|
|
| Doc how come you have an EX? I thought you did not muskie fish until recently.You know thats a given thing in muskie fishing.Guess you just climb the ladder.You are up for a promotion my friend.Welcome to the realm!
I finaly found one that understood my intimate relationship with FISH!
The only thing she complains about is when I tucked them into bed at nite.
marc |
|
| |
|
| Response to muskiekid regarding distribution of large muskies in lakes.
Results from the musky tracking study on Pewaukee Lake indicate that muskies ranging in size from 28" to 48" established home range areas that did not include the deep parts of the lake. These home ranges were established in June and maintained through most of September. As water temps dropped the fish spread out over a wider range during October, November, December and again in early spring. Once again there were some fish in the 40-43" size range that did not use deep water during this free ranging part of the year. Please understand that there are large muskies in Pewaukee Lake that use the deep section of the lake also. Our tracking data simply shows that big muskies can spend most of their time in relatively shallow parts of the lake. I am not aware of any tracking study that has been able to evaluate feeding distribution vs post-feeding distribution. If any of you are aware of such a study let me know. I can say that muskies were often near the top of the water column as we approached the during tracking and headed for the bottom as the boat came within roughly 100 yds.
A study done in 1988 by T. Richard Stronks on Lake Scugog, Ontario showed muskies spending a high percentage of their time in open water when water temps were less than 40 degrees, moderate percentage between 40 and 50 degrees and more time in the shallows at water temps between 50 and 70 degrees.
|
|
| |
|
| I, for one, would like to thank Bob for commenting here at MuskieFirst. Hopefully, he will return to keep us on the straight and narrow from time to time[;)] .
I noticed his comments merely stated observations he has made or knows of in the field with no personal interpretations. We all interpret from our experiences in an effort to categorize the musky...I think too often anthropomorhpizing the fish. As I look at his comments many more questions arise and I think that is how these studies go....one study indicates more studies and so on and so forth. We need more real studies!!!!
Interesting comment about what many of us have been talking about....prefeeding vs. postfeeding location (I like how he boiled it down to just that)--no known studies. Darn it. Maybe Bob could comment from his general knowledge of fish physiology whether musky might seek warmer water to digest a meal? I realize you would have to define "warm", etc. but do you have any educated opinions that way Bob?
Thanks,
BrianW[:bigsmile:] |
|
| |
|
| Mr Anderson,did these fish use all parts of structure and water column during october and november?
Did you notice a significant gathering of fish
in deeper water(15 to 25) in accordance to bait?
Did you find they suspended during this cold water period more,or just consistently on the move?
Do you think river fish versus lake fish behave and use different elements?
You mentioned the fish spooked as the boat got near,do you think it is condioning towards the negativity of the boat?
How would you explain,agressive behavior in taking baits next to the boat?
take care
marc |
|
| |
|
| Doc,re read the article to refresh my memory betwen discussions and articles.The theory behind shallow water and deep water was based upon tracking the fish's movements and angling for certain individuals.
There is no study done on the feeding and digestion theory.
In the articles it mentioned that it may have something to do with pike and muskie coexistence.These fish where on the move consistently,20 big fish in excess of 30 lbs were fitted with transmiters.Sunny days they were in weeds,cloudy days deep.Changing weather they were on the move.
One thing also,these fish were equated to be riverine muskies.
The study consisted of
1) location spawning areas were muskie and pike coexist
2)Spawning strategies between both species.
3)Characteristics of spawning grounds
4)Survival of the eggs and yoy
5)Changes in ovaries
6)Describing feeding behavior before and after spawning
7)Confirmation of fractional spawning (spawn twice)
Mr Anderson,I noticed upon reading an article on an anglers view to the telemetry study.
It mentionions low oxygen content deep,do you think that this may be a cause for fish not utilising deep water sanctuaries?
marc
|
|
| |
|
| Still waiting for some anwsers,I assume mr Anderson is busy.
