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: 32886
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: 2015
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: 2015
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: 2015
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: 32886
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: 32886
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!
Believe in the ducky.
TB
Jump to page : 123456 Now viewing page 4 [30 messages per page]
