|
|
Posts: 426
Location: Perryville, MO | Did a search and haven't found much. Plenty of articles on the web...perhaps there are a few more informative than the ones I've - as yet - come across. But my guess is that I'd be better off finding a solid book on lake map reading. Because I live in the south, something that focuses on reservoirs would be most helpful (obviously, quite a difference in topography), but I'd rather have a well-written, informative book/article than just one that is focused on my specific need. Anyone know of a good book or a must-read article on the subject.
In this day and age when everyone has one another's GPS coordinates the basic art of reading a map seems mute for many. But what's the point of knowing the spot if you really don't know what's going on under the water, so that you can duplicate the situation in other spots.
I understand basic terminology, but not as well as I ought. It would be helpful to see it again and again until it really becomes a part of my natural thinking.
Note: I'm new this fall to M1, but with the spelling errors in my writing you'd think I'm a veteran...lol. |
|
| |
|
| If you are looking for terminology and spots to look for when looking at a map I would read Dick Pearson's book Muskies on the Shield. It was the first thing that I did when I started fishing muskies and I know I have caught fish because of it. Obviously he isn't focusing on reservoirs, but the information is relevant and it is a VERY good read. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 37
| Check out the USGS - http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod/
it may be overkill, but I am a map freak and a few years back, I wanted to learn all about hydrography and bathymetry...if it pertains to maps, it is on this site. hope this helps. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 307
| Reading maps is a science and an art. To do so corectly takes time. A lot of time. One of the best ways to start understanding maps is to get a topography map of your local area and look at how the map coresponds to real life. Topography on land translates to topography underwater. One thing you need to constantly do is remind yourself if what your looking at on the map is what you want it to look like or what it really looks like. If that makes any sense. It is my belief that 99.9% of fishermen do not know how to really properly read a map. Most people focus on the contour lines far too much as if that line is a magical transition point. Map reading just plain takes time. So go grab a topo map to your local park and start walking around.
If you want something fun to do at the same time and if you have a hand held GPS or have access to one give geocaching a try. There are waypoints for pretty much every where now. It is actually quite a bit more fun than what it would seem. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Northern IL | 9)
I'm not going to go as far and say reading a map is science,,, however if more fisherman knew how, there would be a lot more fishermen fishing in the same spots, not a bad thing.
Paper maps or gps maps are only going to give us a clue as to what's there. Maps are very general and may get you close. Only by physically running lures, throwing markers and interpreting what you see, will you get an accurate picture of what's below the water.
I have hundreds of maps from many sources, some better than others in detail. I have fished/ mapped more than 100 different reservoirs, lakes and rivers and not a single map has been as accurate as some fishermen need. If you want to know what's "under the water you must map it for yourself!
Chances are good that the reservoir near you is pulled down right now, (unless built for drinking water) go take a look at it.
|
|
| |
|
| In the words of Marshal McLuhan:
The map is not the territory!
I suggest reading Buck Perry's spoonplugging, since he's the first real "structure fishing" guy. His material is still pretty spot on, other than IMO, his theories on "deep" water movements, where he assumed fish slid from shelves in shallow water to "deep water sanctuaries" with their bellies to the bottom. Due to the time it takes for fish with vented bladders to equalize pressure it is quite unlikely their movements are as vertical as Buck suggested, but more likely to be somewhat horizontal in nature. One atmosphere (14') is no problem, but more than that is questionable.
Another good resource is the original stuff published back in the 70's by InFisherman regarding lake types and seasonal movements of fish. THey do a great job of defining the differences in various reservoir types.
As someone who's been to hundreds of "new" places and has to produce something significant in one weeks time, often without the aid of any maps I can tell you maps are a godsend, but only a rough guide.
One of Perry's most significant contributions to the nomenclature and strategy of angling is pointing out the difference between structure and cover. Maps rarely, if ever, do a good job of illuminating the environmental options provided by cover.
And, honestly there's no way maps can provide that type of info because from season to season as water levels change or water color changes, vegetation can literally be here today and gone tomorrow, or visa versa!
The only way to know that is to go and look for youself!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 105
| I would take Larry's suggestion and get Buck Perry's book. I am just finishing it and I will never look at a lake map the same way. If you are wanting to learn how to read a lake map to find fish, read the book. If you just want to learn to read a lake map, other sources would be better. I can't wait to get on the water and apply what I learned from that book, how fish travel and what they use to do so. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1937
Location: Black Creek, WI | Not sure if youfound this one during your internet search. Its one I wrote many moons ago... but is very applicable to what you are looking for.
http://www.forciersguideservice.com/article6.shtml |
|
| |
|
Posts: 426
Location: Perryville, MO | Lots of good info, guys...Thanks. Ordered both books. Read Jason's article. Checked out the site (tons more to explore there). If there's more let me know. I certainly get the necessity of "on the water time." Just pulling all the tools together. I've been fishing this particular lake for 10 years or so. I have a picture of what - many of it's areas - look like without water in my mind. But as was mentioned, always checking to make sure what's in my mind is reality. Reservoir fishing provides miles of excellent shoreline fishing. It's where I've spent the vast majority of my time pursuing other quarry. But it's high time I learn how to handle deeper water situations and mid-lake structures.