No else has noticed what their big fish are doing,no one has a theory on individual fish and locations of capture!
I see alot view (834)but not many relate their experiences,why?
Not getting any big ones or not wanting to talk about how?
My understanding of this board is to mutualy exchange experience or time on the water,I assume there are others that invest time,share your experience or thoutghts.
Keep looking!
marc |
|
| |
|
| Been out of town for awhile, sorry.
The idea that muskies 'know' where the warm water is in any body of water and go to it to digest a meal taken out deep does not have any basis in fact at all. There is no supporting literature that has been proven, but a considerable amount of literature that appears to be conjecture. Many excellent points have been made here, including some commentary from the Pewaukee Study, which can be taken as gospel.
Some of the ideas do some anthropomorphising, and that we need to watch out for.
Many years ago, there was a voluntary survey done by several Wisconsin Taxidermists examining stomach content in Muskies turned in for mounting. The prey consisted of perch, bullheads, some panfish, occasional cisco out of the big, two story lakes, and a smattering of other stuff. Almost NO suckers,no walleyes, and no other game species; yet they are widely available in the areas where the survey was conducted.
The average size of the prey was about 6". Most were perch, due to the fact that the fish were caught in Central and Northern Wisconsin. In most cases, find the perch, and you have found the muskies. If there is a cisco AND perch base in the same system, there are two distinct types of fishing to explore, and I am not at all willing to say the muskies do not interchange prey types and feeding arenas now and again as they move across the range they have selected for whatever reason.
I fin tagged over 125 muskies in Pelican Lake during the early and mid 80's, and re-captured many of thoes fish over the years. I noticed a distinct pattern as to seasons in the selected range of the individual fish, but not a deep to feed, shallow to digest pattern. Many of the fish were caught on deep rocks early, then weedlines mid-season, open water in the turnover, and rocks again in the fall. Several of the fish were caught by anglers in my boat multiple times over a multi-year period, until the tags were overgrown and VERY difficult to find.
It is not hard to tell if a Muskie or Pike has a full belly. Most of the fish I caught over the years that were captured on tough days were empty, but if the bite was on, frequently, I would catch a 'full' ski or pike.
This is a subject that needs lots of study. I fully admit I am only submitting personal observations from 30 years of extreme curiousity here, backed up with some research, but my position has always been to challenge ideas that are based on lending human attributes to the fish, so I do. Alot. |
|
| |
|
| Yah, I like what you had to say Steve. You can't ignore 30 years of "observation". The stomach content info is interesting too. I'd go out on a limb and suggest that Suckers and Walleyes were less prevalent because most of the year they live in the lower water column which is a "less than ideal" environment for the muskie. Either that, or the majority of fisherman are fishing for muskies much shallower than where those two forages are living. Perhaps there are muskies eating that forage base... just not getting caught by muskie fisherman?
Sometimes I think "when the bite is on" it is simply a matter of the forage and muskies coincidentally happen to be LOCATED where YOU want to fish.
I think JONO said it on one of these boards and I think it is incredibly important, "Don't fish where you want them to be, fish where the ARE."
The problem is, they don't stay in one place very long.....
jlong |
|
| |
|
| jlong,
Actually, I spend most of my time where the predator/prey interaction is. I try really hard to find out what the Muskies are eating, and stay in reasonable proximity to the food. I find that they are usually in the area, the trick is to get bit, and have her stay stuck.
The lakes where the contents survey was conducted were in Northern Wisconsin, throughout the entire season, and that was when the first day of fishing season was the Muskie opener first Saturday of May.
Just seems the muskies are opportunistic, and the perch, I am sure, way outnumber the sucker/walleye population. Could be the sheer number of perch available numerically bumps up the likelyhood a Ski eats perch more than other prey. I found it interesting that the muskies ate bullheads so often. One would think the fin spines would raise pure nasty in the stomach, but I guess not! |
|
| |
|
| Steve, HOW do you know that you are always where the predator/prey interaction is? Location is the ultimate component for being successful.... and I don't think anyone has found a sure-fire method for pinning down musky location on a day to day basis.
