|
|
Posts: 15
| just curious if any of you know why there is such a trend towards smaller baits in the spring? personally, i use the summer arsenal from the start and dont down size unless the main forage in the lake is small.
some will argue that because the water is cold and fish are less active we should be using small baits...
why does that not hold true in the fall then?
i will leave it at that and look forward to hearing any other reasons...
|
|
| |
|
| On Eagle, the baits I throw all year are small...I throw Big Joes, Mag Dawgs, and HUGE bucktails early...am I right? I'm not sure!!
Anyway, I think the idea is metabolism...they haven't eaten for some time n the spring!! Their tummies are small, and they don't want to gorge themselves right now.
The fall is a different story...it is cold, but they want something BIG...late fall, metabolism has slowed dwn, and I think your theory also holds true.
Did I just say anything worthwhile?
Sorry for rambling!!
Donnie  |
|
| |
|
| donnie, good start. i think this could be a good conversation.
i just don't understand that thought process however. if metabolism has a correlation of 1 with water temperatures...why would there be any difference in the fall vs. spring. if anything i think because the waters are cooling so fast in fall, they would be more reluctant to eat anything big. however in the spring, water temps are moving in the other direction (getting warmer) which to me would suggest they are starting to get hungry...and ready to eat.
is the spring small bait theory a myth?
have we just heard it over and over...and now must people are throwing small baits? more fish are caught on them becasue MORE people are throwing them?
I am with you Donnie...Mags, normal size cranks, and double 10's are all i have been throwing.
good start!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1243
Location: Musky Tackle Online, MN | I'm also of the mentality that I use big baits right from the get go.
Trying to rationalize the idea of why small in the spring...maybe it's along the same lines as walleye fishing. The size of the baitfish they're chasing gets bigger as the season goes on. Young of the year perch early, for example. And by the end of the year they've grown a few inches and you no longer have the tiny baitfish that they were targeting early in the year.
Personally, I don't think there's a direct correlation when it comes to muskies. They aren't going after the smallest prey in the system at anytime. If they prefer a 10" meal, they can get that in the spring or the fall. I figure I'm targeting a big fish that can eat a big meal. A 10" lure is nothing for the size of fish I want to catch. So I don't see a need to be throwing the small stuff when thinking along those lines.
Aaron
Edited by AWH 5/11/2007 1:46 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| I believe it's more about matching the lure size to the average size of available forage. Match the hatch so to speak. I also think that small baits lend themselves better to slower presentations, which would be "best choice presentation" for low metabolism rates (cold water) and post spawn lethargy.
One thing I know for sure -- the bait you throw most often will get eaten most often.
Well, unless its a glider |
|
| |
|
Posts: 691
Location: nationwide | I thought we threw smaller lures in the spring because we are out of shape and throwing the bigger lures wears us out too fast . .. just kidding. I think it goes with the match the hatch theory which has been written about above. After fishing for many years I do not subscribe to this theory as a general rule. Under a cold front I will down size but for a regular opener with warm weather I am not afraid to throw large lures, especially large topwater lures. And after following this for several years I am almost convinced I do better by throwing the regular sized to large lures from the start of my season, Memorial Day weekend. If my season started earlier in May I might consider going smaller but not by much.
Corey Meyer |
|
| |
|
| addict,
what is available forage? it sounds good but what is it? i think there is "choice" forage...cisco or other rough fish...
perch, bluegill...and whatever else there may be, in lakes with a cisco/shad/sucker/redhorse population, i dont see them being much a part of the muskies diet.
i think water temp dictates how lethargic fish are...
is anyone really sure what spawn does to a fish? i know one thing, through experience, the big girls like to get their feed bag on after they roll around in the spawning areas for a while.
from the posts so far...it seems to me that this may be one of those "old man's" tales...from the old school.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 8781
| John
Maybe "available" isn't a good word... Everything in the lake is "available". They're eating what's NEARBY. Smaller baits during the post spawn period is a way to try to match the forage that's most abundant near the spawning areas.