From time to time someone on the site will mention how fishermen overthink things. I suspect that's true. But more often than not, I don't think guys think enough. People in my experience tend to go to the spots others have told them about or they stumbled upon a fish once upon a time. I'm just as happy as the next guy to learn of a good spot, but I really want to know why its a good spot. Then I'll duplicate it elsewhere! I can do this on a couple of lakes I fish regularly, but just want to keep getting better.
Edited by hawkeye9 1/22/2010 1:36 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 212
| One of the ways I've been able to visualize my maps a little better is with some drawing. A bathymetric map is basically putting a 3-d surface on a 2-d piece of paper, so if you take some time and learn about the interpretation ..closer lines=steeper slopes, further distance=lesser slope, etc, etc. looking at specific areas on the map becomes more like looking at "spots".
 |
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | I agree with Larry that Bucks book will get you what you need to know and that his terminology is very specific. Structure isn't cover and cover isn't structure those terms are used interchangeably by many "professional" anglers. What you'll get from "the book" is the understanding of what to look for from someone that isn't going to confuse you by callling weeds structure.
I'm surprised Jerryb didn't mention "the book" since he's a Spoonplugging instructor! Maybe dipping too many "pole dancer pink" lure retreivers... |
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Northern IL | Hey Will, dipping as often as I can! ha ha
Good to see you in Chicago!
yea I should have mentioned that however I've been chuckling over the comment "Mr. Perry's "stuff" is "still" pretty spot on",,,, like it's going change, lol!
Most of the as you called them "professional" anglers wouldn't have the careers they have if it wasn't for Buck, where's the gratitude?
Edited by jerryb 1/22/2010 3:57 PM
|
|
| |
|
| HI J
Not sure I understand your remarks. I have great respect for Buck and his contributions. I often refer to him as the Isaac Newton of angling. Why else would I suggest reading his book? Above all other things, I think he removed the "voodoo" and presented an organized and logical set of physical and mental tools with which to approach angling.
Back in the 70's I spoke to him often on the telephone and discussed many topics related to angling. He was always willing to discuss any subject related to fishing and answer any question I might have for him. An hour conversation was not unusual.
You'd probably be surprised (I sure was) to know what he told me his number one favorite place, species and method were: Topwater fly fishing for white bass on Lake Pepin when they're schooling and going goofy on the surface!
His contributions were remarkable, but he wasn't right about everything and left quite a few empty spaces for the rest of us to fill in.
The last discussions I had with him were back in 1974 when I first stumbled on the magic of neutral buoyancy lures and how pike and musky responded to them.
I was into the concept of lures with non-mechanical action that could be worked in ways that made them respond to the visual cues provided by a following fish.
It was totally foreign to him as an approach, but he was highly interested because I was averaging 1.75 legal muskies per day on my homemade non-painted junky looking lures.
Nothing has "changed" regarding how to interpret structure, but as I said, his hypothesis on daily movements regarding "deep and shallow" were not entirely accurate, and theories on lures, as he would readily admit when not "selling spoonplugs", far from complete.
best,
LD |
|
| |
|
Posts: 105
| Larry,
So what you are saying is muskies move to a suspended place over deep water verses traveling to deep water as the book says. In reference to their daily migration as the book speaks of. Not trying to start anything, just trying to learn. |
|
| |
|
| Yup, I think it's quite likely that ALL fish with non vented bladders behave that way more or less on a day by day basis. It's got to do with the time it takes for them to "pressurize and de-pressurize".
I'd suspect under very extreme weather shifts this may not be the case, but I'm not absolutely certain.
I've spend many hours perched on 10' step ladders in the front of the boat and even in tree when I was younger, watching fish, not just muskies, move. In spring time, when water temps have huge differentials throughout the day and clarity is at it's highest, is an especially good time to have lots of "encounters" and opportunity for viewing.
What seems to be the deal is "one atmosphere". i.e. If a fish is in 4 feet of water he's got no problem dropping to 14 feet or so. Much deeper, especially you approach 2 atmospheres, is a problem for a fish if it remains there.