Seasonal movements may be easier to identify... but to nail down daily movements can be tough. Sounds to me like you find the food and wait for the fish to come to you (or you believe they are there the whole time... but just don't show themselves very easily). The good 'ol revolving door a the restaruant technique. Or as Joe Bucher would say, "Catching fish through attrition".
Is that really your approach... or are you simplifying things here?
jlong |
|
| |
|
| Actually, my approach is pretty much as I said. Where the predators find the prey will be a 'zone' where I begin looking on any given day. I am not saying they are always together, but frequently, they are. One must also examine the food chain in that water, many patterns may exist surrounding the different relationships in any lake or river.
If not, the fish are usually in the area of the prey, either deeper on the break or into the cover, a light penetrationand/or traffic thing, I think.
Muskies feed pretty regularly, and need to be in close proximity to the feed so precious energy is not wasted wandering the arena looking for a meal. I feel they are basically opportunistic, and tend to stay reasonably close to the restaraunt. |
|
| |
|
| Steve,
I believe that Muskies do stay very close to their Kitchen in the fall as long as the primary food source stays there as well,they must put on weight before cold waters set in.Usualy there will be a more schooling effect with Bigger Muskies and those primary baitfish schools as well in the fall.But in the summer I beleive they move a lot and sometimes large distances in search of primary baitfish,the food source can be of many types as well.Some Muskies will take up territory of areas in the summer,but within that territory will be a food source or they will roam as well. Capt. Larry |
|
| |
|
| How do you guys know where the "restaruant" is on any given day? If you can't mark bait on your electronics to confirm you hunch... do you have any other tips? You know, look for perch jerkers, feeding birds, visually spot check likely areas, etc?
For a lot of guys it is simply a matter of trial and error or past experience. You know... "well they were here last year at this time, let's start there" approach. Got any tips for the guys that can't get out on a regular basis or fishing new water that might help us/them more consistently find the restaurant? Are there any "flashing neon signs" that one should/could look for to find the "Musky Diner"?
jlong |
|
| |
|
| Thanks for your patience guys. My students are keeping me hopping these days. It is fascinating to read the theories and experiences you all have regarding musky behavior. There are lots of really good ideas for future research projects in your questions.
I will try to provide information on a few items that have been discussed.
Regarding the issue of muskies seeking warm water to digest their food.
I found an interesting section in a book edited by David H. Evans called "The Physiology of Fishes". In this book a paper by Jeffrey R. Hazel called "Thermal Biology" has a section entitled "Behavioral Thermoregulation in Fishes". This section explains that fish regulate their internal body temperatures to within 3-5 degrees C by moving between areas of warm and cold water. A study on largemouth bass by Reynolds in 1976 showed that in a temperature gradient tank the bass regulated their body temperature between 29.3 and 30.9 degrees C. Hazel also reported that preferred body temperatures generally decrease with age. Perhaps the muskies are "basking" simply to maintain their internal body temperature at a stable level after spending time in cool waters searching for food.
Answers to specific questions regarding the Pewaukee Lake tracking study
Did you notice a significant gathering of fish in deeper water(15 to 25) in accordance to bait? We have not seen any evidence of this.
Did you find they suspended during this cold water period more,or just consistently on the move? We have not noted an increase in "basking activity" during cold water periods. Movement increased dramatically.
General behavior questions
Do you think river fish versus lake fish behave and use different elements? I can't say anything about this based on our studies on Pewaukee. From a general fisheries biology perspective, river fish maximize efficiency by finding areas of lowest current next to areas of highest current. That way the food conveyer belt brings the most food past them and they spend the least amount of energy to maintain position. There is no selection for this type of behavior in a lake fish.
You mentioned the fish spooked as the boat got near,do you think it is condioning towards the negativity of the boat? I have no way of knowing why the fish dropped down in the water column when the boat approached. My guess would be that it is a natural predator avoidance response.
