 100% effective. More importantly, how does (or should) this change the way we fish?"
quote by -ESOXADDICT-
Yes!!!! The real question has emerged!!! These are the types of questions that interest me as an angler. It is questions like this that originally prompted me to go to school for marine biology... Yet even then, no one had an answer for me that I found to be a legitimate one. These are the things that I sit and think about while trying to decide which lure to use and why (besides all of the other reasons) Like he said, one fish can get caught more then once.... So where is the 'conditioning'?
This overall question, is one of the many reason I love fishing
Posted 4/5/2012 3:34 PM (#551076 - in reply to #551069) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
I have a question...
Speaking of the "reactionary strike". I have fished many of spots with a great water clarity and visibility. I can throw the same lure to one small spot over and over and over again. For whatever reason the fish wont hit the lure on the first 9 times I cast there... but the tenth, my lure gets smoked by a missile that seemingly came from no where. I'm sure the fish saw and or heard the lure the first 9 times and chose not to attack. So why the tenth? Did I finally pee it off enough to hit it? Was it finally so irritated that it thought the only way I was going to stop was to eat it? There is something to be said about the amount of testosterone within the fish. I just am not sure what that may be? Then maybe if a lure with great vibration gets to close to the lateral line, it will hit that to, regardless of hunger... but I guess that one falls under the "reaction strike" as well.
Posted 4/5/2012 3:45 PM (#551079 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan!
Here's a couple things that I have witnessed over the years. I have watched reactions like instincts, when a fish is spotted even if a ways away and the angler gets what I call Too excited. If you watch the fish it's like they feel the danager. I've seen this in big fish of many species. I seen fish scoot out of an ice hole, turn off a bait when closing the gap, and blow up for no reason and swim off in a fury. Then too on the opposite side of the coin I have caught the same fish numerous times on the same bait. I used to think the circumstances had changed enough to give the bait a "new appearance" but have not drawn that as a full conclusion. I think it's like I prefer brunettes I might have in my younger days taken a second look or more at a blonde or redhead, secretly I was a sucker for a brunette. Wired that way I think there are fish with a "weakness" for certain baits. Certainly from a conditioning stand point is there a Muskie alive that has not seen, heard or felt a blade bait? Yet when I used to log my fish catches the blades smoked all other baits.
Posted 4/5/2012 3:47 PM (#551080 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
I still learn new things just about every day on the water, and I threw my first cast in 1974. Not nearly as long as many, but I've been at this game for a while. What can we do? Something different! Not sure we can avoid the conditioning process all that much, but we can react to it by doing something different. You run the risk of it not working, but then if the same old thing wasn't working, what have you got to lose? If they're following a topraider, throw a pacemaker. If they're following a Depth Raider, throw a grandma, if they're following a double 10, downsize to a double 8... There's a few guys out there who still catch a ton of fish on spinnerbaits and Mepps Musky Killers. I think part of that is because that spinnerbait or that Mepps is the first one those fish have seen in a long time. Somethng to think about for sure. I've saved the day more than once doing something weird out of desperation. "You're working that thing WAY to fast, Jeff." ... "GOT ONE!!!" Then again, maybe you're not working it fast enough! LMAO
Posted 4/5/2012 3:58 PM (#551083 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 994
Location: Minnesota: where it's tough to be a sportsfan!
I've always thought we as fishermen tend to put way to much credit on the bait. Look at the lowly glider as an example. I thought with my 10-12 different retrieves I had this bait mastered. Last year I had a guy in the boat that was doing the most stupid retrieve I've ever seen with a glider. After the second fish...guess what I was doing! I think we tend not to WORK hard enough to trigger a strike as we should. Instead we are content to see a "clinically perfect retrieve. " Like when you have a smaller fish come in on an 8 and you just mess with them and then pull the bait away so you don't have to hook them. The actions you will do with your bait are totally different than when you are attempting to do the "perfect" 8.
Posted 4/5/2012 4:08 PM (#551093 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek
I keep a cooler full of 10" suckers with me. When I catch a fish I just give her a couple of them. This way I give the fish positive reinforcement and they return to my boat numerous times throughout the day.
But that's only if I'm fishing suspendos. Fish relating to structure don't get conditioned, that's why people who fish structure catch way more fish than guys who basin bomb.
Posted 4/5/2012 4:18 PM (#551098 - in reply to #551083) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
Jake -
I've noticed similar situations while fishing with my wife. I tired to teach her all of the different baits and how to use them. Last year we went out fishing and towards the end of our day she was throwing one of her favorite lures. It is a small crawdad color rattle trap. When she bought it, it never ran straight. it swam on its side. I told her to throw it away. So as the story goes she is using this "broken lure" and a 45" smashes her bait so hard she almost fell out of the boat.
My only logical thinking was, that the fish had not seen a lure swim like that before, maybe it thought it was a dyeing bait fish... who knows? She caught her first Musky on that lure, as well as at least 30 pike last year all over 33" and 10lbs. It was the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. A bait that I thought was CRAP, looked like crap, swam like crap, rolled on the retrieve, hooks got caught up ect. caught more fish then my mind could comprehend on a regular basis. If she didn't catch a fish every other cast it was shocking... yet I tried to throw it one once or twice and even went out without her and brought it along... never caught a #*^@ thing....
Posted 4/5/2012 4:22 PM (#551101 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
The most important question to ask is what IS conditioning as far as Muskies go? Way different than dogs, for example, and the fish's brain is totally different, including the rather important lacking of frontal lobes. They do 'remember' but not the way we do. Be careful of anthropomorphism here.
It would take a number of negative reinforcements for a Muskie to avoid a particular lure strictly in that sense long term; probably more than the fish would be exposed to, and each lure has a slightly differing footprint. In most cases it's repeated exposure to the lure footprint that adjusts the Muskie's reaction to it. First exposure, largest reaction. 10,0000th exposure, not so much. When a presentation becomes part of the nearly every day environment, the fish's activity level has to be heightened to get a strike response. Rarely is a fish taking an artificial lure displaying a feeding response in the strictest sense. Therefore, a more limited reaction...say a follow instead of a strike...or no reaction at all would be the result of neutral or negative fish exposed to a presentation that is commonplace. They don't eat every perch or sucker they see, either.
Adding an additional stimulus is the trick to getting a strike response, and is a well known tactic to take a fish that hasn't yet triggered.
Fish do 'learn'. Again, be careful of anthropomorphism looming again. The example of a LM bass using pebbles is a good one, question might be how wide spread is that tactic among that population, and is it a shared behavior? Do ALL LM Bass use it? Why not, if the answer is no? How were they exposed to this tactic, and how long has that behavior been observed?
Muskies are regularly recaptured, obviously, or CPR would be a waste of our time.
First, we need to establish that capturing and handling a Muskie is as strong a negative experience as we think it is. If it is, and the fish are as capable as we seem to be giving them credit for, why would ANY muskie ever hit an artificial lure twice or get anywhere NEAR a boat and motor? And if suckers are the main forage in a waterbody, and a fish is caught on a sucker...will that muskie get real skinny eating bluegills?
Remember the CFMS?
Some days fish hit everything that moves. others, they won't touch a thing. Thousands of hours watching fish on an underwater camera has taught me allot about how to trigger even negative fish, but even then some days...nada. The next day, or even the next hour, and a completely different behavior exhibited.
Posted 4/5/2012 4:31 PM (#551104 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
Interesting topic for sure, Travis. So there's two dinner bells that get a muskies attention; 1) Sight, 2) Feel. That said, I think if we consider visual conditioning for a moment, the obvious assumption would be relevant to daytime instances as opposed to night. My immediate reaction to fish reacting to visual ques is that while it may get their attention, I believe the closer they get the blurrier the object their chasing becomes in instances where the retrieve is faster than a dead-sticked twitch bait. I think the actual strike is purely driven by feel, almost as if the lights go out as the fish opens her mouth and takes the lure in. That said, my opinion as of now is that conditioning to visually cues, like the flash or color and even mass/size of a lure may not be something to concern myself with when fishing pressured water.
When I think about "Feel" and how a blind fish would react to the foot prints of a bucktails vortex versus that of real living prey, I personally believe that if the fish begins doubting the feel of movement in the water as being live versus feaux, we'd start seeing a lot of sickly skinny fish out there. That said, it’s no secret that when a fish feels hooks the odds of it eating again are a lot less likely, but still possible. Even more obvious is how a fish turns totally negative after being caught and released. They tend to hunker down for a couple days in the same general area and remain totally negative to baits.
All that said, while I don’t think the conditioning matters as much with sight, I do believe in conditioning developing to feel. I learned several years ago on pressured water, like some of my home water , that a simple straight retrieved pair of 10’s will still get the attention of window shoppers, but sometimes making the sale means throbbing or pulsating the bait with quick pulls of the rod during the retrieve. This varies the vibration just enough, IMO, to throw off the hesitant and sometimes paranoid fish you may have the attention of. On the topic of big bladed bucktails, also, my belief is that when they are close enough to get a good look at the bait yet just far enough behind it where it’s tickling their nose, the vortex moves those sparkly flashabou skirts enough to really blur the lure to the point where I can’t imagine a fish deciphering the difference between a lure and a living prey.
Posted 4/5/2012 4:47 PM (#551110 - in reply to #551101) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
sworrall - 4/5/2012 4:22 PM
[...]
why would ANY muskie ever hit an artificial lure twice or get anywhere NEAR a boat and motor?
[...].
Because muskies are dumb. All fish are dumb. The difference is that most other species of fish we catch don't get a second change to be dumb.
I think this really only comes into play when trying to trigger neutral or negative fish on highly pressured waters. I also think that whatever conditioning takes place is not repeated enough, and not retained for a long enough period of time for said muskie to "remember" the whole experience of being caught yesterday or even last week. But if you hook one and lose it, it's probably not coming back today.
Posted 4/5/2012 5:08 PM (#551120 - in reply to #551104) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
interesting article I found on pain and fish. If fish can get conditioned based on feel of a lure like jamming hooks through their face then I would think that is directly related to pain or irritation... We all know they have vibrations sensors on the head and face... but pain? If I think that a fish will shy away from certain baits after getting jabbed with hooks I would relate that to pain. The article is kind of funny.. it is more based on trout fishing then anything else.... but interesting non the less
Posted 4/5/2012 5:14 PM (#551123 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
Nice, Sled
These are instances that seperate the men from the boys on the pressured ponds, like my home waters in SE Wisconsin. Lakes like Pewaukee draw attention from musky fisherman all across the map, especially the immediate area. Not too many trophy hunters in our area, mainly numbers folks, and while it's no secret Pewaukee Lake has giants in it, I can attest that not many are willing to sacrifice the action for the chance at THE ONE. That said, what you see are boats skirting the weed edges and following the shoreline two casts out or less hoping to get a muskies attention, no matter it's size, it just has to be a musky. In part, it sounds like santa's in town every time I'm on that lake with all the jingle bell clatter being thrown. Back at the dock you hear a lot of 30-36" fish stories and window shopping complaints.
I have personally been challenging myself to trophy hunting on these waters over the last couple years. Folks will challenge this so I'll speak on my own behalf when I say that the techniques I emplore are different than the majority on that water in the way of lures, depth and baitfish migrations. The few that follow the same suit as I are targeting different fish and making contact with fish that have a whole lot less scars on their noses versus that of the fish targeted by the majority of the guys out there.
In tournaments, however, it's not about the size so much as the quantity as two 34's will beat a 50. That said, when a tourney falls on pressured water, I go with my gut and suspect what I see on a daily basis on Pewaukee probably exists on those waters as well and one way to improve your odds if you fall in line with the other boats fishing the same weed beds, etc, is to change up your retrieves with variable cadense and speed.
Posted 4/5/2012 5:17 PM (#551124 - in reply to #551120) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
Neat.
"Every time I see an angler, I say a little prayer that he will get his fishing hook lodged in his body, and then perhaps he will give some thought to the barbaric 'sport' he is pursuing."
I may consider that quote if a muskie ever turns around and bites me when I am releasing it and says "you bastard, that HURT!"
Posted 4/5/2012 5:18 PM (#551125 - in reply to #551124) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
esoxaddict - 4/5/2012 5:17 PM
Neat.
"Every time I see an angler, I say a little prayer that he will get his fishing hook lodged in his body, and then perhaps he will give some thought to the barbaric 'sport' he is pursuing."
I may consider that quote if a muskie ever turns around and bites me when I am releasing it and says "you bastard, that HURT!"
Posted 4/5/2012 5:36 PM (#551129 - in reply to #551128) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
I keep a flask in the boat for that purpose. When I catch a fish, I pour a little whiskey down the gullet before I release it. I figure it will kill any "pain" the fish might be feeling, and also help them forget the trauma of being caught. As a side note, my numbers have gone WAY up since I started doing this. I'm just not sure if it counts catching the same fish 5 times in a row...
Posted 4/6/2012 8:26 AM (#551219 - in reply to #551128) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
sworrall - 4/5/2012 5:27 PM
SNIP...
Travis, probably was authored by me and Rob Kimm for Esox Angler. Those were the days.....
I was actually looking for that piece the other day Steve/Travis, but I couldn't find it. Is it still available somewhere?
TB
addict
Posted 4/6/2012 9:02 AM (#551223 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
If there were no conditioning, the double ten would have never been invented and we'd all still be using red and white daredevils and there would never be a need for anything else. If you don't like the word conditioning, then call it a negative reaction to a stimulus, call it a bad experience.....call it whatever you want. Fish behavior changes because of what anglers do, and where we are, and what fish experience based on that. I don't know how that fact could even be argued. There's an article in pretty much every single issue of MHM about fishing "pressured waters." What does pressure mean? What is the result of pressure? Why?
Posted 4/6/2012 9:20 AM (#551232 - in reply to #551223) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
addict - 4/6/2012 9:02 AM
If there were no conditioning, the double ten would have never been invented and we'd all still be using red and white daredevils and there would never be a need for anything else. If you don't like the word conditioning, then call it a negative reaction to a stimulus, call it a bad experience.....call it whatever you want. Fish behavior changes because of what anglers do, and where we are, and what fish experience based on that. I don't know how that fact could even be argued. There's an article in pretty much every single issue of MHM about fishing "pressured waters." What does pressure mean? What is the result of pressure? Why?
Couldn't disagree more. The double 10 stimulates a strike response like few (if any) lure ever has. The same fish will eat 10's every year...year after year. I bet there are individual fish on Mille Lacs that have ate 10's half a dozen times in their life! ... Does pressure effect fish, sure....100 boats going over a great ambush spot tends to put a fish in a negative mood..but they eat or die - muskies are not conditioned to lures I've caught the same fish on the same lure dozens of times. One individual "stubby" has ate a weagle 4 times!
Posted 4/6/2012 9:31 AM (#551238 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
I agree with Addict. Not sure how one cannot believe in conditioning of fish, but will still talk about fishing pressured waters. What is meant by pressured waters if fish don’t get conditioned? If they were dumb, and could not be conditioned, how does pressure affect these creatures? Some may think this thought is “out there”, but have you ever fished your favorite lake on a weekday versus a weekend? There are some lakes I have fished that I swear the fish “know” what part of the week it is. Let’s just say there is a benefit to fishing on the weekday, and I have experienced this more times than just a couple to think it is more than just a coincidence.
I agree with Steve’s comments and warnings on anthropomorphism, or in other words giving human characteristics to animals. It can go both ways. Just because we need the brain the size we have to do what we do does not mean an animal does. Same goes on how we learn, and how we remember.
Steve I would love to answer some of the questioned you posed in your first post about the LM Bass, but I cannot. Just a tidbit I brought up from hearing it from another source and haven’t had time to dig into yet. However it will be dug into eventually.
I love the story Fat-Ski brought up on working a glider. Many stories out there like this, and you can look at it whatever way you wish. I like the thought that the fish eat the bait being worked “incorrectly”, as our thought process goes, because the fish haven’t seen an object going through the water like that before. On pressure waters they are use to seeing foreign objects move more or less in the same manner. Then along comes something that looks foreign, but also moves much differently than the previous 40 of those that day.