I agree about water temp and metabolsim, that's been proven. That's the nature of a cold blooded animal. But there's more to it than that -- same water temps in the fall, November 8, where are you fishing and why? The difference between Spring and fall is in the fall the muskies are where they are to eat. In the spring, they are where they are for a whole other reason.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 3240
Location: Racine, Wi | I think they actually eat both in the spring and the fall. As long as you are throwing the baits in an area where the fish are, you will get bit. I've gotten some big fish in spring on husky jerks, but also fishing mag dawgs at night.
I like muskymeyers theory, gotta work to get in shape. 
I've noticed however that on clear calm days, not necessarily after a cold front, I've done better on smaller baits, but on windy days the bigger baits shine. My guess is that the bigger bait stands out better in the chop and wind and low light conditions created, where as a smaller bait sometimes forces you to bring out the lighter gear thus minimizing the extras that the fish can see.
So perhaps it's a visibility connection verses a water temp connection. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 723
| I know one thing, when I spawn, I get pretty exhausted, thus, I need to re-fuel as soon as possible, I may be a little dis-oriented, maybe sluggish , but, I will take the first 32oz prime rib that comes my way.....
I think it just depends on water temps, if they are going, they will go on anything you throw in front of them. If they aren't , well, you may have to downsize, upsize, slow down, or speed up. one of those is going to work eventually. hehe
some places we fish big baits work in the spring, and small baits work in the fall..... go figure.
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 742
Location: Grand Rapids MN | I don't know for sure either but thought I wanted to throw an idea out there.
In the fall they want to store up energy throughout the winter, especially females because they need that to develop eggs for spring spawn throughout the season. That's why they prefer fatty/oily fish like cyscos, white fish, etc.. Eating a big meal means more calories and expending less energy.
For spring time, here's a theory that just came to mind. Maybe in the 'Old Days' they were more limited in tackle and the smaller items (such as crankbaits) fit the shallow water presentation better. Their big lures probably had large dive lips and didn't work well. I know they still used larger jerkbaits such as 10" suicks/bobbies but those worked well in shallow water. So that smaller bait mentality carried on throughout the years.
Maybe!?!?
Edited by Targa01 5/11/2007 3:04 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 93
Location: Minneapolis, MN | This spring's PMTT on the Fox Chain in IL was won by fellas throwing small -- even bass-sized baits -- in 2-3 feet of water and the connecting channels between lakes.
Saps like me were out throwing fat muskie baits over deep drops and didn't have much luck.
One example to munch on. |
|
| |
|
| This may have been said before but I thought that early in the year most of the food is going to be big. There are not many young of the year around since all the feed is getting to be about one year old. I don't understand how we can say the fish want to eat smaller lures because they mimic the available bait fish. I am not sure why they want a slower moving bait either. Both sound like BSTs to me. I find that the same lures tend to work early or late in the year if you are fishing good spots with good lures there is a good chance you will catch fish. |
|
| |
|
Location: Des Moines IA | stinger - 5/11/2007 4:05 PM
This spring's PMTT on the Fox Chain in IL was won by fellas throwing small -- even bass-sized baits -- in 2-3 feet of water and the connecting channels between lakes.
The Fox is notorious for a small bait bite. Just like Pewaukee. My limited experience shows a lake by lake preference, more than a seasonal preference.
Edited by MuskieMike 5/11/2007 5:52 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 107
Location: milwaukee | This question came up during a class at last years CCMI Muskie School, and was answered the same way by the three very accomplished anglers that were presenting the class (at least one of which is a regular poster here).
The answer was that has little to do with size of baitfish, metabolism, etc., and much more to do with the location where you are generally throwing that small bait at that time of the year: up shallow, sometimes right up to shore, over new weed growth (aka 'slop'), where the water is warmest. It's just easier to work small baits in those areas than a 10" Jake.