How would you explain,agressive behavior in taking baits next to the boat? You lure them to the boat with your bait and they strike at the last possible moment. Their focus is on the bait rather than the boat. (just speculation on my part, no data)
Thanks guys. Have a great week.
|
|
| |
|
| Thanks Dr. Anderson for your insight and your time. This discusion has been a good one filled with lots of learning, and it isnt winter yet..[;)] [:bigsmile:]
We will have to bring you on as a chat room host this winter Dr. Anderson, might be a very interesting chat room session on muskie movements throught a season.
I hope your keeping the girls I radio tagged in check. It seems they have been boat shy because I have yet to here of a radio tagged fish being caught this season. |
|
| |
|
| Thanks Mr Anderson.Your answers are greatly apreciated.
Jason,your graph is your eyes to whats going on down there.
The food chain is my prime target.You mentioned location as being the prime factor.
I beleive like steve food is what you should look for.Is it close to cover or suspended.
Location would be second thing to look at.My reasoning.Some areas have vast amounts of food and produce when food is there but other areas produce when the food has gone.Some things I have noticed about the methods I fish.
I agree shallow fish are esier to target but I beleive it is because you have honed your presentation on sight,visual.
Deep fish are harder to convince,for one thing you have the real deal in food and I suspect they feed when hungry or opertunaty occurs,your lures they are odd in the deep world.A little convincing is needed,triggering them is always a great help.
You are fishing fish that do not hide in cover but followfrom below.When fishing deep most folks and loose confidence.I beleive waiting for the feeding window is whats important.You can fish weeds or deep all day,when the feeding window opens,you have action.Shallow fish you can agravate into hitting.
Interesting views
marc |
|
| |
|
| Marc,
Yup, some great point of views being spoken here. This type of discussion is precious. Wish more would chime in.
Baitfish or the presence of food will always help identify a good location... but as you point out, sometimes certain areas produce better when vacant of forage. Bottom line, you need to be in the right place at the right time. What we observe will most definitely help us make that happen. That is why I asked, "What do you look for?" to help make a decision on where to start. Sure, bait on the graph is nice... but tough to see on a graph cluttered with beautiful cabbage and coontail in the shallows. I feel the graph is more useful over deeper structures that have schooling or suspending baitfish present.
As far as your thoughts on shallow vs. deep fish. That is interesting. Curious what you think can "aggravate" a shallow fish into eating? Also, what do you feel "triggers" the deep girls into eating. My view is that the shallow fish offer the ability to stimulate the second most important sensory system.... the lateral line. It is much easier to get your lure close enough to the fish to initiate a "reaction" strike (you buying this?). Might explain why bucktails are so effective over shallow cover.
I believe the deep fish, however, are more adapt and dependent on their primary sensory input... VISION. I believe this to be true because other than sound (not proven to be an effective attractant) light has the ability to travel the greatest DISTANCE from the lure. You need to get the attention of a deep fish from a greater distance. The further away a fish can SEE your lure... the better chance you have of getting her to eat. The ultimate question is WHAT are the most effective visual cues? Flash? Profile? Speed? Hang Time? I'm not sure, but it looks like you are correct in sayind fish holding deep are more challenging to get to eat. Is it simply a distance factor between us and them... or are there other reasons?
jlong |
|
| |
|
| Hey Jason,
Just to clarify a bit..
I have found that Muskies in the deep zones, say 15 or deeper, ARE usually relating to food and cover. The fact one doesn''t see large schools of baitfish on the graph means little; a Lowrance or Raymarine sonar unit reading 21 feet of water only ''sees'' a 7'' diameter circle; not even the area covered by your boat.
Perch, bullheads, gills, and other above- the-thermocline food sources don''t always travel in big schools, showing as clouds or ''Christmas trees'' on the screen. Many times fishing anchored for perch, we catch 2 or three, and then have to wait for another group to move by.