Living creatures have an erratic movement about them. For the most part the common retrieve of baits have a rhythm about them. Something to think about.
Posted 4/6/2012 9:35 AM (#551240 - in reply to #551232) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
IAJustin - 4/6/2012 9:20 AM
addict - 4/6/2012 9:02 AM
If there were no conditioning, the double ten would have never been invented and we'd all still be using red and white daredevils and there would never be a need for anything else. If you don't like the word conditioning, then call it a negative reaction to a stimulus, call it a bad experience.....call it whatever you want. Fish behavior changes because of what anglers do, and where we are, and what fish experience based on that. I don't know how that fact could even be argued. There's an article in pretty much every single issue of MHM about fishing "pressured waters." What does pressure mean? What is the result of pressure? Why?
Couldn't disagree more. The double 10 stimulates a strike response like few (if any) lure ever has. The same fish will eat 10's every year...year after year. I bet there are individual fish on Mille Lacs that have ate 10's half a dozen times in their life! ... Does pressure effect fish, sure....100 boats going over a great ambush spot tends to put a fish in a negative mood..but they eat or die - muskies are not conditioned to lures I've caught the same fish on the same lure dozens of times. One individual "stubby" has ate a weagle 4 times!
Justin either I took Addicts post wrong or you did. I think what he was getting at is if fish didn’t get conditioned there would be no need for the constant evolution of baits. We would all still be chucking #5 Mepps. What is funny is I have heard that the puny little Mepps, and other small tails, have become increasingly more productive the last years which falls in line with the big double 10’s not being as productive as they once were when first being fished.
Again you will always have some fish that continue to not “get it”, and eat the same bait over and over. No different than a person that gets the runs something fierce when eating at McDonalds, but they continue to do it.
Posted 4/6/2012 9:46 AM (#551244 - in reply to #551238) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
That's really the issue here then, as I see it...what the fish remember. Whether or not a musky eats the same bucktail (or any other lure) several times in their life, sort of depends on their memory of it, right? I'd have to review the neuroanatomy of the muskellunge (or any fresh-water fish in general), but if they don't have much of a hippocampus, then they likely aren't going to be able to convert short-term memory into long-term memory. Thus they simply might not remember falling for the same lure before, lol.
Posted 4/6/2012 9:50 AM (#551248 - in reply to #551240) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Oh so now some fish get "conditioned" and others don't? Some are smarter? That kind of funny. Small blades have always been productive no more today that 10 years ago ..... Fish ate 10's just fine for me last year.
Posted 4/6/2012 10:33 AM (#551262 - in reply to #551259) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
I think lures evolve for the anglers who *buy* them, as much as anything. It's certainly why they are painted in such vibrant colors much of the time. For instance, blues. As I recall, research into the vision of muskellunge has reported that they do not have the ability to distinguish blue/purple colors, and apparently perceive these as shades of gray. Certainly it could be the vibration factor causing some lures to be better than others; that's a very real possibility. And that may well be the reason lures evolve so much, as much as color...or style.
But I suspect that it's as much about appealing to the desires of the anglers who buy the lures, as it is about appealing to the fish.
Posted 4/6/2012 10:43 AM (#551264 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
I understand where both Justin AND Travis are coming from, and while they seem like their on different pages, both points of view go hand-in-hand IMO. So, for the longest time smaller blades with bucktail were the meal ticket. Fish have been caught in them consistently through the hands of musky fishing time, but what is "consistently"? We didn't know that something else, like bigger blades, could stimulate even more action from even bigger fish. Sure biggies are caught on small blades, that's not what I'm saying, I'm simply saying that the number of giants caught on super blades after they went mainstream was definitely noticable, and so went the craze.
So in Addict and Travis' point, it's not to say fish became conditioned to small bladed baits to the point they stopped eating them, it's that when the big blades came spinning through, it stimulated the fish perhaps even more for scientific reasons - more vibration/water displacement. There's also the notion that the blur affect of the dazzling flashabou skirts flowing like Medusa's hair in the vortex of those super blades eliminated visual acuity, which some believe decreased opportunity for fish to identify if what their chasing truly is prey or artificial. > And NO, I'm not saying that fish are smart enough to know what "artificial" is all the time, but if we get knit-picky...
To Justin's point, small blades certainly DO continue catching fish, and here's where Travis' point coincides about how the Big Blades productivity is potentially pumping the brakes while smaller blades are picking up in catch rates.. IMO, the potential reasoning of Travis' point could fall in line with the same notion that has folks believing Black and Nickle are the most productive colors.. You catch more on one color versus another if you cast the "hot" color more often than the other. Similiarly, perhaps it's our notion that conditioning to big blades is occuring, which drives more of us to toss smaller blades, hence catch rates between the two fluctuating.
Posted 4/6/2012 10:44 AM (#551265 - in reply to #551240) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
this is just my personal opinion..... But I feel fish (regardless of species) do get conditioned and even sometimes it works in our favor, though most may not think so. For example. I fish Lake Minnetonka A LOT in fact I would say 80 - 90% of my time is spent on that lake alone. Could any of you think of a more "pressured" Minnesota Metro lake... Cause I can't. That being said, there are fisherman, pleasure boater, kids swimming ect..ect. There is constant boat pressure on the lake and not just fishing pressure. We all get upset when a stupid "pleasure boater" goes in between us and the shore and we think to our selves that it just screwed up any chance of catching a fish that we may have had. Now I will say that this happened to me a few times last year... BUT before I would move I would always throw at least a few more casts to the same spot the boat just went by. Most of the time, the theory stands and I catch nothing. But twice last year I did. Caught a nice 40" and a nice 41" within 5 to ten minutes of the boat passing through.
I thought hmmmmm... Maybe the fish got 'conditioned' to all of the boating pressure on the lake. They had become so used to hearing and seeing boats pass by on a regular basis that they don't even bat an eyelash anymore. I could see where this would happen, especially on a lake like Tonka. Constant boats all the time left and right and never stopping.
I see what Travis is saying about the different days of the week, some of my best days last year whether it be catch rates or sightings came on days that there was less boating pressure.... but it didn't necessarily mean there were less fisherman, just less pleasure boaters.
With the ridiculous amount of different lures on the market I like to try a little bit of everything. Some I use a lot and some not so much. I am a big believer in the 10s and 13s though. I have raised the same fish 3 or 4 times at one spot. If she doesn't eat, I will leave and come back to the spot maybe an hour later (or less). and hit the spot hard. Usually when this happens I will raise the fish again or catch the fish. I tend to catch more often then not if I spotted the fish first... however I only tried this tactic a hand full of times.
Now If I take "conditioning" into consideration I realize that the SAME fish saw the SAME lure or a different variation of the SAME lure about 15 times before she decided to eat it. So why did it take so long. I would also notice other anglers (using blades) hitting the same spot as I previously had. Not sure if they caught any fish or not. However I know that fish saw a variety or different types and colors of blades... Maybe Mine just made a better grinding noise ;-)...
Either way I know there are different types of conditioning, some may or may not help us in certain ways. But either way I know that the fish can MOST DEFIANTLY be "conditioned". It just all depends on how the angler reacts to such issues... that is what will separate the guys who catch and the guys who don't
Posted 4/6/2012 10:51 AM (#551266 - in reply to #551259) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Tom - I agree for the most part but there are lures that have come out in the last 10 years that were significantly different than any predecessor, different "tools". Don't get me started on paint jobs - lures should be white, black or black and white
Posted 4/6/2012 10:53 AM (#551267 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
Good points between you and Travis on the boating pressure..
I know my favorite times to hit my area lakes is when "No Wake" rules are temporarily applied to the entire lake, like some springs or after many days of heavy summer rains. Fishing pressure relents and voila, sightings go up in normally pressured community spots.
On the other hand, much of this discussions points play a hand in why I moved "out there" in the last few years
Posted 4/6/2012 10:53 AM (#551268 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
I'd venture to say the evolution of lures is more a result of conditioning of ANGLERS than the fish themselves. No doubt when they see the same thing going through the water all day long (i.e. double 10's) they eventually will respont to it to a lesser degree. But... I do not believe this conditioning lasts very long. Explain to me, why, after what, 30 years? Why is a suick still a great lure? Certainly every fish everywhere has seen one at some point. Success of a lure is due largely due to how it stimulates the lateral line, and how it offers visual cues that trigger a feeding response. The success of the double 10 has to be all about the water it displaces, because it sure doesn't look like anything they would normally eat. Some lures look just like fish, but they rarely move or displace water like an actual fish would. Others have the movement and/or the water displacement, but when you look at them? Looks nothing like a fish. Conditioning? Yes. Long term? Probably not. I've experimented throwing various things - a leaf, a stick, a piece of chewing gum, small dry flies, among others into a school of bluegills. The first few times they all eat it, and promptly spit it out when they realize it's not food. After that, they will completely ignore it. But if you come back an hour later, they all will do exactly the same thing. I happens with all species of fish, and it happens with muskies. I raised the same fish 13 times over a period of four days on Eagle a few years back. She'd come in hot on the first cast, then I'd throw something different, and she'd follow that, but not as agressively. Then we'd leave, and come back a few hours later, and it was the same thing all over again. This went on for four days. As I said earlier - you can't argue that conditioning takes place. To what degree, and how long it lasts is what's important. I can't imagine a fish has the capacity to remember something long term, whether it's being caught, or this or that lure. If it's reenforced on a constant basis, day after day after day (i.e. pressured lakes) you may have to change things up to fool those fish. But in places where any given fish hasn't seen a lure in a week? I'd venture to say they are just as dumb as they have ever been when it comes to lures.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:04 AM (#551271 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Grand Rapids, MI
I've observed what I perceive as conditioning with lures and even with livebait. I've seen where lure X gets eaten for a period then it's not working for everyone but if you change the retrieve, voila, it starts catching fish again. Fish that used to eat livebait like crazy just stop but by changing the type of livebait those fish are caught again. If that's not a conditioned response I don't know what you would call it. Pressure might have an impact on the mood of the fish but that's a conditioned response as well. IMO it can also work in our favor. I fish one pressured water that the fish seem to get conditioned by mid-summer that it's safe to eat when there's tons of recreational traffic. My BST is that the fish are conditioned to avoid feeding when the rec traffic is low because that's the only time they're fished for and caught.
The obvious statement is when overall pressure is low, angling and rec traffic, there isn't enough negative reinforcement to condition them. Fish on low pressure waters like Lake of the Woods probably don't ever get conditioned. This is what saves us when we fish those ultra low density waters (1 fish per 5000 acres), no pressure, no conditioning = "stupid" fish.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:16 AM (#551274 - in reply to #551265) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
EA, I think you're onto something there--that fish, unlike humans (for instance), really don't have any significant ability for long-term memory. And why would they need it? They don't have to process information to anywhere near the level that humans do--they basically worry about eating, not getting eaten, and then reproducing. One could argue that these things, at their most basic level, are instinctual by nature. There isn't much thought that needs to go into any of them--and most people will show you this, if you just watch them (LOL).
But from the little bit of research I've done on the matter, it's the hindbrain that is responsible for basic instinctual function. And although I haven't read the studies because I don't have access to them, I've found references that indicate that the lateral line system information in fish is interpreted or "processed" by neurons in the hindbrain. This suggests to me that they are indeed primarily driven by instinctual (rather than cognitive) function, at least in the fishes possessing a lateral line system. For smaller fish without a lateral line system, maybe it's as simple as just "following the herd." Instinct tells them to school up for more safety, and there isn't one actual "leader" in the bunch. Just watch YouTube videos of bait balls getting attacked by any number of predators--they move in every imaginable direction, almost instantaneously. So how could there be one "leader" in the school, and what would happen to the rest of the bait ball if that leader gets munched? Certainly is has to be instinct-driven, the way I see it.
So put another way, if my thinking is correct (no pun intended), fish aren't "thinkers" as much as they are "reactors" on a more instinctual (i.e.; primal) level. While I am by no means an expert in the neuroanatomy of fish, this does make sense to me. But I'll have to dig out my fish physiology text today, and see if I can find some more information on the neuroanatomy of fishes.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:23 AM (#551276 - in reply to #551274) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Exactly - And why long term I believe there is almost no lure conditioning. You catch a fish its probably not eating anything for a week - the fish was stressed. But 4 months later the fish is now so hungry it finds a meal or dies you cant tell me its smart enough to turn down the same lure going by its face - that why lures trolled or cast with speed are so effective - the fish charges eats or dies.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:32 AM (#551279 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
Absolutely Jake! All aspects of conditioning, and not just ones we associate with a negative result. There are some lakes that when it came to suspended fishing you needed to be in that basin before any boat traffic to have a chance at fish. However dynamics changed and now those fish don’t mind eating amidst all the boat traffic. That’s where we as anglers need to keep an open mind, and don’t get conditioned ourselves. Gotta keep checking different avenues to see what new patterns may have developed. Another possible example of pressure, and conditioning, is this. A lake was notorious for a very early morning bite. We would fish no longer than 8:00 am as after that it died significantly. Sure fish were caught after that time, but not to the extent as before. However others took notice of the early morning success after a few years, and the pressure at that time increased significantly. That pattern died, but there was still a period that the fish had strong activity. The time period just shifted. Point of all this being what as anglers can we do about it? Don’t get stuck in a rut. Don’t just assume that because a pattern died that the fishing on the lake has gone down hill. That early morning bite may have become a midday bite. Switch up when you fish the lake if you are expecting different results. Does this example pertain to conditioning of fish and how smart they are? I don’t know but something definitely changed their attitude and what they react to. To be successful we need to realize what is happening when it is happening.
Sam summed up my thoughts well! I also agree with Will’s statements, and the reason we all look for that hidden gem of a lake. There is a reason for Lake “X”.
Betka you are a breath of fresh air when it comes to threads like this, but I will challenge your comments about memory and thinking. Let’s not forget anthropomorphism. I respect your intelligence as well as others, but we continually try to find the need to compare animals qualities to that of humans and we shouldn’t. We are programmed differently.
Why do BIG fish get harder and harder to catch? Is it because of the population density of trophy fish, or is it based on instincts which are formed through what has been “learned” over that fish’s lifetime?
Posted 4/6/2012 11:41 AM (#551282 - in reply to #551279) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Not trying to compare fish and humans...just contrasting their two neuroanatomies. Anthropomorphicizing them would be injecting subjectivity into the mix. My intent was to remain objective, while hypothesizing how each animal might make use of the tools it has been given.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:48 AM (#551283 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
Justin you are right Suicks are still a great lure. However remember the story of success of that bait when it first came out? Has that kind of success been seen since with a Suick? I am not saying a lure quits producing all together. I am also not saying a lure, or presentation, will ever produce great results ever again. However what I am saying is we need to think about “cool off” periods of where we need to find the BETTER pattern. There is a reason we all go away from that “hot” lure we once had and maybe never really threw it that much again. I am suggesting perhaps blowing the dust off of some of the lures and you may be surprised at the results.
Tom I should have known better to even question your thinking.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:48 AM (#551284 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
By the way Travis...
Your comment about big fish being harder and harder to catch is very interesting. Do you think this is because they just aren't as aggressive as smaller fish, and (as such) get beat to the lure by them? Or is it something else? Are they more cautious by nature? If fish truly have no (or limited) long-term memory, then do their instincts change as a result of past experience? Are there certain fish that are "smarter" than others, when it comes to being more cautious or skeptical (how's that for anthropomorhism, lol) when it comes to chasing a lure?
Another random thought--why do some deer get hit by cars, while others don't? Is it because those deer who get hit/killed on the road weren't smart enough to stay away from the road, while the others were? Or is it simply chance?
I pose these questions not because I am trying to be difficult--but rather because I've wondered about them many times before. And then along comes this discussion, and I get to throw them out there for consideration...
GREAT discussion, btw.
TB
EDIT:
Tom I should have known better to even question your thinking.
I admit that I can be somewhat of a "mental Cuckoo clock," now and again. I just am thankful that you guys indulge me...especially when I go off on one of my math excursions!