For me that was a reinforcement of the "lures are tools" lesson. Just wish I had more time to go out and practice it...:( |
|
| |
|
| Never bought into the 'spring means small bait' idea. What did last year's bait do...grow an extra two inches then jump onto shore?! Lake's got bait of all sizes. On bigger water (Georgian bay, LOTW, Nipsissing etc) there are 3 inch perch by the millions and seven inch perch by the millions. Two pounds lake trout and twelve pound lake trout. The bait that winds up in the wrong place at the wrong time is the popluar one as far as a muskie's concerned, I think. Seen and caught lots of pike in May and April with 13' walleyes in their mouths, while using five to seven inch minnowbaits or little jigs. In the shad lakes or panfish lakes, I could see a certain size being dominant though, for sure. Opportunistic feeders, five inch minnow makes a mistake it'd probably get eatten as readily as a ten inch one. I like Corey's idea about warming up with the smaller lures as being easier on the body! Big water with big fish usually means a wide range of eating opportunities. I like the idea about what's abundant at given times/windows too, smelts run, fish pig out on those. Herring or trout spawn, they become the target. Lots of good ideas mentioned so far, and a question with no real answer we can prove. Pike definitely don't take the winters off when it comes to eating, neither do lakers, panfish or walleye. Best bite all year in some areas for those critters. I don't even know what 'small' really means to a fish. A ten inch Jake's a joke to a thirty inch pike, scary to think what a forty pound muskie would condiser too big. Right after turnover, baits from 8 to 10 inches have been the best for me. Nothing wrong with having to pick up a coupla new baits! |
|
| |
|
Posts: 32886
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | I use lures that match the total presentation I'm shooting for. if the fish are skittish and shallow, I'll use smaller baits that don't blast into the bottom on impact with the water. I like the lures to behave the way I need them to to execute my current technique. If season was open up here today, I'd have been throwing 1/4 ounce jigs with a 4" baby creature sight fishing muskies on the sand. Big baits make too much commotion, and would spook the majority of the fish we saw today. ( We were fishing panfish, mostly, but did tangle with a bunch of Bass)
I don't think the small lure/spring/match the hatch thing has much merit; throw what matches your total presentation and if it ends up in front of a Muskie, there's a chance she'll eat the thing no matter the size of the bait. The whole concept has nothing at all to do with forage.
Stinger mentioned a technique that won a recent tourney; perfect example.
Depth control/speed control/contrast matching the lure to the presentation. Couple of 'old guys' with a last name that ends in Lindner were pushing that concept way back when...
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | I like what Steve said.... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 929
Location: Rhinelander. | I think the only time to downsize is when fishing the shallows and cold fronts. From my experience I seldom see big bait fish up in shallow water. I'm talking daytime fishing and 4 feet of water or less. So in that shallow of water I use small baits. I also believe that the big splash from large baits in shallow water may spook the fish. I prefer soft landing baits. Look at what has won the w.m.t. on north twin the last few years, very small in shallow water.
Cold fronts just seem to slow them down and I have better luck with smaller baits it seems. Maybe if we all threw bigger baits all the time we'd find out it makes no difference. Confidence baits I call them and if you have that p.m.a. your more likely to have more success.
I don't buy into into this match the hatch thinking (key word hatch). There are fish swimming in the lake of all sizes at all times of year. Muskies are not laying there waiting for a certain size bait fish to present itself to them. They will strike when they want to and at whatever they want to. I sometimes think we as anglers out think ourselves and give muskies way to my credit. They can't really out think you as they just have certain needs (preferences) and react to them. Figure out there needs and behavior and you'll find them. If your lucky enough to run a bait by one and get a reation you'll get one. Thats about the way it works as I see it and thats why they call it fishing and not catching.
Pfeiff
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 2112
Location: The Sportsman, home, or out on the water | Early, in my opinion, is about putting it on their nose. low and slow. huge, tiny, whatever.
Some of my walleye friends are taking huge amounts of walleyes on number 18 rapalas, trolled painfully slow, and taking musky as well. Had a discussion with an aquiantence last night who was trying to duplicate The Sportsman Trifecta. Told him troll slower (he was doubling the speed, and coming up snakeyes). We did big and small, tight wiggle and violent wiggle, but it had to run 1.0-1.5 mph and within one foot of the bottom. negative= on the nose. positive = anyones guess.
Edited by muskynightmare 5/14/2007 12:00 AM
|
|
| |