If a fish is set up in the 14 at or so range, it can comfortably slide in and out to the 30 or so range. This doesn't mean a fish can't charge up out of deeper water, eat something and charge back down, or visa versa.
If there's a lesson in this applicable to angling, it's this; after working the tops, edges, corners and best cover on a shelf or flat, if you choose to work the deep areas adjacent to run your lures the same depth (or slightly shallower) as that of the primary shelf break rather than trying to whack the bottom of the basin.
Also, especially if the primary break is in the one atmosphere or less range, you might want to try topwater, even if it's 97 feet deep where your lure is landing.
Telemetry studies on 10+ bass have suggested similar behavior relating to pressure.
I'm still trying to figure out the pressure as it relates to barometric changes. There is no doubt some kind of correlation, but what is it?
Consider this; if a fish move up or down 3 or 4 feet in the water column it undergoes a greater pressure change than if the barometer went from the highest reading to the lowest reading in recorded history. So are they reacting to the barometric pressure or does the barometric pressure have a direct relationship to some other factor we have not yet identified? I've got a hunch it MIGHT be related to UV, but at this time I am totally uncertain.
I've considered buying one of those UV meters people who sunburn easily sometimes use but have not yet done so. If I don't have to travel much this summer and get to spend some significant time at home this coming season, I just may do that.
This past season I was too busy, (and too fascinated) messing with a special hi-test underwater mike listening to lures and catching muskies!
LD |
|
| |
|
Posts: 105
| Larry,
Great stuff as usuall, thanks!! How much do watch barometric pressure when on the water? If you do, how does it influence how you fish when you see changes? |
|
| |
|
| On a "daily, hour by hour" basis I pay attention to it out of curiousity, but it doesn't affect how or where I fish,'cause I can't do anything about it, and have not come close to "figuring it out" so to speak.
This is especially true if I'm on unfamiliar water. So I just keep fishing. checking off "new" spots and re-visiting what I consider to be the key elements of the spots that looked the tastiest.
But, that being said..., when it would fall though the floor, and I was on the river where I guided for 20+ years and had "intimate" knowlege, I had one or two spots I could go and almost 100% of the time cream big walleyes. This was especially true when the water was super low and clear and walleye fishing was at it's toughest.
Yes, it would strictly be a dinner run and (sorry walleye lovers) a limit of what ever bit got eaten, whether it was 14" long or 30" long.
Like everyone who's spent any time chasing muskies has no doubt observed, when a big storm is approaching, especially it it's been warm, sunny and beautiful for a long stretch of time, and the barometer is falling they move.
However, if I've got time to get in the groove and really study the options, my favorite weather is warm, sunny and stable for all species. For me it seems like their movements may not be all day long as is often the case in crappy weather, but once you get the "timing" and locations down, is more consistent. In most cases I've found, you just have to be more "precise".
L |
|
| |
|
Posts: 688
Location: Northern IL | Larry,
I was probably a bit glib up top, but glad you've expressed your respects for Mr. Perry as you should.
None of this is new, uv?? Light condition?? Buck was talking about this 60 years ago and makes this one of his main points in all his teachings! I don't know anything about this " one atmosphere" or 35 atmosphere.... but really what's the point, are fishermen going to be able to bye a meter and know what atmosphere the fish are in? It's probably just me...
To get back to your post above, I don't recall Buck ever speaking or writing about the "magic of neutral buoyancy lures." He could have produced one himself. I'm not going to say I knew what Buck had in his mind when you entertained your ideas with him but I do know he was not a selfish man and I believe if he felt this "magic" held water he would have written about it, or cashed in.
No actually I'm not at all surprised, While speaking with Buck in 1996 at Crab Orchard lake just before I was leaving for Minaki he talked about how much fun the fly rod was catching small mouth on the English river with, "popping bugs." Just to hear him say popping bugs was pretty funny. I remember him winking at my partner saying "make sure you boys run one in the "boil", he paused for a split second as he added, "for muskie". Classic Buck! He caught a 35lbs muskie up there on a 500, so much for big lure big fish, no one get too excited.
If you have ever been to Buck's warehouse you too know of the success that he is directly responsible for, it's literally overwhelming! The pictures go on and on, the wives and the children and not to forget the "pros" in all their glory covered from head to toe in patches, (playing the game) all expressing their appreciation is fantastic to see! Buck heard it all and my young boys and I got a chance to add a small part as well. One month the kids and I caught 200 pike from local southern Wisconsin lakes during the work week, on 3 of those weekends we drove 6 hours and landed 96 muskies. Buck was always interested in seeing the kids catch fish. That season we ended with 234 muskie from 30+ different lakes fishing muskies about 1/2 the time, no guide fees or atmosphere . Not bad for kids?