What is really interesting to me is the movement of the prey seems to match the movements of the predators. If, for instance, the anglers on Rock lake here in Lake Mills are catching panfish suspended over 30''- 16'' down, one can bet a carefully executed trolling pattern will produce some big pike.
I like to then go to the 16'' litoral zone, and fish that hard, as the schools of ''bait'' move in to the area in the evening or move out across it in the morning. Pelican has produced some really nice fish for me this way, and it is a very efective way to catch the fish that are ''deep'' and not related to weedlines or rock breaks at the moment. We can''t troll there.
There is an 18'' line all the way around the edge of the basin line on Pelican, which, unless things get VERY warm, holds perch, bullheads, and other prey in large numbers all summer. If I cannot find shallow fish in the weeds and on the stones, that is the first place I check. I have had some pretty good days there using creatures over the years.
We were doing EXACTLY the same thing at the Smokey''s Tournament on Pewaukee last Saturday, just trolling it instead of casting.[:0] |
|
| |
|
| Steve,
Thanks for sharing your "secret" pattern and technique. I find it interesting, however, that you will check the weeds and stones (shallow stuff) FIRST before you resort to probing the deeper stuff.
Again, I think it comes down to efficiency. We can more effectively fish shallow water (contact them easier) than when they are positioned deeper in the water column. The guys that have mastered determining when and where the big girls will move shallow are the consistent casters producing trophies.
Could this be why Trolling appears to have a higher BIG FISH ratio than casting (I stress the word "appears")? Trollers can more effectively fish the deeper zones... and therefore contact MORE big fish than us handicapped casters "forced" to fish the shallows?
Looks to me like the majority of casters have refined a technique of starting shallow (look for the easy pickin's) and then progressively move deeper. Just curious why that is..... and remember, this conversation started with the shallow water digestion theory. We started this by asking WHY are those fish in the shallows? Now I'm asking why do most fisherman start in the shallows?
jlong |
|
| |
|
| jlong;
You nailed it, it is easier to fish the shallows, and more fun, too, because I have a visual anchor there.
The deep stuff is way easier to fish trolling. Ask any Pro Walleye guy. |
|
| |
|
| Jason Smith, could you post this on muskie first in prospective.It goes in the big fish theory,page 3 a reply to Jason long.My computer kicks off when my fingers take too long.I loose everything.
This is from Marc Thorpe.
Jason Long,
My answer to your question What do you look for? First I look at the weather we will be fishing,sun,cloud,warm cold.That pretty much gives me an incling to where to start.Time of year or season we are fishing comes into play.Bait fish location is problably the first thing I look for on the water,are they up or down,deep or shallow.
You stated it is hard to see bait on a graph,in part you are right when using a graph mode.Fish ID on the other hand is very usefull in shallow water.I know it sounds silly but only the ones who dont use it
correctly are silly cause you can see true fish when you calibrate and take your sensitivity down to 10% of its strength or less.I also use a broadbeam as transducer.I am not technical on the stuff but know
how to use and abuse.If my memory serves me correct the cone angle is 60 degrees.Good in shallow water but bleak in deep water.In deeper water I use 192khz wich gives me better reading.I assume the cone angle is
diminished.
You may not be able to distinguish whats down there but most importantly you will know if the fish are moving 2 foot or 4 foot down or they may all be on the bottom wich spells tough fishing. As crazy as it may seem ,you can have individuals sitting in a clump of weed.My assumption or catches have shown me those to be muskies.When those fish sit
dead center of the clump.Getting them to bite is a challenge,my best bet is to get that fish out of its lair.Once she leaves or moves out,to me she is fair game.If she does not budge,I move on.
You may be asking yourself How do you know?Simple cast to that fish,most times it takes mutiple cast to get that individual out and she normaly comes out Quacking at the bait wich I assume is a negative fish by her
behavior.I have done this on all my individual
clumps.Agravated trolling runs seem to work better at pulling her out.