Posted 4/6/2012 11:48 AM (#551285 - in reply to #551279) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
The last 5 years I average 300-400 hrs a year on a single 450 acre lake (only muskie lake near me). Its eye opening to spend that much time in a "fish bowl" Do fish react to certain situations sure, but so do ants....ants might be smarter than muskies.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:50 AM (#551286 - in reply to #551279) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 3518
Location: north central wisconsin
CiscoKid - 4/6/2012 11:32 AM
Why do BIG fish get harder and harder to catch? Is it because of the population density of trophy fish, or is it based on instincts which are formed through what has been “learned” over that fish’s lifetime?
Maybe that basin dwelling trophy fish never ate a 9" Grandma, triple D or Hard Head even once in its life. Might not have seen one. Perhaps it lived a life eating mud minnows in 29' of water, coming into contact with hook and line once or twice in 26 years, breaking the hearts of 2 twelve year old girls on a dock in 1988, and one tournament walleye angler who was just glad to have it over with, when he finally got his jig back after the fish wrapped him around the drift sock.
What I'm saying is, there is a faction of fish in some waters, that we, the ultra intelligent Musky anglers, never target...
With that said, I beleive there is some type of avoidance response over time among some fish in highly pressured situations. Do they remember from year to year what happened? No. They might just enjoy/get used to their new feeding/living pattern, and tend to take part in same the next season..?.. Survival.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:51 AM (#551287 - in reply to #551283) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
CiscoKid - 4/6/2012 11:48 AM
Justin you are right Suicks are still a great lure. However remember the story of success of that bait when it first came out? Has that kind of success been seen since with a Suick? I am not saying a lure quits producing all together. I am also not saying a lure, or presentation, will ever produce great results ever again. However what I am saying is we need to think about “cool off” periods of where we need to find the BETTER pattern. There is a reason we all go away from that “hot” lure we once had and maybe never really threw it that much again. I am suggesting perhaps blowing the dust off of some of the lures and you may be surprised at the results.
Tom I should have known better to even question your thinking. ;)
Why did you stop throwing the lure to begin with? - I've never seen a lure "cool off" - fish may have moved to a different depth..so there is a better tool.
Posted 4/6/2012 11:58 AM (#551288 - in reply to #551287) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Interesting point Justin. When I was actively fishing musky, I didn't stop finishing the same old baits. I fished the same old Shallow Raiders, Jakes and Depth Raiders (trolled) all the time, because they still produced. I also injected a select few newer lures into the mix though, when I tried to expand the envelope again. But the old standby lures seems to produce just as well as the new types did, so I completely agree with you in that respect.
In my experience, a person doesn't really need nearly as many lures as he thinks he does to catch these fish. Many times he just needs to believe in the ones he's using, and keep it in the water.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:02 PM (#551289 - in reply to #551277) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: 31
tcbetka - 4/6/2012 11:25 AM "1 fish per 5000 acres" LOL @Will...
Fishing low density populations isn't actually as daunting as it seems Tom (and Reef Hog), because like Will says they're pretty stupid and once you find them, they are fairly easy to catch. Finding them is obviously the key and I say them because whatever is attracting one muskie will attract others for the same reason, I disagree with a giant loner theory.
The bonus with low-density is that you are typically dealing with large adult fish (why else fish it?) that have very little competition for food from other muskies, obviously very little competition from other anglers too.
I'll give you some food for thought… on the lowest density population system I have ever fished, my boat was lucky enough to have a doubleheader from two large fish. Not only that, the heaviest fish in my boat ever was on that same super low-density system… I believe Will’s largest was also captured there. Sometimes less is more, but only if you're willing to pay the price.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:05 PM (#551290 - in reply to #551284) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
tcbetka - 4/6/2012 11:48 AM
Your comment about big fish being harder and harder to catch is very interesting. Do you think this is because they just aren't as aggressive as smaller fish, and (as such) get beat to the lure by them? Or is it something else? Are they more cautious by nature?[...]
I'd venture to say there are three factors at work here:
1. There are far fewer numbers of big fish. It's more a case of being difficult to find them that it is catching them.
2. The largest fish in the system are inhabiting different areas, and chasing other larger meals. They still relate to structure, but not in the ways we normally think of.
3. Biology - a big fish has to expend a lot more energy to eat a meal. If it's going to expend the energy, it will be for something subtantial the provides more energy than it expended catching said prey. Chasing and eating everything that moves no matter the size like a smaller fish would is counterproductive. Would you run around the block for a cracker? What about a deep dish pizza?
Are they more cautious? Maybe. But I think it's much more a result of them spending their time in areas we don't fish, spending time farther off the structure in deeper water, and eating things that are larger than the lures we typically use.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:27 PM (#551296 - in reply to #551290) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Fair points, EA...
I will say though that, at least in the Green Bay system, the big fish seem to be very willing to chase small lures. In fact in the Spring, several 50+" fish are caught by Walleye anglers in the southern bay--sometimes these are even the longest fish caught that entire year! But even in the Fall, smaller lures (7-8") have traditionally worked just as well as 9-10+" lures. In 2007 when we had a GREAT year here in the bay, every one of my six 49+" fish was caught on an 8" Swimmin' Joe. I caught lots of other muskies on larger lures, but the biggest fish were on the SJ. A few other anglers had great success with them as well, although (as I'm told) they haven't been as good since.
But these fish here at least are not afraid to chase down the shad we have schooled-up all over the place; nor are they afraid of chasing down small gobies. So while it seems as though people think that very a large musky might not want to expend that much energy to catch a meal, it doesn't seem to be the case here.
There are those anglers who insist on "big lures for big fish," but I am not necessarily one of them--at least not in the Green Bay system.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:34 PM (#551298 - in reply to #551283) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
CiscoKid - 4/6/2012 11:48 AM
Justin you are right Suicks are still a great lure. However remember the story of success of that bait when it first came out? Has that kind of success been seen since with a Suick? I am not saying a lure quits producing all together. I am also not saying a lure, or presentation, will ever produce great results ever again. However what I am saying is we need to think about “cool off” periods of where we need to find the BETTER pattern. There is a reason we all go away from that “hot” lure we once had and maybe never really threw it that much again. I am suggesting perhaps blowing the dust off of some of the lures and you may be surprised at the results.
What great success do you refer to???? 30 legal fish in 30 days? Well since the legal length limit was 28" back then .....I'd say heck yes that has been duplicated!!! ...I'd go so far as to say someone had way more success with a suick last year that that???? They eat what you throw...when they want to eat... if you have your lure at the depth they are feeding, some lures trigger stikes better than others and continue to do so year after year.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:46 PM (#551303 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek
30 28" fish is pretty good for some guides. The ones that are no longer in business. Seasonal patterns change all the time, from where they feed to where they recover after feeding, to what they want to eat and how big. You can blame pressure and conditioning, but it sounds to me more like seasonal movements and feeding behaviors.
Posted 4/6/2012 12:55 PM (#551306 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI
I wish I knew why some of my baits/patterns died. Could have been just me, but I know it isn’t the depth the fish are at as I would still catch them in the same area but with a lure with a different footprint. Some lures get hot again for me while others never have. For instance I had a clown depthraider I tore the fish up on for a couple of years. The pattern has never come back for me, but catching fish in the same area with a different lure at the same depth has worked. May not be conditioning, but what the heck happen?
Lets not forget that not all the BIG fish are found deep. On the contrary, so I heard ;), some giants are found very very shallow. It’s the instances of finding fish of large proportions in spots that just don’t make sense. Places most anglers don’t or wouldn’t look. Is it because of what the fish are finding there, or a case of what they are not finding there? EA said that large fish aren’t contacted due to the density of that population. I currently disagree. Like Jerry said it is becoming more readily acceptable to find several large specimens together. I think there are a lot more trophy fish, of most species, out there than most of us realize. Last year I stumbled across a bunch of large walleyes in a lake that is widely known to have them. It just so happens that the conditions were right at the time I targeted them that I found out the true potential of the fish in that system. I got lucky in that the fish just got done spawning, recouped, and were feeding heavily on big perch. Again point being is I don’t think the thought of the population of the trophy sized fish is always going to be very small. Everyone I tell about what we ran across on that lake is pretty surprised.
Muskies are the apex predator in the water world we fish. It is said over and over again that the largest fish are found on the best structures available. So in all reality they should be pretty easy to find
Posted 4/6/2012 1:06 PM (#551310 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN
I don't know about Muskis being so smart. I had the laptop along a few years ago and was doing a little work while the kids swam. A Muskie comes along, looks up at my screen and asks why I'm not coding in C#. Silly fish. My compiler only supports C and C++.
Posted 4/6/2012 1:10 PM (#551312 - in reply to #551310) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Herb_b - 4/6/2012 1:06 PM
I don't know about Muskis being so smart. I had the laptop along a few years ago and was doing a little work while the kids swam. A Muskie comes along, looks up at my screen and asks why I'm not coding in C#. Silly fish. My compiler only supports C and C++. :)
Posted 4/6/2012 1:11 PM (#551313 - in reply to #551290) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1360
Location: Lake "y" cause lake"x" got over fished
esoxaddict - 4/6/2012 12:05 PM
tcbetka - 4/6/2012 11:48 AM
Your comment about big fish being harder and harder to catch is very interesting. Do you think this is because they just aren't as aggressive as smaller fish, and (as such) get beat to the lure by them? Or is it something else? Are they more cautious by nature?[...]
I'd venture to say there are three factors at work here:
1. There are far fewer numbers of big fish. It's more a case of being difficult to find them that it is catching them.
2. The largest fish in the system are inhabiting different areas, and chasing other larger meals. They still relate to structure, but not in the ways we normally think of.
3. Biology - a big fish has to expend a lot more energy to eat a meal. If it's going to expend the energy, it will be for something subtantial the provides more energy than it expended catching said prey. Chasing and eating everything that moves no matter the size like a smaller fish would is counterproductive. Would you run around the block for a cracker? What about a deep dish pizza?
Are they more cautious? Maybe. But I think it's much more a result of them spending their time in areas we don't fish, spending time farther off the structure in deeper water, and eating things that are larger than the lures we typically use.
These reasons are exactly why (though hard to swallow at times). We all try to go outside of our "comfort zone" and fish a spot that we had never tried or even seen a fish before. For example last year my brother wanted to go out musky fishing with me. He had gone once before and caught one, but wanted to continue his conquest of these elusive beasts. We tried a few spots and didn't see a darn thing. He then brought me to one of his "secret" crappie spots on the other side of the lake that I have never tried before for muskies... not only have I never tried it, but have never seen any other musky angler trying it either. We were there for five minutes, I raised two and he caught a nice 46". I guess it just goes to show that you just never know. I will be trying that spot again this year. Did pretty well the other day there for craps too.. had some fun.. nice be out on the water again
Posted 4/7/2012 6:51 AM (#551417 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
I read those documents about the CFMS last night. The year 1 summary report was very interesting--especially the information about the post-catch activities of the radio-tagged fish. I also found it very interesting that over 95% of the fish survived the catch and release process. And the one fish that died was caught on a single-hook sucker rig, and the hook was left in the fish at the release...something well-proven to cause a high degree of morbidity and mortality.
What I found most interesting is that this is a far cry from the nearly 30% mortality found by Beggs (et al.) in his 1980s Nogies creek study. I hadn't read the summary on the first year before, but I wish I had--as this would have been very good information to have. But I found the information on the CFMS very interesting indeed.
Posted 4/7/2012 8:10 AM (#551422 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
Tom,
None of that information has any validity what so ever. The entire 'study' was a patchwork of make believe and bad to non existent data, and conclusions arrived at in year one were based on assumption.
It's interesting, but just as a piece of fiction. I have all the 'tracking' data here still. There were times the tracking boat would have had to be in two places at once and miles apart, and other times the 'readings' put the fish a mile up in the woods. The elapsed time recorded in locating and tracking fish was absolutely impossible to accomplish with the equipment used.
Conclusions were made before data was even recorded much less interpreted, what data was actually recorded was presented in several conflicting formats, and seminars were being presented and articles written on the behavior of those fish that were entirely make believe as a result.
I obtained an interview with Tribal elders after the piece now at TNB and the Weird Science piece written by Robb and I for EA was released. Information offered during that interview proved the entire year one, and much of the year two study to be complete fabrication.
Musky Hunter has actually published much of the study 'results', and those flew in the face of known muskie behavior dramatically. Jason Smith and I began a two year process of gathering information in order to test the data and either confirm or refute the stories behind this thing.
It's bunk.
A few folks who had very good intentions were involved in the peripherals, but the study itself...wasn't.
Posted 4/7/2012 8:35 AM (#551426 - in reply to #551422) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
So none of the data can be considered valid? I am most interested in the qualitative aspects of it, rather than quantitative (for lack of a better comparison). Basically I am most interested in the post-catch tracking information, because although I don't ever plan to fish those areas reportedly used by the fish after being caught, I find the fact that the trackers COULD track the fish most helpful. Put another way, if the fish were trackable...then they weren't dead. The fact that they "went deep" (true or not) was interesting, but I don't necessarily agree that it's the normal behavior. It certainly might have been true there, but I've heard numerous reports of the same fish being caught days apart, in nearly the same spot. So I know that not all fish "go deep" after being caught, although some may well do so.
What I was most interested in, to be honest, was the fact that the fish were trackable after being caught. Where they went and what they did, is of less importance right now.
Posted 4/7/2012 8:38 AM (#551427 - in reply to #551426) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
Absolutely none of it. Quite a bit was very simply fabricated. The authors actually eventually admitted the 'data' was not actually available to them and would never be available for examination. Why? Because for the most part there was little or none in any form that could be used.
Nothing published about the CFMS by the study 'authors' can be trusted to be anything but entertainment.
Posted 4/7/2012 8:54 AM (#551432 - in reply to #551427) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
sworrall - 4/7/2012 8:38 AM
Absolutely none of it. Quite a bit was very simply fabricated. The authors actually eventually admitted the 'data' was not actually available to them and would never be available for examination. Why? Because for the most part there was little or none in any form that could be used.
Nothing published about the CFMS by the study 'authors' can be trusted to be anything but entertainment.
Very unfortunate, although I must say that it *was* an entertaining read.
Thanks for the clarification Steve. I'd like to hear more about the study some day, when we're wetting lines together.
Posted 4/7/2012 12:41 PM (#551464 - in reply to #551432) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: 31
Tom,
My interpretation is their primary interest was to fabricate things to attempt to prove the descendents of the Chippewa Flowage mythical past were still swimming. When the Lawton record was removed, and subsequently Sprays fish moved to the top, this created quite a stir and Sprays records were naturally put under a finer microscope.
Not that there was even much doubt before that, but I remember reading the article in Musky Hunter where Brad Latvaitis located one one the smoking gun photographs proving Sprays record was bogus. Dettloff was quick to get a lid on that can of worms, and for all we know this CFMS was only conceived by them to further defend their meal ticket.
Either way, like Steve says… it was pure bunk and when you read some of the key points of the article below in that light, their conclusions become almost laughable if it wasn't such a waste of resources... just imagine how far that amount of money could have went towards valid research.
“Problems Surface
Original articles written by the study participants put forth claims that the study data resulted in the dispelling of some of the longest held beliefs about muskies and musky fishing.
These claims were made before a comprehensive and careful analysis of the data gathered was available, and the study participants were openly trying to provide and explain a factual basis for reduced capture and sightings of Chippewa Flowage muskies before the study was completed-or for that matter, even fully underway.
The study coordinator, Mr. Allen, is a guide on the Flowage, one of the study participants and authors, Mr. Dettloff, owns a business there, and all the participants had a potential financial interest in proving the Chippewa Flowage was and is as fine a fishery as ever. The potential for bias is probable, and that potential is problematic throughout the publication of the study ‘results’.
Scott Allen, speaking to the Milwaukee chapter of Muskies Inc. stated that: Data from the study indicated that during full moon periods, muskies exhibited a pattern of moving deep, moving tightly along breaklines, suddenly moving to three feet of water, and just as quickly returning to deep water.
New moon period observation saw muskies cruising the breaklines, moving together into the shallows in ‘wolf packs’ zig zag patterning, supposedly while feeding. He described this activity as ‘spooky’.