We can't debate every discovery Buck made that some don't agree, that's been going on for decades, and a waist of time! Many of the loudest claiming "I have a better way, follow me." I choose instead to focus on Mr. Perry's "proven" guidelines along with the spoonplugger nation who quietly puts a spanking on most every lake, river, or reservoir they fish. However, "his hypothesis on daily movements regarding "deep and shallow" were not entirely accurate." really..... Do the fish suspend sure they do, sometimes, but can we count's on them suspending most of the season, I say NO WAY! unreliable, A lake with a strong thermocline they will use it as a breakline and the fisherman must be aware of it.
I don't buy into the suspension idea until proven other wise. I don't need to know where they go after an activity period has ceased, cause I know where to find em when an activity period begins, (most of the time). I have experienced it thousands of times and I'm not alone as you know, ha ha. Our "best chance" at a fish is on or near well defined routes, we as fishermen can at times see and locate these routes. Fishing for suspended fish is looking for a needle in a hey stack. Only after Mr. Perry himself experienced a fishing situation time after time, after time, did he claim it as a fishing fact and proceed to write it down. Dose the trout suspend more often than a lm bass yes but if the fisherman goes about his fishing in an orderly manor these suspended fish will reveal themselves.
When I read "Mr. Perry's "Stuff" is "still" pretty spot on" it kind of rubs me wrong. I'm sure you have considerable accomplishments and have earned every reward congratulations! I understand there's a game to be played but, there's just something about it I don't like. Nothing personal!
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 455
| Wow Jerry I think you are mis reading something here. I don't think that Mr. Dahlberg ever intended to rub any one the wrong way by recomending a book about map reading. After all wasn't that the original purpose of this post? (Reading a map.) I think Mr. Dahlberg's statement of being spot on is due to the fact that the book was written such a long time ago, and is still in many ways relevent today.
Keep up the good posts LD your insight is appreciated.
Edited by chasintails 1/23/2010 7:50 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 32880
Location: Rhinelander, Wisconsin | Ditto. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Now this is getting to be a funny thread. Jerry, "spoonplugger nation"?, good gosh man, do you need a shovel?
It is easy to derive from your posts that you are proud of your accomplishments and desire recognition for the same, but after noting that, I have never seen Buck Perry held up to anything but high esteem on this board, and I believe LD is one who is also doing that. "Spot on", says to me Larry concurs that Buck nailed it.
Relax and enjoy your fishing Jerry. Buck's legacy is safe on this site. Better to worry about the stringer shots.
Edited by firstsixfeet 1/23/2010 9:58 PM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 105
| "Nothing personal!" Glad you cleared that up, the 8 paragraphs of being defensive had me confused. It's not like Larry was bashing the book. I hope Larry will frequent the board, I enjoy his insight on fishing.
My question is, are muskies more apt go out and suspend versus the bass that will go deep. This was not explained well in the book and the very few pictures of muskie in the book made me wonder if there was a difference, like your trout and bass example. There seems to be a lot of talk in the muskie world about suspended fish, not pounding the bottom in deep water. I find it interesting in one of the other threads on here about depth muskies are caught, it seemed most were not in deep water. Is this because we are all missing the boat and not fishing deep enough, or is this not the best place to look for muskies? Any chance you could clear this up for me, Jerry? Thanks |
|
| |
|
Posts: 4080
Location: Elko - Lake Vermilion | WOW!
Because of the comments that LD made I will seek out the Buck Perry book, but Jerry you seem to have a cocky attude as to what Mr. D. Was alluding to... He agreed with mr. perry on everything but Depth , So what ? In my book , both Men are experts in their field, and deserve a closer look....... Don't ya think?
Closed minds = Weak________.
Jerome
Edited by Top H2O 1/24/2010 12:39 AM
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Larry - That's good stuff right there and nearly exactly what I described to a group of local spoonpluggers in a seminar. It had them scratching their heads but I explained that muskies prefer to follow the breaks on a migration route to a particular depth then suspend for a period. Other fish will continue to follow the breaks on the migration route to a sanctuary. In fact here's part of one slide that shows a common daylight to mid-day movement of a muskie (IMO going pelagic is sanctuary for a muskie). These fish then move down in the water column to a more normal sanctuary and make a similar shallow movement to other fish by following breaks on a migration route to shallow water. One thing I will note is this type of movement is most common during the warm water period. Before 55 and after 55 degrees muskie movement follows Buck's writings. Again my opinion. 