You asked how to agravate a
fish,casting...repeat cast to a single clump will get that fish quacking at your
bait,I feel it is not a behavior to feed but more of a behavior of your taking up my living space and get the hell out before I crunch you in two!How do you do it trolling?Repeat trolling passes,if she does not move,I
will do a 90 degree turn on her and normaly once the boat straightens out if she turned on the bait the rod goes.Now sometimes ,many times you cant get that fish to budge.These are some of the assaults I use on aggravating that fish in its living room.Honestly my
confidence builds when the clump is void and a single fish is marked roaming in the vicinity.
Now when a clump is void of a fish,normaly within the vicinity we tag a fish.Often we mark individual roamers around the weeds.These fish are up high and moving.Are they coming in and out of the weed flats? Not sure but those fish are easier to catch than those parked in the clumps. Weed edges are different,I do beleive fish use them more for ambush purposes,problably do to the design of the weed edge.
You mentioned shallow fish may use their latteral lines more.My views are opposit.My reasoning,a shallow water fish is either in an ambush position or soaking the sun (fish dead center of the clumps),there for visual is more important than sound.When in ambush position they are watching food go by and waiting for the proper moment when bait commit mistakes.
Deep water fish to me would use their latteral lines more,my thinking behind this is they can lurk beneath the suspended forage without being noticed using their lines to indicate the close proximity of food.My
assumption of methods of feeding for this open or deep water roamers is they feed on opertunaty.Either they can lunge up to a close and unsuspecting prey or grab a bait that strays for the school.They may also follow the forage until the forage comes to some type of ambush structure that muskies can use to their advantage.There is no way of prooving this.Suspended muskies are harder to convince when forage is abundant.
Myself I look for thinner suspended forage.
When fishing close to the bottom,I like seing an variety of forage and other predators like walleye or bass around the bait.If I mark and individual,I retain the where abouts and consistently hit that fish until she moves or bites.
You mentioned bucktails as the most productive,myself crank baits and topwaters in shallow water are my most productive baits.I think productivity of a bait comes
with confident usage of a lure.You can troll cranks with 6 inch of water.Its alot of work but the worth the effort.When casting,top water is the most used bait I use for casting.Reason ,it gives alot of vibration off and is a big fish consistent producing
bait.Jerbaits will be a close third as wood is grand for big fish.
I do use hair but my feeling with hair is relative to light or heavy weed growth that year.Yes there are patterns that occur during the season where fish want hair but my best years on hair were when the weeds grew their thickest.I guess the hair would let me get
at the fish adequatetly.
You mentioned sound is not a primary factor.Sound has lot more to do with it than most think.Beleivers are the loudest bait you can find without rattles.Do fish get conditioned to the sound of a beleiver.I think so. My feeling is fish when caught repeatly,not once or twice,get to know that unique sounds genarated by certain lures are negative.I think they shy away from that particular lure.I also beleive they shy away from boats after repeated captures.I am also talking jointed baits.Straight baits do not give off the same sound waves.Myself I like baits that have more of a swimming vibration than a ruckess being made by a particular lure.Dont get me wrong beleivers and other loud baits are great for grabbing a fish attention as they are very curious and anything that enters their world gets attention.Now wether the lure triggers a
positive or negative behavior is dependent on wether that fish has been stung or on how high of a feeding mode she is on.
When fishing deep or over deep water,my aproach is pretty simple,mix it up.Some 13 inch lure with 9 inch lures. Graphing the depth that the forage is running and if possible graphing muskies and what depth they
are using. Up or down. Some days you graph no
muskies,you relate to the next thing....baitfish,what depth are they travelling at?Get your baits at the same level and beneath them.Understanding the elements and structure that is in the proximity can also aid to what your presentation should be.
What is the most effective visual clues?
Thats a good question,some days is a natural
presentation (color) other days a shock presentation (bright color).I dont think the theory of bright lures on bright days and dark lures on dark days realy hold
true.Contrast I think is important but at certain times straight colors work best.Not sure if it is related to what the muskies are foraging on.Perch would lend be to beleive contrast is key but straight colors would lend me to beleive shad or other species
of mostly one color with little or none distiguished markings.