During the ‘dog days’ of summer, tagged fish, according to Allen, were observed stacked up in groups of as many as nine fish or more in areas not usually fished by muskie anglers.
Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”
The only "spooky" thing is how far they were willing to go to deceive the public.
Posted 4/8/2012 7:36 AM (#551617 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
About the only piece of information that I would find useful there for my purposes, if it were indeed true, is the last thing you quoted:
Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”
I would find this information most helpful from the standpoint of potential research in the Green Bay fishery.
If we are trying to determine the degree to which angling pressure is detrimental to the fishery here, then this bit of information might be very useful. For example, let's say that this information is accurate--then the large fish being caught and released here in the southern bay may not remain in the area that exposes them to further risk. So as long as they survive the catch & release process for that particular year, then they might be "safe" until they return to the area the next time.
However I am quite skeptical of this notion. For one thing, I've heard several reports of fish with very similar (if not identical) markings being caught a couple weeks apart by different anglers here in the Fall. But the thing is that I am not sure what this claim would accomplish, if indeed the data was bogus or fabricated. What good is to claim that once a fish is caught, it goes deep and is no longer susceptible to further angling pressure until it returns shallow? What would be the motivation to make such an assertion?
So I guess what I am saying here really is that I wonder if there isn't any useful data at all that we might gain from reviewing that first year summary? To think that every piece of data was fabricated or falsified, is quite possibly assuming a little too much in my humble opinion. I am not defending or accusing anyone here, but I find it very unlikely that a bunch of people could conceive and execute such a conspiracy with perfection. Human nature strongly suggests otherwise. I find it much more likely that portions of such data were (successfully) fabricated or misrepresented, and not the data in its entirety. Admittedly this places ALL the data under doubt, so we may never know what information we might use to our benefit...and therefore the entire matter seems to be a waste.
Posted 4/8/2012 7:58 AM (#551621 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 174
Location: Ontario
The biggest connection to fish feeding or not feeding...in particular to bigger fish is noise.I believe these bigger fish associate the sound of boat motors with trauma.Often wonder why the fishing always seems to get so much better in October and November??? Regardless of a muskies intelligence,there has to be comfort level in its thoughts when it decides to eat a 3lb walleye or whatever.I cant see a 30lb muskie swimming into a bay with jet skis and kids screaming casually looking for lunch.
If a predator that has lived 20 years and been caught a few times to live through the battle...I believe its the noise that is the natural alarm for them.
I saw a 40" plus muskie caught in Georgian Bay mid summer in 140 ft of water... The reasons could be many.Just dont happen to see to many mid summer fish up in these parts. Everyone always associates the colder water for the trigger,and maybe thats partly true.But.These waters are silent for 8 months a year,there has to be a connection between the sound of motors and hooks in the head.
By the way. Happy Easter to all who celebrate it
Posted 4/8/2012 8:25 AM (#551628 - in reply to #551621) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Actually, that CFMS year-1 summary mentioned that as well--that muskies, once caught, would move away from the sound of an approaching boat. Larry Ramsell's report from the Eagle lake study didn't go into that much, as I recall. I think those fish were first captured by methods other than angling, so they might not have been so conditioned to avoid boats...at least initially. I'll have to review his article(s) again, but I don't recall him saying much in there about how the fish responded to his approach in the boat. However my first-hand experience in Green Bay suggests that the shallower the water, the more hesitant the fish are around the boat. But this does not explain the success of those who've reported caught fish by trolling lures right in the prop wash--something I've never been able to duplicate in relatively shallow water.
Posted 4/8/2012 8:58 AM (#551635 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 174
Location: Ontario
Ive experienced the prop wash catch a few times.Its confusing and unexplainable to be honest. I just dont think you can ever underestimate the intelligence of a species in its natural environment. Possibly the muskie sees the lure in the prop wash as vulnerable or as a threat. I almost only troll for muskie...many hits I feel are associated with reflex attacks in protecting territorial areas as much as they are feeding.Who knows...Ultimatly people connected to this species are beyond just being fishermen, and border on insanity.
Posted 4/8/2012 9:07 AM (#551638 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
'Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”'
The tracking data was almost totally invalid. One tracking boat reported being in two places at once several times. Some tracking data was supposedly gathered on nights where the weather would have been absolutely prohibitive. The most important thing is the comments you read were not ascertained by looking at any of the data. Pure make believe.
Again, that stuff was created to sell seminars and create the belief the Chip still had monster muskies swimming everywhere and fill a resort by convincing people the Chip was teeming with huge muskies...they were just incredibly adept at avoiding capture by angling. Pure bunk. Look at the Pewaukee study for real telemetry data. In my experience, muskies could care less about boats. If they were worried about boat traffic, they'd die of starvation trying to get away from them all day and in many cases, all night.
Measure off 50' from your boat. Not very far, is it? If you find muskies in 50' of water following bait, it's rare you find them truly near the bottom. And with sound traveling at 16 football fields a second under water, the noise is absolutely unavoidable. I've caught numbers of muskies in bays with jet skis and powerboats. I don't like that traffic, but the fish could care less, it's part of the normal environment.
Think about it. If the stuff that article quoted was even remotely possible, one would never catch a muskie trolling, and C&R would be stupid because the released fish would never again be caught. On many lakes with good muskie populations, the fishing would be impossibly bad.
I've caught 'em in the prop wash. And I've caught the same tagged fish several times, and a couple only a day or two apart between.
I have observed muskies underwater now for 12 years using my Aqua-Vu gear. I see muskies in 3', 5', 10' and the basin over the sandgrass and where they are....there's ALWAYS food. They follow the camera frequently. The camera is directly below the boat, gas motor sometimes running, electric sometimes running. They move around allot, from what I see under the ice, cruising large areas. Other fish are around them all the time, especially pike, and I've yet to see one try to chase any other fish away, they ignore each other for the most part. I've yet to see anything that resembles 'territorial' behavior.
Anglers have attempted to explain how tough it is to catch muskies for years by creating a far to complicated picture of their behavior, when it's easier to explain by simple numbers. If there were as many muskies as there is Pike or Bluegills in any body of water, I believe you'd catch them as easily as pike or bluegills.
Posted 4/8/2012 9:10 AM (#551640 - in reply to #551635) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Does water depth seem to have any effect on your success Tim?
I hypothesize that deeper water muskies might be more willing to attack a lure in the prop-wash, because they have the safety of that vertical buffer of the water column. They can easily escape deep, and thus may be more willing to hit lures closer to the boat in deeper water.
While I've had other anglers tell me they've had success with prop-wash trolling in shallower water (5-8 feet even), I just haven't seen that myself. Having said this though, Don Schwartz' experience (as seen on his video trolling DVD) seems to be that the fish will come right up behind the prop to investigate a lure...and the prop! And as I recall, he had some footage on the video to support that behavior. So it is indeed conceivable that these fish will hit a lure in shallow water prop-wash, and I simply didn't give it enough of a chance to see success.
Posted 4/8/2012 9:21 AM (#551643 - in reply to #551638) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
sworrall - 4/8/2012 9:07 AM
SNIP...
I've caught 'em in the prop wash. And I've caught the same tagged fish several times, and a couple only a day or two apart between.
All valid arguments Steve. As I said, I am very skeptical about several of the data reported in that summary of year one. You raise valid points and as I mentioned, I've gotten several reports of the same fish being caught in a relatively short period. So I certainly don't believe all reported there--I was just hoping that there was *some* useful data there. Sadly, it appears that whatever useful information exists is so mired in controversy that it is simply impossible to use it, and thus the entire study is useless.
Posted 4/8/2012 9:29 AM (#551645 - in reply to #551640) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 174
Location: Ontario
Tom, the beauty of fishing in Ontario is that we have many lakes and water systems for Muskie.Many I do fish,have no pike.Even so, there is very little pressure on the species.Any prop was fish caught where on these lakes in water in about 20 ft or so.
Now my primary spot to fish is in Parry Sound area of Georgian Bay.Water levels are down around 6ft.The zebras cleared out so much vegetation its unreal. Areas that were beautiful weed lined bays have been replaced by sand islands and rock.
The old timers I fish with kept taking me to spots they fished in for years and we caught squat...so I started trolling.My opnion is that the big fish have become more transitional.They must hunt for success,and therefore trolling gets me into more potential spots vs. chucking lures into weedless bays.
I agree with Steve,the sound of motors may not deter them from feeding. But I think it sppoks them when they are in their "homes" I think its more a matter of getting that lure into different depths and structure continously
to find the fish that are feeding.
My prefered depth is anywhere between 12-30 ft with the lure running around 12ft.
Everyone in my club now trolls with minimum 7" lures and the fishing has been really good.
Posted 4/8/2012 9:42 AM (#551649 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
You know, something just occurred to me. One obvious attraction for all of us to fish muskies is the size of the fish. Another, and one perhaps more powerful, is the mystery of how difficult they are supposed be to catch consistently. Perhaps if we ever reduced it to the biology and reality, the fun and challenge would be lessened.
The mystery of it all is easy to understand...we can't see the darned things to tell what they are really doing most of the time.
Posted 4/8/2012 10:18 AM (#551657 - in reply to #551649) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Exactly. I've said many times that I really don't even care if it's me that reels in the fish or not, when we're trolling. (Casting is a different ballgame mind you, because it's mono a mono in that sense--especially when they hit by the boat on a figure-8.) But for trolling, the challenge for me is to find the fish, and then get them to hit. So I always got more of a kick out of taking people out who have never caught big fish, and put them on a big fish, especially when they really have no idea of what's going on. I've had people fishing in my boat who literally could not drive the boat on a compass course, and I had to do absolutely everything. Those folks are the most fun, because they almost come unglued when they get a big fish on!
My uncle had never caught a legal musky prior to catching the 53-54" fish we got in 2007. So for him to have gotten that fish was an awesome experience--and then to see him struggle with trying to get it unhooked and released while battling the 28-degree air and 35-degree water temps was surreal. This was a guy I'd always known as the "big bad hunter;" but yet here he was, trying everything he (we) could possibly think of to get this 8" lure out of the fish's throat without killing it. And then hearing him when the fish threw water at us on the release, and now listen to him talk about the Lax reproduction and describe the catch to people who haven't seen it before...is beyond incredible!
Posted 4/8/2012 10:25 AM (#551658 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 19
I have observed muskies underwater now for 12 years using my Aqua-Vu gear. I see muskies in 3', 5', 10' and the basin over the sandgrass and where they are....there's ALWAYS food. They follow the camera frequently. The camera is directly below the boat, gas motor sometimes running, electric sometimes running. They move around allot, from what I see under the ice, cruising large areas. Other fish are around them all the time, especially pike, and I've yet to see one try to chase any other fish away, they ignore each other for the most part. I've yet to see anything that resembles 'territorial' behavior.
So Steve with what you have seen, do you feel fish can be conditioned or not. Or do anglers feel they get condiontioned because we catch so few of them?
Posted 4/8/2012 10:45 AM (#551662 - in reply to #551657) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: 31
tcbetka - 4/8/2012 10:18 AM Exactly. I've said many times that I really don't even care if it's me that reels in the fish or not, when we're trolling. (Casting is a different ballgame mind you, because it's mono a mono in that sense--especially when they hit by the boat on a figure-8.) But for trolling, the challenge for me is to find the fish, and then get them to hit. So I always got more of a kick out of taking people out who have never caught big fish, and put them on a big fish, especially when they really have no idea of what's going on. I've had people fishing in my boat who literally could not drive the boat on a compass course, and I had to do absolutely everything. Those folks are the most fun, because they almost come unglued when they get a big fish on! My uncle had never caught a legal musky prior to catching the 53-54" fish we got in 2007. So for him to have gotten that fish was an awesome experience--and then to see him struggle with trying to get it unhooked and released while battling the 28-degree air and 35-degree water temps was surreal. This was a guy I'd always known as the "big bad hunter;" but yet here he was, trying everything he (we) could possibly think of to get this 8" lure out of the fish's throat without killing it. And then hearing him when the fish threw water at us on the release, and now listen to him talk about the Lax reproduction and describe the catch to people who haven't seen it before...is beyond incredible! Now THAT is why I fish. TB
Tom, I only copied and pasted that so you can see how ridiculous some of their statements were. Steve obviously combed through the report and then even went beyond that by checking on local weather for the dates. He did his homework and caught those bums red-handed… without it you might be referring to the CFMS as gospel now.
This statement sure raises a red flag with me; “During the ‘dog days’ of summer, tagged fish, according to Allen, were observed stacked up in groups of as many as nine fish or more in areas not usually fished by muskie anglers.” … Really Scott Allen, how is it even remotely possible to have nine tagged fish in one area?
Steve, regarding the 3-year Pewaukee Lake study, according to Anderson; "We're finding that every time a boat comes by, the fish go down deeper in the water column," Anderson said. "They tend to be near the surface until the boat approaches." I believe you are speaking more from your own experience, and not necessarily referencing the study.
Tom, I think Homer LeBlanc was catching fish in the prop wash before I was born. My personal experience is that the larger muskies in the system take the prop wash offerings, you can certainly catch smaller fish in the prop wash (just not as often percentage wise) and definitely larger fish hit boards regularly. But as a general rule, I'll take a prop wash over board rod about any day of the week. Now, after reading about the Pewaukee study, days with a lot of boat traffic will find my boat probably trying to get those baits down a little deeper eh?
Last September I fished with a friend who couldn't get out much due to a new job. I was fully prepared to let him and his son wind in all the fish, (along the lines of what you do) but after several nice ones on both boards and in the prop wash, he started inquiring about me taking a rod. I told him I'll take the next prop wash rod… 54+”, longest fish in my boat for the year. If you still don't think they'll take prop wash lures in shallow water... dig this, when there are optimal conditions, we just crush them trolling top water lures in the prop wash while steering around weed beds. My favorite way to catch a ski!!!
Posted 4/8/2012 10:56 AM (#551666 - in reply to #551662) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Yes, I had a thought along those same lines regarding the presence of over 20% of the tagged fish all "stacked up" together. It's almost like they formed a club, and you had to have a radio tag to be a member! I haven't read the Pewaukee study though, so that seems to be a logical thing to do next. Maybe you or Steve can vector me to it, and I can read it this week.
Regarding the prop-wash trolling bit, it sounds fun! I probably just didn't give it enough of a chance to work out here. But I fished by myself a lot, and only fish with two lines while alone. And because I seemed to be able to catch just about as many fish as those boats around me, from what I could tell, I really didn't see the need to change things much.
Well, off to Wausau for a few hours. Have a happy Easter!
Posted 4/8/2012 10:58 AM (#551667 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
'Steve, regarding the 3-year Pewaukee Lake study, according to Anderson; "We're finding that every time a boat comes by, the fish go down deeper in the water column," Anderson said. "They tend to be near the surface until the boat approaches." '
I'm not at all in disagreement with this, in fact I believe fish of all species also head out a bit to the side IF the boat isn't roaring over full speed, hence the success of planer board trolling. Dropping a few feet doesn't equate to running for cover and avoiding all boat traffic because they have learned boats are carrying anglers who throw or troll lures which are dangerous and therefore need to be avoided at all costs.....
Posted 4/8/2012 12:22 PM (#551682 - in reply to #551667) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: 31
Same, I know they are not "boat shy" as far as catching them goes. I don't have nearly as much experience watching fish like you do, but that's certainly been my experience as well… that's why that part in the Pewaukee Lake study caught my eye.
I would add that it's my belief that muskies kind of “learn” (for lack of a better word) to actively feed in the prop wash. Maybe that's why we have experienced more success with big fish there?
The way I envision it is a muskie is eyeballing some pray and along comes this boat, they drop-down slightly, or off to the side and then crash the churning water looking for an easy meal. I think they also swim along some in the prop wash waiting for something good to happen, but that's just speculation.
I’ve certainly seen fish following and hitting baits there numerous times, it's totally cool. I suppose because I believe that, I believe they can be conditioned too. I typically run the prop wash 10-20' back and down to about the lowest point of the motor if possible.