Edited by Will Schultz 1/24/2010 1:10 AM
|
|
| |
|
Posts: 105
| Thanks Will, that answers my question. How much does the thermocline play a role in what you described above. Do you find they suspend right at it or is a breakline more important to them to suspend off of? |
|
| |
|
Posts: 2361
| Now this is getting complicated, Buck, Larry and now Will Schultz have all come up with theories, that are not only unproven but also have at least one major hole in them.
I don't really think anyone can make a conclusive statement regarding muskies in this regard, because the population has many more strategies for survival than most. This could be a REALLY long discussion and still end up very inconclusive.
I will say this, I REALLY like Will's illustration here, that is just about my favorite color of green. |
|
| |
|
| Here's my last on the subject.
The telemetry studies (radio tagging) on both mature bass and mature muskies bear out my suspension theory.There is far more actual scientific evidence for it than the "deep water" sanctuary theory.
To the guy who seems to pooh pooh what I've shared about atmospheres as it relates to fish with non-vented bladders, I suggest you pull your eyeball away from the soda straw you view the world through.
Aquatic environments offer various options. Some bodies of water have many, some have only a few. Rarely are all the fish of a given species doing the same thing. The challenge, and for me greatest reward in angling, is to put together the "clues" provided by observation and time on the water to reveal new insights.
His insights not withstanding, and no offense intended to Buck or organized religion, just like the rest of us, in order to get across the lake Buck Perry used a boat.
Here's wishing all a great musky season in 2010 of both catching and learning, with hopes of expanding the body of knowlege! If any of you have any direct ? for me you can hit me up on my web forum.
best
L
|
|
| |
|
| Here's my last on the subject.
The telemetry studies (radio tagging) on both mature bass and mature muskies bear out my suspension theory.There is far more actual scientific evidence for it than the "deep water" sanctuary theory. Ive spoken at length with Mr Hope who did the bass study and it's FASCINATING. (he'd find 'em with the radio, then get in the water and watch them for hours, often having anglers above in boats trying to catch them with every means known to man)
To the guy who seems to pooh pooh what I've shared about atmospheres as it relates to fish with non-vented bladders, I suggest you pull your eyeball away from the soda straw you view the world through.
Aquatic environments offer various options. Some bodies of water have many, some have only a few. Rarely are all the fish of a given species doing the same thing. The challenge, and for me greatest reward in angling, is to put together the "clues" provided by observation and time on the water to reveal new insights.
His insights not withstanding, and no offense intended to Buck or organized religion, just like the rest of us, in order to get across the lake Buck Perry used a boat.
Here's wishing all a great musky season in 2010 of both catching and learning, with hopes of expanding the body of knowlege! If any of you have any direct ? for me you can hit me up on my web forum.
best
L
|
|
| |
|
Location: Grand Rapids, MI | Muskie4Life - 1/24/2010 9:39 AM Thanks Will, that answers my question. How much does the thermocline play a role in what you described above. Do you find they suspend right at it or is a breakline more important to them to suspend off of? The thermocline can be considered a breakline, so yes it can play a role in this scenario. As FSF pointed out this is unproven and is only 25 years of observation on the water. |
|
| |
|
Posts: 1906
Location: Oconto Falls, WI | jerryb - 1/23/2010 7:10 PM
Do the fish suspend sure they do, sometimes, but can we count's on them suspending most of the season, I say NO WAY! unreliable, A lake with a strong thermocline they will use it as a breakline and the fisherman must be aware of it.
Oh oh, looks like I need to go against having my own thoughts, and follow the spoonplugger nation! Those that target suspended muskies exclusively or the majority of their time will gladly disagree with the above quoted statement. Guys like Paul Klein wouldn't target suspended fish for the majority of the season if it wasn't a reliable pattern.
As far as map reading goes. Maps can give you an idea what the lake *may* offer if you haven't fished one before, but the true story is only told once you have driven and fished the lake. As most of us could probably agree some spots that look great on a map may have been a bust, and spots that looked boring turned out to be great.
While maps today are better than those done even 10 years ago, there is no substitute for making your own mental map of a lake. For those that fish suspended a map will not tell us where the baitfish may be located that day on the lake, and do not indicate some key "structures" like springs. Maps will not indicate the densest weedbeds, nor will they indicate where the return flows/currents are under the water or at the surface.
For me maps give me a starting point, maybe, but more importently IMO is to spend time disecting a lake yourself and drawing your own conclusions. You need figure out how that lake fits into your own fishing style, and how to attack it accordingly. Being able to read a map like a "pro" for shallow water structures won't help you very much if the lake has a great deep water/suspended bite, nor will it help if you are a great deep water/suspended map reader finding yourself on a shallow water lake with no deep water bite. |
|
| |