Profile,its hard to distinguish when a fish wants a big bait.But myself, shallow I go small,deep I go big.The opposite does happen as the season moves on to the fall.
Speed Jason is relative to the time of year,water temps and weather pattern.Warmer water means speed but as fronts arrive you got slow it down a notch.Colder water as fall progresses,you have to slow with the fishes metabolism but warming trends can kick things into gear.Hang time,I find most productive in cold water.The slowest moving bait with the wildest action is primo for myself.Would explain why certain grubs for jigs and hard baits produce some impressive fish.
One thing Jason you must understand,alot of info on individual fish and points of capture and where the relation of capture has been shared by a select few.The more time you are on top of them the chances you have at coming across a good fish.From there you retain elements of similarity in every capture and at
some point during the season things come together.I do beleive certain periods during the season have higher big fish activity but predicting it is very tough to do.Taking all this information and theorizing it into an anglers view is just that. My thinking is 50% of it is luck,I dont mind being lucky!
It would be nice to see some views from others. Some good things and visual perception of what we think is being said here.
marc
No problem Marc,, got the novel up for you..LOL[:bigsmile:]
Thanks for your imput, |
|
| |
|
| Marc,
Wow, thanks for writing the book on muskie fishing! Hope this thread is forever archived. Great info exchange going. As you know, I like to challenge great minds simply to help extract info from them for all to use and abuse. Whether we agree or disagree does not matter... as long as it gets info on the table.
My theory about shallow fish is a little different. I do NOT believe they use their lateral lines MORE than other fish. I believe the shallow water makes it easier for the fisherman to get his lure close enough to the fish (lateral line is a close range sense - effective to about twice the fish's body length) to stimuate the lateral line and take advantage of yet another potential mechanism for triggering a strike. The fish laying in heavy cover for AMBUSH can "feel" the presence of a lure and does not need to make visual contact. Therefore, my belief is that shallow water simply gives the fisherman an advantage... not that the fish are any more active.
As far as bucktails go... they are not MY most productive lure either. I'm a crankbait guy. But the numbers show (from MI records and Vilas County Marathons) that bucktails catch a large number of fish.
My thoughts on AUDIBLE sound is that low frequencies are best. A pressure wave of 100 HZ or less is able to stimulate the lateral line. Fish can hear higher frequencies... but I do not feel it makes a difference for triggering a strike. It might, however, give than a greater awareness of the presence of your lure.
I'm interested in your experience with SPEED vs. WATER TEMP. I think your observations suggest Warmer = Faster. I'd like to argue that incorporating speed (acceleration) into an overall SLOW presentation can be killer... especially in cold water.
And finally, I also believe in LUCK.
Thanks for you remarks... and hopefully you (and others) will feel the need to debate some of my theories. Debate brings out info and spurs creative thinking.
jlong |
|
| |
|
| Jason dont thank me thank the Editor in chief
Jason Smith.Poor guy has to transmit my messages.
I beleive there are mid way points between both thinkings and if we can pick the important elements in both thinkings many times we can come up with a narrower beam of theory.I also beleive fish behavior is relative to the bodies of water.
I do think fish use laterals more than we perceive in shallow.Your thoughts and views make alot sense to me also.I assume no matter where they are ,they sense the presence of the lure before they actualy see it.
Your views on sound are pretty close to mine.Lower frequencies do get their attention.
I like loud noise in dirty water but in clearer water I prefer a more subttle sound.
My firm beleif is they can get accustomed to a loud frequency when captured repeatadly on a loud lure.Like I said loud also gets their attention.
Speed and waters temps
I will give this some thought.You are along the lines of my thinking in warmer water faster presentation but there are peaks that demand change.Maybe Jason Smith can help once again in my novel.
Jason ,I enjoy exchanges of this nature and through many different thinkings and views we open our eyes more and get the brain working.