FYI, Marc Thorpe sometimes runs with basically just a leader out… we're talking 4’ from the rod tip to lure… I just can't bring myself to choke it like that. I'll tell you what, it sure makes checking for weed teasers easy, and to clean it, just pick the rod up and swing the bait in. Talk about a simplistic and effective approach… pretty amazing to watch firsthand.
addict
Posted 4/9/2012 7:38 AM (#551811 - in reply to #551276) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
IAJustin - 4/6/2012 11:23 AM
Exactly - And why long term I believe there is almost no lure conditioning. You catch a fish its probably not eating anything for a week - the fish was stressed. But 4 months later the fish is now so hungry it finds a meal or dies you cant tell me its smart enough to turn down the same lure going by its face - that why lures trolled or cast with speed are so effective - the fish charges eats or dies.
Isn't what you've just said EXACTLY what lure conditioning is? Hunger strike vs reaction strike. Speeding a bait up to fool it, (pick your reason for why you now HAVE to fool it in order for it to strike) because it won't eat a slower bait anymore. Don't give the fish time to ID their target, just play onto their instincts.
Your scenario talks about a "stressed" or what I'm inferring might be a sick fish. So, I'm not sure that's a fair comparison. A sick fish is a sick fish. Its likely not going to behave normally. For instance, a raccoon with the mange will eat out of your bird feeder at noon, but a healthy one will wit until midnight.
But I'll pick the speed aspect to soapbox about....... Every issue of every exox genre magazine talks about speed retrieves, speed trolling, burnin' big blades, etc., on and on, and on. There's umpteen threads out there on new high ratio reels to get stuff moving faster. Manufacturers have been scrambling to build faster and faster reels.
Posted 4/9/2012 9:33 AM (#551837 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
addict, you think burning buck-tails or speed trolling is new? These are technique that are being refined from over 15 years ago - speed has always caught muskies. My point was - they will hit fast moving baits, the same fast moving baits over and over and over and .... they have to eat what they "perceive" is food. The fact that a muskie will hit the same bait same color - a half dozen times in its life, that doesn't sound like conditioning to me.
Posted 4/9/2012 11:24 AM (#551862 - in reply to #551811) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
addict - 4/9/2012 7:38 AM
IAJustin - 4/6/2012 11:23 AM
[...]
Manufacturers have been scrambling to build faster and faster reels.
Why are we now moving baits faster?
Because it's a proven trigger. They can swim a LOT faster than we can reel. I don't think it's got anything to do with the fish being conditioned to slower presentations. More likely it's a result of muskie anglers constantly trying to find better tools; tools that make it easier on us.
Posted 4/9/2012 12:54 PM (#551882 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Lots of details here. IMHO one can beat anything to death if one wants to or one can just try keep it simple.
I try to keep fishing as simple as possible. I don't concern myself much about what everyone else is doing. I just try to apply a lure to the situation. Sometimes it makes sense to use speed and sometimes its best to slow down and get the lure in the fish's face. Sometimes its best to slowly twitch a crank bait right over their head. Sometimes its best to drive a spinner bait close to or right through the cover. Sometimes larger lures are best and sometimes smaller lures work better. And much of the time one has to try a few things before one sees what the fish want.
I don't know about everyone else, but I'd rather not think to much while fishing.
Posted 4/9/2012 12:59 PM (#551888 - in reply to #551882) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
Herb_b - 4/9/2012 12:54 PM Lots of details here. IMHO one can beat anything to death if one wants to or one can just try keep it simple. I try to keep fishing as simple as possible. I don't concern myself much about what everyone else is doing. I just try to apply a lure to the situation. Sometimes it makes sense to use speed and sometimes its best to slow down and get the lure in the fish's face. Sometimes its best to slowly twitch a crank bait right over their head. Sometimes its best to drive a spinner bait close to or right through the cover. Sometimes larger lures are best and sometimes smaller lures work better. And much of the time one has to try a few things before one sees what the fish want. I don't know about everyone else, but I'd rather not think to much while fishing. :)
This would be a pretty quiet forum if we stopped discussion threads... to each his/her own, though.
Posted 4/9/2012 1:28 PM (#551897 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 829
Location: Maple Grove, MN
Just trying to add some reality here.
What does one really do when you're fishing? Do you think a lot or do you just try different things on different spots until you see a pattern? You probably start with whatever worked last time at your best spot and/or what seems to make the most sense at the time based on conditions. And then if that doesn't work, you start trying other presentations or other spots. Right?
I have found that trying to learn to much about fish can be counter-productive at times. There comes a point when one knows so much that one cannot begin to start applying all that knowledge on the water. It can get to the point that trying to apply so much knowledge just adds confusion.
A few things that can confuse people at times are:
- Which lure to use?
- Should one fish downwind, upwind, or ignore the wind?
- Slow retrieve or fast?
- Fish shallow, deep or deeper?
- Try to see what everyone else is using to avoid fish conditioning (or not)?
- What color to use?
- Baitfish movements
- Seasonal fish locations
- How to position the boat in different conditions
- Does the color of your clothes matter?
- How hard, what angle and when to set the hook?
- Leader material and wire weight
- Fishing line size and color
- Rod length, reel type, etc
While these are all things to consider, it seems to me that its often best to try keep things simple and not get overloaded.
Posted 4/9/2012 2:24 PM (#551914 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: SE Wisconsin
You bring up a good point, Herb, so I'll keep it quick so as to not hijack the topic of this thread. With the vastness of experience in the audience here on M1, I think the best tip anyone can take away from the point you've made is to keep in mind that this is only literature of opinions and thoughts. Take away from it what you can, even if it's just one little detail you may not have thought of before. Remember it's not about memorizing flash cards when you're on the water; let the ideas that appeal to you in these discussions resonate in the back of your mind and voila, soon the points made here that made the most sense to you innately become engrained in the decisions you make on the water. Just remember, making the best decisions on the water comes from experience and LOT's of trial and error.
Posted 4/9/2012 7:08 PM (#551985 - in reply to #551837) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
IAJustin - 4/9/2012 9:33 AM
addict, you think burning buck-tails or speed trolling is new? These are technique that are being refined from over 15 years ago - speed has always caught muskies. My point was - they will hit fast moving baits, the same fast moving baits over and over and over and .... they have to eat what they "perceive" is food. The fact that a muskie will hit the same bait same color - a half dozen times in its life, that doesn't sound like conditioning to me.
Not to besmirch your character or knowledge, but, your contention that lures don't lose effectiveness is disproved several times in history. The first I can think of was the emergence and then decreasing success of the Hawg Wobbler(might be before your time). When it first hit the market, it was at times an automatic bite, nothing like it out there that the fish had seen. In a couple years it was still a good lure, but just one of your choices. It hasn't ever quit working, but it HAS quit working like it once did. Conditioning? Memory? I don't care which, but the effectiveness rate went down.
Recently the double 10 bite has risen and now fallen. Doug Johnson can verify this from LOW fishing the last 3 years. They still bite double 10's, but not the way they WERE biting double 10's.
For a fish to be caught on the same bait 4-6 times in it's lifetime proves there are always some fish that can make bad choices over and over, but the exception does not prove/dissprove the rule, it simply demonstrates there is variability in response. But you never catch the fish that never bites the same bait again. Blah Blah Blah, fish may not feel pain, per some posters, but fish can be stressed and I would expect the learning curve to be amazingly quick in some individuals, and I am betting as a group, we underestimate their ability to avoid unhappy situations(hooks and hooking).
Posted 4/9/2012 7:14 PM (#551989 - in reply to #551640) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
tcbetka - 4/8/2012 9:10 AM
Does water depth seem to have any effect on your success Tim?
I hypothesize that deeper water muskies might be more willing to attack a lure in the prop-wash, because they have the safety of that vertical buffer of the water column. They can easily escape deep, and thus may be more willing to hit lures closer to the boat in deeper water.
While I've had other anglers tell me they've had success with prop-wash trolling in shallower water (5-8 feet even), I just haven't seen that myself. Having said this though, Don Schwartz' experience (as seen on his video trolling DVD) seems to be that the fish will come right up behind the prop to investigate a lure...and the prop! And as I recall, he had some footage on the video to support that behavior. So it is indeed conceivable that these fish will hit a lure in shallow water prop-wash, and I simply didn't give it enough of a chance to see success.
TB
Your trolling experience is limited at best. Probably need to do more trolling and less speculating.
Posted 4/9/2012 7:21 PM (#551992 - in reply to #551638) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
sworrall - 4/8/2012 9:07 AM
'Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”'
.
I am of the opinion that SOME fish probably do this. It can be self reinforcing behaviour. Regardless of "studies".
Posted 4/9/2012 8:17 PM (#552011 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
'Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”' '
Wasn't my quote, that one belongs to the CFMS folks and is...silly.
Posted 4/9/2012 9:14 PM (#552038 - in reply to #551985) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
firstsixfeet - 4/9/2012 7:08 PM
Recently the double 10 bite has risen and now fallen. Doug Johnson can verify this from LOW fishing the last 3 years. They still bite double 10's, but not the way they WERE biting double 10's.
That is straight up hogwash. There are undoubtedly thousands of muskies on LOTW that have still never even seen 10's once - I'll guess there were other factors other than lure conditioning that led to the lack of success by Mr. Johnson the last 3 years on LOTW casting 10's. MH school still shows there is no better tool for mid to late July last three years!
As for the hawg wobbler you are right I wasn't muskie fishing in 1978 (I was 5) but neither was anyone else - the 1000 muskie anglers of the day, went to every muskie lake in the country threw hawg wobblers only until the early 80's and "conditioned" all the fish? ... Or Maybe it was a fad and guys found something else they wanted to throw?...you tend to catch them on what you throw. If you believe fish in your area get conditioned to a lure and you stop throwing it ..yep they quit eating it.
Posted 4/9/2012 9:34 PM (#552045 - in reply to #552038) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Now Justin, don't confuse the discussion (debate) with silly things like logic and probability. Those things are much harder to explain away using anecdotal evidence, or subjective experience.
TB
I'll edit mine, because you edited yours...
SNIP ...you tend to catch them on what you throw. If you believe fish in your area get conditioned to a lure and you stop throwing it ..yep they quit eating it.
Posted 4/9/2012 9:38 PM (#552048 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Eastern Ontario
Years ago I had an autopilot trolling motor that thing was constantly clicking as it corrected course. On numerous ocassion I had sizable fish strike that motor and move the whole boat they sure wern't avoiding it. Back in the 90's I was involved in identifying spawning areas for the OMNR. We really saw no evidence of the fish avoiding us or shying from the trolling motor.
I have done 80% of my casting for the past 25 years with 2 lures and have seen no decrease in my catch per unit effort and my numbers are comparable to most of the others fishing the same water. I have always maintained location and timing to be far more important than lure. The lure just has to be able to get to your spot and work enough to provoke a strike . One fish that I tagged in the 90's was recaptured 8 times in the next few years in roughly the same spot 6 times on the same lure.
I read somewhere that back in the days where most fishing was done with a 5 or 7 1/2 HP motor and 25 HP was huge they would run through a weedbed a couple of times at full speed.They would wait a bit then short line speed troll the area. I think the idea was to dislodge insects and frogs and get a little feeding frenzy going.
Posted 4/9/2012 9:59 PM (#552051 - in reply to #552011) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
sworrall - 4/9/2012 8:17 PM
'Muskies become conditioned to avoid anglers, especially electric motors and gas motors, after a single capture, suggesting a ‘learned’ response to capture. Muskies also moved deeper after capture, and never returned to the area in which they were caught.”' '
Wasn't my quote, that one belongs to the CFMS folks and is...silly.
I quoted your post as it was there contained, and stating most things out of hand as fact....probably silly, however, I'll stand by my belief that some fish "head for the hills" and may not come back after the experience of being hooked. Tag enough to prove me wrong and it will be interesting stuff, but it will have to be on a big basin where "heading for the hills" is possible.
Posted 4/9/2012 10:09 PM (#552057 - in reply to #552051) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
firstsixfeet - 4/9/2012 9:59 PM
I quoted your post as it was there contained, and stating most things out of hand as fact....probably silly, however, I'll stand by my belief that some fish "head for the hills" and may not come back after the experience of being hooked. Tag enough to prove me wrong and it will be interesting stuff, but it will have to be on a big basin where "heading for the hills" is possible.
I have no problem whatsoever believing that you are 100% correct in that SOME fish head for the hills once caught, and SOME fish don't hit the same lure again...at least for a while. In any population of living creatures, there are those individuals who are "more intelligent" than others. I believe, at least to some degree, that muskies are sentient beings--in that at least part of their brain is capable of thought in whatever form. Am I saying that muskies use logic or reason things out? No... I've read nothing that suggests that; nor have I seen that in the 35+ years I have fished for them (and yes, some of those were actually spent trolling!). But still, there are fish that, given the same set of circumstances or conditions, won't respond like other fish would. Is it age? Is it experience? Who knows...probably some of both. You call it "conditioning," I'll call it learned behavior. You say tom-a-toe, I'll say tom-ah-toe.
The whole thing reminds me of an old-time pilot quote...
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old-bold pilots.
Posted 4/9/2012 10:29 PM (#552062 - in reply to #552038) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
IAJustin - 4/9/2012 9:14 PM
firstsixfeet - 4/9/2012 7:08 PM
Recently the double 10 bite has risen and now fallen. Doug Johnson can verify this from LOW fishing the last 3 years. They still bite double 10's, but not the way they WERE biting double 10's.
That is straight up hogwash. There are undoubtedly thousands of muskies on LOTW that have still never even seen 10's once - I'll guess there were other factors other than lure conditioning that led to the lack of success by Mr. Johnson the last 3 years on LOTW casting 10's. MH school still shows there is no better tool for mid to late July last three years!
As for the hawg wobbler you are right I wasn't muskie fishing in 1978 (I was 5) but neither was anyone else - the 1000 muskie anglers of the day, went to every muskie lake in the country threw hawg wobblers only until the early 80's and "conditioned" all the fish? ... Or Maybe it was a fad and guys found something else they wanted to throw?...you tend to catch them on what you throw. If you believe fish in your area get conditioned to a lure and you stop throwing it ..yep they quit eating it.
Talking about double 10's still catching fish, does not preclude them from being less successful than they were in recent history. In fact they can still be a successful bait and have taken quite a hit in the success rate. Doh? At least do me the favor of not creating an argument for me, as if I stated it.
Well and there yuh go on the hawg wobblers, stating exactly what applies to the double 10's on big lakes like LOW, if you throw a bait exclusively, it leaves little room to catch fish on other baits. However, that was not the case with Hawg Wobblers, the bait was just extremely hot the first time through on a lake or river.
Fish had NEVER seen anything like it...and responded. Disbelieve, if you want, the idea that a new bait can be hot, your option. Of course the same thing happened to a lesser extent with the Tallywhacker, and then later, the Top Raider, both of which substantially changed the noise level and pitch from the earlier mud puppy, and each other.
Posted 4/9/2012 10:44 PM (#552067 - in reply to #552062) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Hmmm, let's see if I can take a WAG at a possible explanation for this phenomenon...
New lure comes on the market. Looks good. A few people buy it. Because it looks good, they cast it. Because they cast it, muskies hit it. So these guys talk about it. Other guys, not wanting to be out-fished by some schmoes with a fancy new lure, buy the same new lure. They cast it because, after all, it's HOT! What do you know...muskies really DO hit it! Pretty soon the whole industry is using it. Will you look at all the gosh-darned fish that thing catches! But after a while, as anglers tend to do, people start to lose interest. They get bored, and look for something new and exciting--something to give them that competitive edge over the other 999 guys throwing that same lure on that same lake, that same day.
Now I ask you--did the lure maker really build a better mousetrap? Or, did a "mass effect" result in a number of fish being caught, simply because the lure caught a bunch of anglers (who then believed in the lure)?
Does it matter?
My point with this diatribe is that I think you are giving the fish a tad too much credit. Put a few thousand guys out there casting a rubber ducky with hooks on it, and it'll catch muskies. Is the Double 10 a great lure? Apparently. Is the Bull Dawg a great lure? Apparently. But when something else comes along and people like it better than the 'Dawg...bye bye Mr. Bull Dawg. That's not musky psychology...it's marketing. Marketing to anglers.
Justin... I think you may have just figured out the best way to end this D10s debate once and for all!
Also that sounds like an awesome challange, I would be very interested to hear the results. If you ever get to accomplish this.. please make sure to post about it. I bet there are a hundred guys on here that would be interested in the results
Posted 4/9/2012 10:52 PM (#552070 - in reply to #552057) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
tcbetka - 4/9/2012 10:09 PM
firstsixfeet - 4/9/2012 9:59 PM
I quoted your post as it was there contained, and stating most things out of hand as fact....probably silly, however, I'll stand by my belief that some fish "head for the hills" and may not come back after the experience of being hooked. Tag enough to prove me wrong and it will be interesting stuff, but it will have to be on a big basin where "heading for the hills" is possible.
I have no problem whatsoever believing that you are 100% correct in that SOME fish head for the hills once caught, and SOME fish don't hit the same lure again...at least for a while. In any population of living creatures, there are those individuals who are "more intelligent" than others. I believe, at least to some degree, that muskies are sentient beings--in that at least part of their brain is capable of thought in whatever form. Am I saying that muskies use logic or reason things out? No... I've read nothing that suggests that; nor have I seen that in the 35+ years I have fished for them (and yes, some of those were actually spent trolling!). But still, there are fish that, given the same set of circumstances or conditions, won't respond like other fish would. Is it age? Is it experience? Who knows...probably some of both. You call it "conditioning," I'll call it learned behavior. You say tom-a-toe, I'll say tom-ah-toe.
The whole thing reminds me of an old-time pilot quote...
There are old pilots and there are bold pilots, but there are no old-bold pilots.
TB
Well, the idea that intelligence causes certain behaviours is probably difficult to consider without really going down the line and clarifying paramaters by which you might measure such a thing, but that doesn't preclude the behaviour being shaped in very short order(by an unknown process).
I think musky populations in some ways are similar to bird populations in that you shoot out a bird population, and you can also fish out a musky population.
If muskies have no intelligence, no ability to learn avoidance etc. etc. then the population should remain high in areas that are originally heavily used, and the strke response should also stay high in those areas, but ... that does not appear to be what happens. If I hunt and shoot pheasants heavily on a farm, the reward of hunting that farm decrease beyond what would be expected just by the birds killed. Same for fishing heavily over fishing areas, and we are generally not killing large numbers of fish. But the results suffer, so, the fish are being run off, conditioned, still there but exhibitting avoidance behaviour or... What?
Posted 4/9/2012 10:55 PM (#552072 - in reply to #552068) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Fat-ski Its been done before - It about conditions - lures are simply a tool, good lures/tools catch fish. A lure or "tricking" a stupid fish often times happens because a muskie cant make out its "target" completely. That is the greatness of 10's get a fish to "engage" on the lure and I will trigger the fish to eat away from the boat often....but if they are not going for the speed change or the lure changing direction on the retrieve.. you have an unparallelled chance of hooking this "engaged" fish in the 8. Almost cheating.
Posted 4/9/2012 11:12 PM (#552075 - in reply to #552067) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
tcbetka - 4/9/2012 10:44 PM
Hmmm, let's see if I can take a WAG at a possible explanation for this phenomenon...
New lure comes on the market. Looks good. A few people buy it. Because it looks good, they cast it. Because they cast it, muskies hit it. So these guys talk about it. Other guys, not wanting to be out-fished by some schmoes with a fancy new lure, buy the same new lure. They cast it because, after all, it's HOT! What do you know...muskies really DO hit it! Pretty soon the whole industry is using it. Will you look at all the gosh-darned fish that thing catches! But after a while, as anglers tend to do, people start to lose interest. They get bored, and look for something new and exciting--something to give them that competitive edge over the other 999 guys throwing that same lure on that same lake, that same day.
Now I ask you--did the lure maker really build a better mousetrap? Or, did a "mass effect" result in a number of fish being caught, simply because the lure caught a bunch of anglers (who then believed in the lure)?
Does it matter?
My point with this diatribe is that I think you are giving the fish a tad too much credit. Put a few thousand guys out there casting a rubber ducky with hooks on it, and it'll catch muskies. Is the Double 10 a great lure? Apparently. Is the Bull Dawg a great lure? Apparently. But when something else comes along and people like it better than the 'Dawg...bye bye Mr. Bull Dawg. That's not musky psychology...it's marketing. Marketing to anglers.
Believe in the ducky.
TB
(I believe!)
You again are missing the point. Many years there is a hot "show" bait and it basically never pans out for fisherman. It continues to be hot one season and dies. A really good bait that IS doing something unusual, starts with some numbers and actually increases every season as people experience the results.
Until it tips over and starts getting decreasing results(due to whatever factors pertain).
A bait like the hawg wobbler just took off because fish(and particularly dark water fish)had never seen the like and ate it in droves. You were going to catch more fish if you used one when it first came out, it WAS that simple. Now it has receded into normalcy, whatever that might be. It was truly an over acheiver those first few seasons.
Now contrast new concepts of an existing bait, like double 10's vs Mantas? Both change the concept of their particular genre somewhat, without being nuclear science. Both get some buildup and word of mouth, both have a steep early sales curve, and yet, the Manta never really does anything unique, and if anything proves itself to be a LESS than optimal bait when exposed to fish through increasing use, whereas the double 10's show that they truly attract fish at a different level than other smaller bucktails, and different bucktail configurations have been doing. The use of double 10's goes up and up and up, and as more is discovered, the use increases to even greater rates on big fish water. Now you have two baits to think about, one achieving usage by "blow" and the other achieving usage by both "blow and show".
These two quickly illustrate how new baits get picked up and used, but they also demonstrate that in todays market, they can quickly be discarded and shelved after an initial trial. It is hard to get everyone out there to throw a bait unless there is substantial evidence that the bait truly does something different.
My next question you need to consider, would you rather be the first boat on the lake throwing double 10's, or the 100th boat? So, the 100th boat is still catching some fish, uhm, what do you think the bite rate of the population encountered is for the 100th boat vs the first boat???? IAJustin, you think the 100th boat is averaging the same number of fish per day??? One following your arguments would expect that to be true, if they really felt your arguments held water(or in this case.....fish).
Posted 4/9/2012 11:13 PM (#552076 - in reply to #552070) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
firstsixfeet - 4/9/2012 10:52 PM
Well, the idea that intelligence causes certain behaviours is probably difficult to consider without really going down the line and clarifying paramaters by which you might measure such a thing, but that doesn't preclude the behaviour being shaped in very short order(by an unknown process).
This is an excellent point. But that's going to be true for White-tail deer, muskellunge, or the three-tailed gnat. Any living thing that interacts with its environment, is going to learn from that environment and adapt. I believe it's called survival of the fittest.
I think musky populations in some ways are similar to bird populations in that you shoot out a bird population, and you can also fish out a musky population.
Of course. And left to our own devices, we'll do both. This is why smart people set limits on harvest, and then carry guns to enforce those limits.
If muskies have no intelligence, no ability to learn avoidance etc. etc. then the population should remain high in areas that are originally heavily used, and the strke response should also stay high in those areas, but ... that does not appear to be what happens. If I hunt and shoot pheasants heavily on a farm, the reward of hunting that farm decrease beyond what would be expected just by the birds killed. Same for fishing heavily over fishing areas, and we are generally not killing large numbers of fish. But the results suffer, so, the fish are being run off, conditioned, still there but exhibitting avoidance behaviour or... What?
But I *do* think that some fish are more intelligent (there I go anthropomorphisizing again...) than other fish. Ever why some deer get hit and killed by a car, but then some others don't? My guess is because the ones who don't get hit are somehow smart enough to stay off the road when the cars are there.
If an animal is alive and interacting with its environment, it must have *some* level of intelligence. The problem, as you've astutely pointed out, is how we define "intelligence" with respect to a musky. It could be as simple as a fish moving deeper when a boat goes over, so as to avoid getting hit by the lower unit. Or, it could also mean to swim very fast in the opposite direction, when a Double 10 bucktail goes sailing over the weed bed you're laying in. Either way, that fish survives to pass on its genetic material. But however primitive that intelligence is (by our standards), it is still intelligence. Charles Darwin and Herbert Spencer did a pretty good job of explaining all that, as I recall...only they called it "natural selection."
Posted 4/9/2012 11:38 PM (#552084 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
i wish new lures did cause this "feeding frenzy" firstsixfeet speaks of... But as I've mentioned already earlier - I unfortunately get to fish a "fish-bowl" ,450 acres, 90% of my season, I have a thousand muskie lures...and every year I try to find something they just wont be able to resist. Doesn't work. The only two lures that have made any difference on this "fish bowl" the last 10 years have been the weagle and double 10's.....why? well a weagle does a better job of imitating a wounded shad than a giant jackpot - these fish see thousands of weagles and they keeping eating them, when the water temps/ conditions are right......I've caught the same fish within the same week on 10's, 10's are a seasonal lure on the lake as well. They eat these two lures because they trick fish better and they continue to do so year after year......again, they eat lures that appeal to them, lures that imitate the forage, something of the size they want to chase, something that simulates there lateral line, something moving really slow, something moving really fast...... I've never had a lure go cold, when conditions are right good "lures" ..."trick" fish. I've taken a dozen individuals on this lake - most throw a lure I don't or wouldn't (i throw 5 baits on this lake) - I cant find any five that are better - over 1000's of hrs.
Posted 4/9/2012 11:57 PM (#552086 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
Define 'conditioning'. A large part of this discussion is an attempt to figure out what everyone means by that term.
Some think muskies are exhibiting a 'learned response' to capture and avoid boats, baits and therefore capture in the future. Let's look at what it takes to create a learned response that specific from critters with a far more complex brain structure than a Muskie.
Train a dog. How many times does positive reinforcement have to be applied to get the desired response to particular stimuli? My family raised silver tip Police dogs for awhile, and black labs for awhile. I can tell you negative reinforcement took LOTS of incidents to create avoidance of a behavior, even in adults being trained for specific services, so we are not just talking puppies here. A powerful shock collar will teach a dog soon enough, but not the first few times. Let's suffice it to say dogs are much smarter than muskies, and still it takes repeated training/experiences to create a long term learned avoidance reaction or positively reinforced desired behavior.
The fish's brain lacks the structures necessary for the 'reasoning' many want to lend to them, and the 'wiring' as well. Also for pain, as we understand and process the sensation. So 'pain' is not as much a problem as we would like it to be as far as negative reinforcement. Probably far more important is the lack of positive reinforcement from the experience; receiving nutrition that exceeded the energy expended to acquire it. That, according to the literature, takes considerable exposure to create a behavior, however, so a one time capture on a bucktail probably isn't going to cause the fish to go live under a rock in 65' of water. THAT would be a negative reinforcement, as there's little food there.
Muskies live to eat. That's pretty much all they do. Finding them isn't complicated really, just find the food, and there they will be, close by. getting them to react to your presentation by hitting it, however, can be a real pain.
NOTHING they eat day to day looks, acts, sounds, or feels like a lure. Nothing. Nada. Follow along with me for a bit on this one.
Lures look like hell, sound like hell, and act like nothing else in the fish's diet. Muskie ought to reject lures immediately if as intelligent as we credit them to be. Topwater lures don't sound or act like ducks. No lure looks like a 'wounded baitfish'. Not one. And, my observations with my tank raised Esox show that injured or sick baitfish die, all by themselves, and rarely get eaten. Why? Maybe because 1000's of generations of Muskies have 'learned' that eating a sick, badly behaving baitfish isn't good. Maybe because nature has hard wired fish to ignore the footprint given off by a sick or dying baitfish to avoid the spread of disease. ?? Anyway, lures don't have a 'footprint' like any living...or dying thing.
And that is why they work.
Muskies are very opportunistic in their feeding activity, and have the same issue all fish have. Doug Johnson calls it, " If it moves, it's food". Fish hit anything that moves past them out of pure reaction, and many times they can't see it well enough to tell what the heck it is. Consider this:
Muskies respond to a series of stimuli automatically, they HAVE to or they die. No reasoning, no 'moods', no asking other muskies what to do. Thousands of variables determine how heightened the reaction to any stimulus might be at any one given time. We know or think we know what some of those variables are; weather, light penetration and vision as a result, oxygen levels, water temps, predator/prey relationships in that water, all sorts of the obvious, and the theoretical like moon phase, etc.
What we do know is if there is a stimulus, the muskie will exhibit a response at some level. How they respond depends on how strong the stimulus 'footprint' is, proximity, duration, and much more coupled with the variables that determine the activity level of that fish at that time. Strike response is, very simplified, Dougs If it Moves It's Food Rule.
Stimulus/response works pretty much like this in any environment with all living critters. Stimulus/response for strike response to your presentation's footprint.
First stimulus, strongest response. Never been exposed to it before. Moving, it's food, strong stimulus, and all things being equal, the strongest response. Second exposure, diminished response level. Third, diminished even more. 10,000 casts by 1000 anglers with that presentation later? Still way more than the sucker or perch they live with, because they LIVE with them 100% of the time and the stimulus of the bait fish's availability is usually only effective when a feeding response...not strike response, is the result. Everything has to line up for the Muskies to be 'feeding'. I see this on the camera all winter...fish just co-existing all day, avoiding each other by only the slightest adjustment, but then a switch flips, all hell breaks loose, and the bait fish are on the run and my Lindy Dater is hell on wheels effective.
That said, it's way tougher to get as many strikes and far more commonplace to get a follow which is nothing more than a reduced response to a stimulus, from that 10,000 casts by 1000 anglers presentation footprint now because it's part of the natural environment and will obtain no more a response than any other stimulus that commonplace in that environment. Now the muskies have to be more active than they were at first exposure to elicit a strike response, but they WILL smash the thing when that 'all hell breaks loose' activity period, better known as 'window' opens up for awhile. As the effectiveness drops off to level with other frequent footprint lures, popularity of the bait drops off replaced by the NEW HOT GOTTA HAVE thingy for $60. Self fulfilling prophesy, fewer people throwing the lure = fewer reported fish caught on it and so on into obscurity....unless the lure has 'legs'...the ability to vary the retrieve and widely vary the footprint effectively keeping numbers of anglers throwing it no matter what: Suick, Bucktail, Top Raider. etc.
If a stimulus (footprint of your lure) disappears from the lake because folks no longer use the lure, it can be reintroduced and be extremely effective for a time. Ever see that happen? How much is learned, and how much is remembered, and for how long, has to do more with brain structure than how cool and mysterious we desire our quarry to be. DO muskies learn? Sure, over repeated exposure over time. Do they retain any of that? Not real well, according to my son, who works netting muskies, walleyes, suckers, etc each Spring. After a couple net captures, it's tough to get the same muskie again...until next year. Boom. Right back into the net. Fin clips are HOW populations/year classes/ recaptures are recognized and determined. And he is stripping the fish of all it's eggs, an experience I am sure would cure a human of getting anywhere NEAR a net like that again if she survives, and the males? Well, if human, they'd be lining up.
Vision down there sucks. Hard to see, even tougher to discern detail. Much of the time, it's darned drab to dark down there. So recognizing a footprint as 'dangerous' would have more to do with the overall footprint of any lure. Here's the rub...they all sound different. My hydrophone has taught me different brands of Double 10s exhibit COMPLETELY different footprints. One capture probably isn't enough to create an avoidance response later, and then it's have to be the same brand lure from the same production run if those vary at all, and they do, run at the same speed with the same leader at the same depth to create the same footprint.
Now consider this. About 20 to 30% of each year class disappears every year to natural causes and a bit more to angling mortality if sport angling is common for that specie. If a 'good' trophy water has .5 to 1 'adult' muskie per acre, and the lake is 4000 acres, and the population is made up of multiple year classes which vary greatly in size due to all sorts of issues, the end result is DARN few fish that make it to upper confidence limits when compared to the total population or any new year class the same size as a ratio. Each year, every year class shrinks. Two poor year classes can make for a very tough bite for 45" and 47" fish, for example, because the year classes that WERE that size are now gone, and when it was time for those two year classes to take that place...fewer fish. Blame it on learning or whatever if you wish, most times it's simple availability. If there's lots of big fish surviving from an excellent year class or stocking in any waterbody, lots will be caught. As that year class ages, numbers will reduce. It's the way it is.