Got to drag some baits and do some thinking,I will post something next week on my views on speed.
Good luck this weekend
Enjoy the diapers,its a great time at that age.
take care
marc |
|
| |
|
| Who was it that said that trolling was for dummies and anyone can do it.[:bigsmile:]
The advantage we as trollers have over casters is that we have all this extra time to think and learn about the fish we are after. While a caster has to concentrate on every crank of the reel as to what his lure is doing well we have to do it just for the first part of the run and once we are going along we can actually start to think of other things while we are trolling. It is a bit like when your driving your car home and your mind is somewhere else and you get to where you are going to but do not remember the drive.
All this talk about big fish theories and how 2 minds can think differenly about the subject but yet quite alike. I am on the believe that it has to be different from one body of water to another to a certain point.
I can tell you that just a week or so ago I was catching some big ones in shallow ( 10 ft or less ) but from now on I will be spending my time deep looking for the monster that will be my next personal best. It might be cold and long time between catches but the average size will make it worth it as always.
Only big fat ones from now on.[:sun:]
1 more week of work then it's all play till the end of the season and I plan on fishing 4 to 5 days a week guiding or not.
[:sun:] |
|
| |
|
| You have had 8 days to build up some more novels.. Continue on Marc. LOL[:bigsmile:] |
|
| |
|
| Jason,let me get over Ben Remer first.
I got some goodies coming your way.
Of course I will need your assistance,who knows maybe Ryan B can chim in a bit.
Not to worry,I have realy been thinking of this.Should be good.
Remember you will see it first on
Muskie First
Then you you can read about it.
Muskies at the Utmost Level
marc
|
|
| |
|
| My home lake has been severely affected by the bizarre weather conditions we have had this year. The water level dropped about 21 inches in a 6 week period. While this might not be a big deal on many lakes/rivers, when your average depth is 4.5 feet, this becomes a VERY big deal. How did the fish react? There are areas (although limited) with 15-23 feet of water. But the fish didn't go there. Instead, they headed for the shallow weeds and burrowed right in there like a gopher in winter. There were days that NOTHING would pry them out of the weeds. This represents the warmest water in the lake, the most affected by boat traffic and water clarity changes caused by wind action. Yet, this is where the fish have held now for weeks. The decision to go shallow versus go to the deeper cooler water defies logic except that you can troll around out there for hours and see not a single baitfish in the open water.
It is really interesting that larger fish (the over 40 inch crowd) have been tough but not impossible to catch. There are a few, but they're coming on some pretty bizarre tactics. The over 45 inch crowd are almost non-existant. Despite surface water temperatures that are now around 47 F, STILL the larger fish have not moved out of the weeds. Small scattered groups of baitfish and some individual larger fish are beginning to appear in the open water, but do not seem interested in hitting anything at this point. Coincidentally, the lake level has come up about 7 inches in the past 3 weeks, and is now only down about 4 to 6 inches below normal levels.
How did the increased water temperature (clearly in the mid 80F range for weeks) effect the metabolism of these fish? Why weren't they eating and hitting like crazy to keep up with the expected increase in metabolism?
The strange behaviour of the fish this summer tells me that despite preferred temperature ranges, oxygen levels, boat "noise", water clarity, and any other factors we want to include - the availability of food is still clearly the #1 factor in fish location. Does this carry over to other much larger water bodies? Sure does. We saw it at the CanAm this year on Pigeon and Sturgeon. The traditional deep open water fish and deep structure fish were almost non-existant. Instead, the fish were holding along deep weed edges, and in weedbeds/weed pockets. This is almost totally opposite from the norms.
I go back to my earlier comment that there are no absolutes in muskie fishing. One must be versatile and keep an open mind at all times. A pattern today could be all but history tomorrow. Baitfish are definitely the key. If the baitfish are there, the muskies WILL be in the area. You just have to figure out how to push their buttons so to speak.
Steve Wickens |
|
| |