The same thing happens with baitfish. Think about the implications of that. The muskie anglers on Mille Lacs have experienced a bait fish boom lately. Think about how much easier if the fish were forced to be more localized...like they used to be perhaps?
Fishing on LOTW is better now than it has been for a very long time. Superb year classes for a few years. All the stars aligned, and there you have it.
Muskies will hit a 1X4 with blades spinning and banging around under it making no end of metallic racket. Witness the Coot.
Posted 4/10/2012 12:35 AM (#552091 - in reply to #552086) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
Movie Time, nice natural Muskie lures imitate baitfish. Turn up your computer speaker volume full blast, then hit play and tell me how many Perch make THIS sound:
Posted 4/10/2012 7:25 AM (#552106 - in reply to #552091) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
sworrall - 4/10/2012 12:35 AM
Movie Time, nice natural Muskie lures imitate baitfish. Turn up your computer speaker volume full blast, then hit play and tell me how many Perch make THIS sound:
Wow. If I was a musky, I'd attack that lure...just to get it to shut up. That thing is obnoxious!
Posted 4/10/2012 7:40 AM (#552107 - in reply to #552086) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
sworrall - 4/9/2012 11:57 PM
NOTHING they eat day to day looks, acts, sounds, or feels like a lure. Nothing. Nada. Follow along with me for a bit on this one.
Lures look like hell, sound like hell, and act like nothing else in the fish's diet. Muskie ought to reject lures immediately if as intelligent as we credit them to be. Topwater lures don't sound or act like ducks. No lure looks like a 'wounded baitfish'. Not one. ...
Anyway, lures don't have a 'footprint' like any living...or dying thing.
And that is why they work.:o :o :o
(But duh Steve)
Muskies respond to a series of stimuli automatically, they HAVE to or they die. . etc.
Steve, Steve, Steve.....we have had this discussion before, and here you go again, so much chaff, so little wheat. If you were a little more concise, ie less wordy, less verbally voluminous, MORE TO THE POINT BUDDDY!!;) , it would be easier to respond.
You have tripped up here as you have in the past, by expanding your point to the failure level.
ALL ARTIFICIAL BAITS RESEMBLE THINGS THEY EAT EVERY SINGLE DAY AND NIGHT. They do in many ways, natural foods move, ABs move. Natural foods are visible, ABs are visible. Natural foods give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times, ABs give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times. The fish are hardwired to respond to such signals, large and small, clear and subtle. To suggest otherwise clouds the discussion. I have made this point before, but....someone wasn't listening were they? Probably qued up in line waiting for a net.....
And note, you reverse yourself in short order before you even have finished your novel.
Sad story...;)
All I am left to say is...Steve, Steve, Steve....:-(
Guest
Posted 4/10/2012 7:50 AM (#552108 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
At some point in a muskies life they have to take a chance when eating. The first time they eat a minnow, a frog, a crayfish, and duck, seagull.
Attacking something new is part of life. To say that lures don't resemble anything they eat really makes no sense. A frog doesn't resemble a minnow or a duck, but they will eat them all.
Hot lures do come and go. That's easily seen by guys who have fished a lot of years.
Posted 4/10/2012 8:05 AM (#552111 - in reply to #552108) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
I think there are more aggressive fish, and less aggressive fish. I think each fish can be different in that respect--at least to some degree. I don't want to go as far as to say that the fish have personalities, but just because they are the exact same species doesn't mean they have to respond in exactly the same way...all other things considered. So if you present a less aggressive fish with a lure that doesn't look like anything they normally eat, then maybe that fish doesn't respond the way you'd like. You might get a follow, but (using Steve's parlance) their switch hasn't been flipped. Now present that fish with something that looks more like a perch or shad (ie; "match-the-hatch") and you might just get them to eat. But then there are fish that will hit anything, whether or not it looks like anything they normally eat.
Which one of these fish do you think might live longer, and thus make a greater overall contribution to the gene pool? On some level of consciousness, all animals MUST make choices. Whether or not they have the capability for thought depends upon the complexity of their brain, I'd agree. Steve made this point, and I think it's very accurate. But I would also point out that there are other factors at play here, like impulse or "instinct." And those things can of course make or break that fish's day.
Posted 4/10/2012 9:43 AM (#552131 - in reply to #552107) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
' ALL ARTIFICIAL BAITS RESEMBLE THINGS THEY EAT EVERY SINGLE DAY AND NIGHT. No, they don't. They are the wrong color, shape,don't behave at all like the real thing, don't swim or sound like the real thing
They do in many ways, natural foods move, ABs move. That's Doug's if it moves it's food
Natural foods are visible, ABs are visible. yes they are, but that accentuates the differences. I said visibility sucks much of the time down there, and it does.
Natural foods give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times, ABs give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times. The 'signals' are so different that if muskies were smart as you think they'd SCREAM outta there. 'Sounds' underwater are basically pressure waves. And sound underwater really travels, too, 4800 fps.
The fish are hardwired to respond to such signals, large and small, clear and subtle. yes, I believe I said that. That IS the entire point
To suggest otherwise clouds the discussion. I have made this point before, but....someone wasn't listening were they? Probably qued up in line waiting for a net.....' We should listen to logic and what actually makes sense based upon the fish's actual capabilities. Read 'Behavior of Teliost Fishes' Second edition, Chapman and Hall, Fish and Fisheries, Series 7. Let me know when you have, and we'll talk some more.
I caught a muskie on a Coot last year. 1X4. Told you...
The video above is a Perch shaped and sort of Perch colored lure. Watch how it behaves. Now watch the perch in this video. Notice any differences? How dumb ARE muskies not to be just a little concerned...
Posted 4/10/2012 9:49 AM (#552135 - in reply to #552133) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
Here's hydrophone audio and Aqua-Vu video of a little rattle bait and a Pike screaming in smashing the lure. Turn your volume all the way up, you CAN hear the fish attack. Barely. Fish are quiet. They move slow and easy most all of the time unless running to food or away from being food. Moving fast for a short distancehad better be in avoidance or an attack...or it's a good chance you will get chased and perhaps...if the predator after you is lucky...eaten.
Posted 4/10/2012 9:52 AM (#552137 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
'I would also point out that there are other factors at play here, like impulse or "instinct." And those things can of course make or break that fish's day.'
My points exactly. I remember reading a study done on salmon introduced grizzly bear country. It took GENERATIONS of predation before the fish began exhibiting avoidance behavior to the smell of a grizzly upstream in the water. But they did....eventually.
Posted 4/10/2012 9:59 AM (#552141 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
You didn't, I should have said as smart as folks think. My bad, guess I have to buy the first round this Summer. Others have the tendency to believe it because marketing folks have pounded that into our minds for decades.
iajustin
Posted 4/10/2012 10:00 AM (#552142 - in reply to #552108) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Guest - 4/10/2012 7:50 AM
Hot lures do come and go. That's easily seen by guys who have fished a lot of years.
JS
Please give examples. When was a spinnerbait "hot" and then the fish decide to quit eating it? A 10" Jake is less effective now than when it was introduced or less people use them less now? Was a rumbler any better than I topraider - I would argue not, in fact I think the topraider is a better bait always has been always will be....and do you really believe a fish that ate a rumbler on lotw would have rejected a topraider? Not me.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:25 AM (#552147 - in reply to #552131) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
sworrall - 4/10/2012 9:43 AM
' ALL ARTIFICIAL BAITS RESEMBLE THINGS THEY EAT EVERY SINGLE DAY AND NIGHT. No, they don't. They are the wrong color, shape,don't behave at all like the real thing, don't swim or sound like the real thing
Wait a second STEVER, I think you are making assumptions muskies can discern such things. JS makes a good point, frog=duckling=minnow and all get eaten, so how can an artificial bait be the wrong color, wrong behaviour, wrong swimmer or sound? No way Josie Steve.
They do in many ways, natural foods move, ABs move. That's Doug's if it moves it's food
Doug Johnson quote that is irrelevant to the discussion, I could throw in many of those, why are you bringing it in here? Clouding the issue again!
Natural foods are visible, ABs are visible. yes they are, but that accentuates the differences. I said visibility sucks much of the time down there, and it does.
But Steve, they are not able to understand the differences, so...it only really accents the similarities, ie food aint invisible....
Natural foods give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times, ABs give off acoustic signals, pressure waves, sounds even at times. The 'signals' are so different that if muskies were smart as you think they'd SCREAM outta there. 'Sounds' underwater are basically pressure waves. And sound underwater really travels, too, 4800 fps.
OK, all sounds are basically pressure waves, irrelevant how fast it travels, once again clouding the issue? Note my post above, where do I say they are smart??? And how are the signals so different? They are signals are they not, and travel through water, and unless they sound like a killer whale making a run to the beach for a tasty seal, I'm thinking there is only a limited response. Lateral lines can sort out the front/back signals from the others received and make a size estimation of the object that will probably limit its potential hardwired threat to the fish.
The fish are hardwired to respond to such signals, large and small, clear and subtle. yes, I believe I said that. That IS the entire point
Yes, but you are missing that point by your wild claims that those same signals are somehow significant in their variance, when my point is that they are significant IN THEIR SIMILARITIES.
To suggest otherwise clouds the discussion. I have made this point before, but....someone wasn't listening were they? Probably qued up in line waiting for a net.....' We should listen to logic and what actually makes sense based upon the fish's actual capabilities. Read 'Behavior of Teliost Fishes' Second edition, Chapman and Hall, Fish and Fisheries, Series 7. Let me know when you have, and we'll talk some more.
REALLY?
I caught a muskie on a Coot last year. 1X4. Told you...
Whatcha mean "told you"??? Proves MY point, not yours.
The video above is a Perch shaped and sort of Perch colored lure. Watch how it behaves. Now watch the perch in this video. Notice any differences? How dumb ARE muskies not to be just a little concerned...
Steve Steve Steve, that perch shaped, sort of perch colored lure does what? MOVES, swims up and down and sideways in the water, is visible, gives off some kind of acoustic and potentailly sound waves in the water, seems like something alive and swimming around to me, and evidently does to the perch too, am I mistaken or are they not EATING THE STUPID THING????!!!!!
HITTIN THE COUGH SYRUP AGAIN STEVE???
btw, I really liked your use of red.
Guest
Posted 4/10/2012 10:26 AM (#552148 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
iajustin, you can believe what you want to, no skin of my back.
The latest, greatest example is the DBL 10. It is not as effective as it was when it 1st came out. Period.
More people throw them now then ever before in may area, and they are catching less and less fish, and producing less follows.
They are not the go to bait they once were. To me it doesn't matter why, you can argue about fish "learning" behaviors one way the other till your blue in the face.
The main thing is to learn what is working and why on particular lakes and use it. Or another way to look at it is learn what isn't working and don't use it.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:36 AM (#552150 - in reply to #552142) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
iajustin - 4/10/2012 10:00 AM
Guest - 4/10/2012 7:50 AM
Hot lures do come and go. That's easily seen by guys who have fished a lot of years.
JS
Please give examples. When was a spinnerbait "hot" and then the fish decide to quit eating it? A 10" Jake is less effective now than when it was introduced or less people use them less now? Was a rumbler any better than I topraider - I would argue not, in fact I think the topraider is a better bait always has been always will be....and do you really believe a fish that ate a rumbler on lotw would have rejected a topraider? Not me.
Well Skarie, that about says it, we need to get rid of our rumblers, and just go topraiders. Or maybe somebody else needs more experience, and to give more thought to their posts before coming up with such declaratives?
Posted 4/10/2012 10:37 AM (#552151 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
FSF,
You are presenting my points with the same information offered in a slightly different way. Muskies have no idea what a lure is. And they don't care. The rest has to do with conditioning or lack thereof, and is based upon the exposure to the footprint. They will, for all intents and purposes, eat anything that moves. How consistently and the 'whys' of that issue is what's being discussed here. But...you already knew that.
The speed (and resulting amazing volume transmission) of those pressure waves underwater has a HUGE amount to do with the understanding of how any fish locates and either makes the move toward, or ignores food or artificial lures.
The 'told you' goes back a few years.
I don't have any cough syrup here. I did have two big cups of coffee though.
Boy, you are dating yourself, cough syrup hasn't been available with codeine in it OTC for decades.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:51 AM (#552153 - in reply to #552148) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
JS - Is it possible that other conditions besides the lure are making it more difficult to catch these fish in your area? What were your overall catch rates? the same on these lakes last year as compared to four-five years ago? - or has the fishing just become "tougher"? All I know is I spent 7 days during the summer (two trips) in MN last year. 6 of the 7 fish over 49" that were caught, were on 10's. (the other was caught on double 8's) Topwater, dawgs, spinnerbaits, cranks all caught at least one fish - but not the size or even numbers. I know its a small sample - I will say a dozen boats hitting a spot in front of you, throwing any lure...generally does nothing to improve "the mood" of fish. Muskies are negative more often than not. And I think there are many factors that contribute to "tougher" fishing but a fish remembering what lure it ate last year is not one of them - IMO.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:56 AM (#552154 - in reply to #552150) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Well Skarie, that about says it, we need to get rid of our rumblers, and just go topraiders. Or maybe somebody else needs more experience, and to give more thought to their posts before coming up with such declaratives?
;)
Plenty of experience here - willing to test your BST anytime.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:59 AM (#552156 - in reply to #552151) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
And actually, a fish's lateral line system is very sophisticated--much more so than I had recalled from Ichthyology many years ago.
I pulled out my copy of The Physiology of Fishes over the weekend, and read about the lateral line system. There are specialized neuromasts for both velocity and acceleration. But the cool thing is that they are located in slightly different positions on the lateral line--and more pelagic fish apparently tend to have a different ratio of canal (acceleration) to superficial (velocity) neuromasts, apparently even in the same species, although this was less than clear to me. But it was pretty clear to me from reading that reference, that a predator's lateral line system IS indeed specialized for the types of prey it hunts.
For instance, one could hypothesize that the reason that the lateral line system in a pelagic fish has a greater ability to detect acceleration, is because that fish spends more time chasing down prey in schools in open water (like a bait ball). If you've ever watched a YouTube video on predation of fish in a bait ball, you'll see how these small prey fish are ALWAYS changing something. Put another way, they are constantly changing their speed and/or direction, and hence they are constantly accelerating...either in a positive or a negative fashion. So a successful predatory fish would obviously need to adapt to such behavior, if it were to be able to feed on these prey fish.
Translating this to the "science" of fishing musky, I would argue that in fact the choice of lure might well have something to do with provoking a strike--but it seems more likely to me that the angler using that lure has much more to do with it than the lure itself. (I know FSF, there I go "speculating" again...) But consider this: Just because the two guys in the boat with me are having success with a Bull Dawg, doesn't mean I will too--even if I use one of their 'Dawgs. Lures are just tools, and like any tool, it's usually the craftsman that determines how well the job turns out. Subtle nuances in how the lure is presented often make a significant difference in whether or not a strike is triggered...especially when the bite is tough.
TB
Edited by tcbetka 4/10/2012 11:10 AM
Guest
Posted 4/10/2012 11:26 AM (#552161 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Justin it isn't "my" BST.
It's a theory shared among anlgers I know that have much more experience than myself, or you and I put together.
I never said you can't catch a fish on DBL 10's anymore, but if you were one of the first guys using it years ago you know what I mean.
Posted 4/10/2012 11:33 AM (#552163 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 8821
I'll say it again. Muskies are dumb. If they weren't, we'd never catch them, and certainly not more than once. Biologically, their only purpose is to breed once a year, eat, and survive to breed again next year. Beyond the first few years when they have to avoid being eaten by other fish, predator avoidance really isn't a part of their day to day life. Eagles and bears may get a few, but how often does that happen? The spawn lasts for a few weeks at best. That leaves the other 50 weeks a year, when their only function is to eat. That's it. Eat. Whatever they can catch. If exposed to a lure enough times, and often enough, that provides no food reward, it's not a stretch to think that they might become conditioned to ignore it, because it's not food. But that all goes out the window when it's time to eat.
We give them WAY too much credit. A few years back, I spent four hours camped out over a wreck in the gulf with a dozen other guys, all fishing various forms of real food - squid, cut bait, shrimp, pinfish... I yelled to the captain about hour 2 and said "Hey cap, we gonna move or what?" He laughed and said "if you saw my graph, you'd want to stay here for the whole 3 days!!" Four hours of nothing. The somebody caught a fish. Then someone else. Within 10 minutes, everybody on the boat was hauling in fish on every kind of bait, as fast as they could reel them in, re-bait, and get a line in the water. And then they stopped, just as quickly as they started. When nature tells them it's time to eat, they're gonna eat. If you're out there, with a lure in front of them, when nature tells them it's time to eat? Doesn't much matter what lure it is, or what color it is. Neutral fish? Different story. Those you have to convert. Lure selection plays a part. But what you do with the lure is far more important. I have a friend who catches a ton of fish on Burts. I have another who catches a lot of fish on reef hawgs. There's a guy here who can put 4 fish in the boat on gliders in a day when nobody else is catching anything, not even on live bait. I can't catch a fish on a Suick. Find the lures that work for you. Simple.
Posted 4/10/2012 12:26 PM (#552186 - in reply to #552151) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
sworrall - 4/10/2012 10:37 AM
FSF, You are presenting my points with the same information offered in a slightly different way.
NO Steve, I'm not saying things like this!
' ON ARTIFICIAL BAITS RESEMBLING THINGS THEY EAT EVERY DAY
SWORRALL SAYS, "No, they don't. They are the wrong color, shape,don't behave at all like the real thing, don't swim or sound like the real thing"
IT GETS SO CONFUSING WITH YOU, NOW I HAVE TO ASK AGAIN ARE MUSKIES STUPID, OR ARE THEY CAPABLE OF MAKING ALL THE ABOVE DISCRIMINATIONS YOU CLAIM THEY ARE??? THEY CAN ONLY BE HARDWIRED FOR SO MUCH REACTIVITY, AND RESPONSE, THERE HAS TO BE SOME VERY PLASTIC BEHAVIOUR ALLOWED IN THEIR HARDWIRING TO ALLOW THEM TO ADAPT TO THE CHANGING AND VARIOUS FOOD ITEMS WHICH MAY PRESENT THEMSELVES OVER TIME. JUDGING FROM WHAT YOU ARE SAYING HERE, ONCE THEY ARE BORN, OR IDENTIFY ONE FOOD ITEM, THAT WOULD BE IT FOREVER MORE, DANG, NO MORE SMORGASBOARD.
Boy, you are dating yourself, cough syrup hasn't been available with codeine in it OTC for decades.
I FORGET, YOU HAVE NO ACCESS TO THE GOOD STUFF, DO YOU...;)
Posted 4/10/2012 12:49 PM (#552197 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 1296
Location: Hayward, Wisconsin
A couple of pages back, sworrall wrote: "Anglers have attempted to explain how tough it is to catch muskies for years by creating a far to complicated picture of their behavior, when it's easier to explain by simple numbers. If there were as many muskies as there is Pike or Bluegills in any body of water, I believe you'd catch them as easily as pike or bluegills."
Based on a personal experience that most will never have, I have to "almost" agree with Steve. Although muskies are still muskies and I don't believe can be caught like bluegills (pike maybe), we did catch 40 in about 8 hours of fishing one day in a lake that contained mostly muskies! Lots of fish...lots caught...simple. OR is it? The lake had been closed and hadn't been fished for 50 years, hence no pressure/conditioning. Since it was later reopened to fishing, catch rates have plummeted and the lake is more "normal" nowadays. Make up your own mind about this discussion. Y'all might be right or y'all might be wrong...OR?
One other thing I would like to comment on and that is regarding fish leaving an area after being angler caught and not returning (at least that season). This I experienced first hand while doing tracking work on Eagle Lake in NW Ontario in 1986. Sample size was very small, but ALL fish with transmitters that were either caught by angling initially or recaptured by lure after having a transmitter placed in them on this lake exhibited this response during the study period.
Posted 4/10/2012 1:08 PM (#552208 - in reply to #552197) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
IT GETS SO CONFUSING WITH YOU, NOW I HAVE TO ASK AGAIN ARE MUSKIES STUPID, OR ARE THEY CAPABLE OF MAKING ALL THE ABOVE DISCRIMINATIONS YOU CLAIM THEY ARE??
I'm saying they don't, silly. Obvious as the nose on your digital face.
Posted 4/10/2012 2:23 PM (#552230 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 4343
Location: Smith Creek
"One other thing I would like to comment on and that is regarding fish leaving an area after being angler caught and not returning (at least that season). This I experienced first hand while doing tracking work on Eagle Lake in NW Ontario in 1986. Sample size was very small, but ALL fish with transmitters that were either caught by angling initially or recaptured by lure after having a transmitter placed in them on this lake exhibited this response during the study period"
The two largest fish I've caught in Wisconsin were seen or caught in the same spot within weeks after being caught.
Smaller water and fewer ambush spots to choose from than Eagle but one was on the Turtle Flambeau and ate the exact same lure in the exact same spot a few weeks apart. The other was from a 200 acre lake so the fish probably didn't have much choice as to where it hung out after being caught.
Posted 4/10/2012 2:37 PM (#552234 - in reply to #552197) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2361
Larry Ramsell - 4/10/2012 12:49 PM
Although muskies are still muskies and I don't believe can be caught like bluegills (pike maybe), we did catch 40 in about 8 hours of fishing one day in a lake that contained mostly muskies! Lots of fish...lots caught...simple. OR is it? The lake had been closed and hadn't been fished for 50 years, hence no pressure/conditioning. Since it was later reopened to fishing, catch rates have plummeted and the lake is more "normal" nowadays. Make up your own mind about this discussion. Y'all might be right or y'all might be wrong...OR?
After reading about the personal experiences of iajustin, the above scenario is impossible. Lures could not be LESS effective. They maintain their viability over time and use. Musta been a death loss thing. Did you gut hook a bunch that day Larry?
Posted 4/10/2012 2:40 PM (#552236 - in reply to #552234) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
When did I ever say pressure on a lake does not make fishing "tougher" . Mr smart old man - If i have a two acre pond and go catch 500 bass that was never fished - it will be hard to catch 500 bass the next day, and probably impossible the third.....and it has nothing to do with the lure you are throwing. Seriously get a clue
Edited by IAJustin 4/10/2012 2:46 PM
Guest
Posted 4/10/2012 3:06 PM (#552246 - in reply to #551042) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
I would ask the question what makes a lake show signs of what we call "pressure", i.e. spookier fish, less follows, fish not going into figure 8's as much as they used to, slower catch unless conditions are prime etc.
Is it that fish are getting conditioned to not hitting lures, or that they get "scared" of boat noise such as trolling motors, or that they take up new spots that we don't fish, etc.
Each lake may have a different answer. I still think that fish change behavior due to outsite influence, whether you attribute that to "smarts" or just instinct, they do change.
Recognizing these changes will make you a better fishermen.
JS
Dirt Esox unplugged
Posted 4/10/2012 5:28 PM (#552285 - in reply to #552084) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
IAJustin - 4/9/2012 11:38 PM
i wish new lures did cause this "feeding frenzy" firstsixfeet speaks of... But as I've mentioned already earlier - I unfortunately get to fish a "fish-bowl" ,450 acres, 90% of my season, I have a thousand muskie lures...and every year I try to find something they just wont be able to resist. Doesn't work. The only two lures that have made any difference on this "fish bowl" the last 10 years have been the weagle and double 10's.....why? well a weagle does a better job of imitating a wounded shad than a giant jackpot - these fish see thousands of weagles and they keeping eating them, when the water temps/ conditions are right......I've caught the same fish within the same week on 10's, 10's are a seasonal lure on the lake as well. They eat these two lures because they trick fish better and they continue to do so year after year......again, they eat lures that appeal to them, lures that imitate the forage, something of the size they want to chase, something that simulates there lateral line, something moving really slow, something moving really fast...... I've never had a lure go cold, when conditions are right good "lures" ..."trick" fish. I've taken a dozen individuals on this lake - most throw a lure I don't or wouldn't (i throw 5 baits on this lake) - I cant find any five that are better - over 1000's of hrs.
They don't eat Weagles on Pleasant Creek like they did the first season they saw them, that I have first hand knowledge of. Not buying it.
Posted 4/10/2012 5:47 PM (#552289 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Sure they do! name a more productive bait when the water is 59-63 and the shad are spawning in the shallows? And the same fish will eat them year after year. Lots more pressure on the little puddle than 04!!!! other factors have made the fish "seem" tougher to catch...but get the conditions right weagle is still one of the few bait they wont follow and refuse.
2010 a tournament was won when conditions were right - I think a dozen fish were caught that day, at least 80% ate a weagle other 20% ate a jackpot...many other lures were tried...the fish would ONLY eat WTD that day. But why?.. they have seen the bait a hundred times.
Posted 4/10/2012 7:03 PM (#552306 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
just a side note to my post above...So that Tourney was on a Sunday, I often have family obligations on Sundays, any way received a hot tip, that a large fish was haunting a couple of contestants - she was big but she would only follow. So Monday after work I don't fish the spot until "primetime" - what should I throw? Some would say not WTD she just saw that bait a dozen times the day before...and she followed half-a-dozen times but wouldn't eat. No hesitation on my part, when she wanted to eat I knew she would eat a Weagle conditions were - right, only took one cast...she rocketed from the depths and was air-born with the weagle in her mouth completely clearing the water it seemed like seconds before she fell out of the sky - it looked like Shamu at Sea world..what a sight - coolest topwater strike I've ever seen, engrained in my mind forever. She was "conditioned" to not eat on Sunday - next day she was ready.
Posted 4/10/2012 10:50 PM (#552356 - in reply to #552306) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 457
Location: Minneconia
IAJustin - 4/10/2012 7:03 PM
just a side note to my post above...So that Tourney was on a Sunday, I often have family obligations on Sundays, any way received a hot tip, that a large fish was haunting a couple of contestants - she was big but she would only follow. So Monday after work I don't fish the spot until "primetime" - what should I throw? Some would say not WTD she just saw that bait a dozen times the day before...and she followed half-a-dozen times but wouldn't eat. No hesitation on my part, when she wanted to eat I knew she would eat a Weagle conditions were - right, only took one cast...she rocketed from the depths and was air-born with the weagle in her mouth completely clearing the water it seemed like seconds before she fell out of the sky - it looked like Shamu at Sea world..what a sight - coolest topwater strike I've ever seen, engrained in my mind forever. She was "conditioned" to not eat on Sunday - next day she was ready.
That example is all well and good guy, but I know from first hand experience and many days spent over a few years on that water that they don't eat Weagles for as long a period of time and with the frequency they did in 2004. It wasn't a 4 degree temp window it was more like 20 that year...definitely seemed like some sort of conditioning curve to me. Of course you can still catch them with the same baits as your example states, just tougher and less frequently.
Posted 4/11/2012 8:41 AM (#552400 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 108
In my opinion, to believe a fish can get conditioned to fishing pressure... but then think they cannot get conditioned to a lure is proposterous! I simply cannot understand that logic.
Survival is the strongest instinct in any living organism. Fish are stupid!! We tend to "humanize" them so we can rationalize things in our minds how things work in our environment. Fish don't live in our environment... and it doesn't exist in theirs...we are as alien to fish and aliens are to us. Fish react to stimuli in thier environment and that is all they do...they don't think...they don't plan ahead...all they do is react to their environment...period. Fish eat when their bodies tell them to eat...if they think it is food...they will eat it. If they think it is food that is bad for them...maybe not. A fish doesn't know what a lure is and they never will...all they can determine is if they should eat it or not...that's it.
We as humans have a autonomic response mechanism too that protects us from ingesting bad things for us...ever drink wasy too much tequila...the next time you smell it you get sick from the smell...it's called pyscosomatic illness...nothing made you actually ill as you didn't ingest any the second time...but that smell sent a trigger to your brain telling you last time you drank this it didn't work out so well and do not do it again.
If a fish thinks its food and it's body is telling it to eat guess what? Now let's start talking about "trigger"!
Posted 4/11/2012 9:38 AM (#552416 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
Brett agree 100% - The biggest thing with "pressure" - IMO , is that if someone hit your favorite 5 spots on the lake before you arrive and caught a fish off each one of those spots - it may decrease your catch.
Posted 4/11/2012 2:36 PM (#552501 - in reply to #552496) Subject: RE: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
Nice article, and some nice tips. I liked to use "vintage" lures, like those from the 80s and 90s. But the tips in the list at the end there, certainly make sense.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. If it is broke, then try something else.
Posted 4/11/2012 4:46 PM (#552534 - in reply to #552502) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: 31
That article is awesome, nice work posting that!!! I don't think there's any denying that fish get conditioned now.The article talked about watching the bass anglers fishing the same stretch with basically the same lures all day long. From a muskie perspective we've all probably witnessed the same thing firsthand.
Most of us can remember our first trip to Canada, beautiful scenery, big unconditioned fish… right?
Here's my story; I spent five consecutive weeks camping and fishing on Lake of the Woods in the summer of 1989. My routine was to find an area that had fish, set up my tent, and hit it hard at first light, then return to my camp for a late breakfast, take a nap and figure out what I wanted to do with the rest of the day.
When I had my tent pitched in Quandary Bay, it was like watching a McDonald's drive through sometimes because I suspect someone at Big Narrows was handing out marked maps, if you know the bay it has very distinct and prominent spot, and a couple weed beds. On clam days I could hear the boats coming while I ate breakfast. They would all pretty much set up in the same spots, fish basically the same baits in the same manner, it was a regular muskie merry-go-round.
I didn't camp in that same bay for five weeks, but whenever I did, I could see the new crews come in throwing Eagletails for the first few days, then you'd typically see them switching over to some kind of jerk bait midweek, and then you could see them get serious knowing the trip was almost over. Keep in mind that this was Lake of the Woods in 1989… I wasn't a very good fisherman back then (even though I thought I was), but watching that scenario unfold certainly helps to get me “unconditioned”.
Posted 4/11/2012 5:12 PM (#552540 - in reply to #551276) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 2058
IAJustin - 4/6/2012 11:23 AM
Exactly - And why long term I believe there is almost no lure conditioning. .
I believe a fish can be conditioned short term, and for sure will show conditioning in a controlled environment. It's been proven many times by scientists - what hasn't been proven is if you catch a fish on a particular lure one year will it eat the same lure the next year? That requires long term memory. Maybe a good poll question?
Posted 4/11/2012 7:29 PM (#552561 - in reply to #551042) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Posts: 32920
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin
“Several studies make it clear that catch rates go down as pressure goes up, even when fish density is the same. That big picture is well documented,” he says. “Whether those fish become accustomed to a single lure—and if so, how long they’ll avoid it—we don’t have any information on that. Does switching to the latest thing increase the success? It has yet to be studied.”
What's important here is there is absolutely no evidence fish 'avoid' a lure. If they are not eating and do not eat the lure, it is no more the fish 'avoiding' the lure than 'avoiding' baitfish in the area. Some folks think I don't believe fish can be conditioned. I've tried really hard in this discussion to convince every one they CAN be and are. Lots of repeated similar/same stimuli = reduced response which requires a heightened activity level OR heightened stimulus OR a combination of both to get the response we want.
Posted 4/11/2012 7:35 PM (#552565 - in reply to #552561) Subject: Re: Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
Location: Green Bay, WI
I took that statement to mean that neutral fish simply weren't provoked into hitting a lure. That is my argument actually--the determining factor as to whether or not inactive or "neutral" fish might be turned, is the angler...and not necessarily the choice of the lure. When the angler in the camera boat started burning his lure through the water after many anglers were not doing so, an (apparently) neutral fish was provoked into striking. Admittedly, there may have been other reasons for this (the fish wasn't there before?), but it certainly could have been the increased retrieval speed.
Fish Conditioning or Fish Smarts
