Paul Roberts

GREAT forgotten lure.

The numbers above are what I've read. There are some northern fish though that have broken 20 years but these were rare individuals.

Bruising from hooks commonly looks like black spots for a short while. There is also a "black blotch" syndrome in bass in some waters. The reasons for that are not understood as yet.

May 4th, 2010 Brilliant sun. This is the time of year here when brilliant blue skies can weigh in on the fishing in a negative way. It's peri-spawn, meaning the spawn has just begun in some ponds and about to happen in others. It's a time when thermal stability has been reached the water having absorbed enough heat to ward off night time chills. Spawning temperature (>58F) has penetrated the depths, giving the ripe bass the signal (one of several major factors) to spawn. This heating of the depths has another effect: it makes the entire water column (in these shallow ponds) roughly equal in temperature (isothermal in limnology terms), bringing to a close (but not entirely) the intense heat-up periods that consolidate prey in early spring. During that time I pray for cold fronts and love the post-frontal sunshine. But now, brilliant blue can make things a little tougher as, unless the urge to spawn takes over where the heat consolidated bluegills left off, the bass are reluctant to be exposed. Something else may be happening too: Rich Zaleski has defined the start of the spawn as the time when bass vacate the shallows, to relocate to spawning areas where they either spawned previously or were hatched themselves (this is called spawning site fidelity in fisheries biology terms). Ralph Manns, a dedicated bass behavior observer and pond watcher, has noted this relocation and site fidelity too. Today I found the high sun penetrating deeply and no fish were seen. A couple possible beds were noted, but apparently abandoned -I'm sure some were occupied in the shallower ponds where the spawn would have begun. Water temps had eroded a bit into the mid 50s though, as winter is still duking it out in the nearby mountains. The early spawners simply have to deal with it. My first pond has high clarity so the vegetation beds are already developing. I tried to draw fish up and out of the clumps but they wouldn't show, despite a good stiff breeze putting a chop on the water and allowing me just booming casts. Not wishing to hunker down and cajole I moved on (Power baby!), and hit a pond with some shoreline flotsam that holds good fish regularly except during the peri-spawn pull-out. Nada nobody home. Next pond made the most sense considering conditions steep sided, shaded, with good depth close to shore it has areas that hold fish year round regardless of conditions. There it's all about getting bites. I managed three bites and dropped each one! Ugh!! > The last came unpinned at my feet, the jig had somehow got itself tied in a knot with the line perpendicular! The fish (a nice 18er) simply opened up and leggo! I decided then to accept my lumps and go check up on a pond that had received a partial but heavy winterkill three years ago. Three years will add 4 to 6 inches to the bass, so I thought I'd check on it. While kills can devastate bass populations, esp the larger individuals, it clears the way for the survivors to grow in reduced competition. I've seen this many times over the years in ponds, and call it boom-n-bust fishing. I watch for the booms. Because of the layout I bulged a SB, a super-shallow crank, a swimming worm, and the always ready (dedicated rod) jig. The bass were there, thick. I caught ten 12 to 15ers before deciding to leave the place be and bring my young son there on the weekend. Most of the bass were on the thin side, indicating large numbers in high competition. My son is gonna love this pond. May 6th, 2010 Today I hit a large pond I haven't visited this year. It has good numbers of bass and sits right next to another pond I fish an easy cast between the two. Both ponds are quite different though in terms of clarity and fertility or at least what's done with their respective nutrient rations. This difference was made clear by simply looking out over each pond: One was blanketed with swallows dipping and diving for what must have been swarms of midges hanging over the water. The other pond was devoid of swallows, however with its high clarity, it had attracted a cormorant, a pair osprey, a troupe of pelicans, and two Caspian terns one of which caught a bluegill in front of me. I chose today over yesterday bc the front was due in today and I wanted clouds to encourage the bass to come up and meet me at least half way (Power baby!!). Plus, in a float tube, being so low to the water, efficiently probing the nooks and crannies for holed up bass is a daunting task. I got what I asked for, in spades. I'd left the house in a snow squall and arrived at the ponds under a black sky with sheets of 50degree rain and a stiff breeze. I was darn glad I was still dressed like a mountain man fleece and layers, hat and gloves. I stood looking at both ponds: my planned water was ominously dark and windswept, the other, more protected, was relatively calm, and blanketed with swallows that looked like bluefish on bunker. Hmmmm...do I change plans entirely? I decide to settle the matter by testing my original game plan before putting my float tube in. I was anticipating the first wave of spawners and fish crowding up onto the shoreline shelfs my target was not the males up on the cobbled shelfs, but the females hanging just off. I also hoped for some topwater action and cast a Zara on top of the shelf to my right and was rewarded with a splashing strike. That was motivation enough for me; I stayed with my planned water and launched into the stormy sea, although that fish being all of 12inches long was not a solid indicator. This is the cut-off size of maturity for bass here: Was it an immature (apt to dabble in foolish pursuits) or one of a crowd of mature spawners on the shelf? I kicked out and took a temperature profile over deeper water -56F top to bottom, 58F in immediate shallows). Since this pond is fairly large my guess was it hadn't yet received its first wave of spawners. But I gave the little bass its due and fished the shelf with a swimming worm, a topwater, and a jig. I found no more bass over 150yards of good shelf, canning plan A well enough for me. I did take one good female of 16+ from an isolated milfoil bed at shelf edge. Because of clarity the milfoil survival was good in this pond and beds were present but greatly reduced. I knew deeper, away from shore beds would be in better shape so I shifted to plan B away form shore. Each milfoil bed I hit gave up bass from 9 to 18inches, I tallying 11 from 12 inches up more than half of these 15 inches up. The top fish were two 17s and an 18. Most fish took a Sebile lipless fished in pumps and falls amongst the milfoil. Sonar was important in that not all good areas were developed enough to show near the surface. I even found some great new structure that will pay off come summer. My maps of this pond continue to grow in detail. Fishing milfoil beds in a float tube is not very efficient. I'm so low to the water that, esp on a dark day, I cannot see very far ahead so fishing is by brail. But the bass met me almost halfway. They would not come up for a bulged SB, most strikes coming on the lipless on the fall. When I could just pause long enough I'd get a bass too fast (trying not to bury) and no go. Sonar, brail, positioning, and enough fish meeting me halfway made it happen. It was fun, despite the wind and rain. At the end of the day I was dripping wet, festooned with milfoil, and looked like the way humans should look, by gum!! By comparison with the walkers on shore (not many today) wearing light jackets and sneakers, I looked like some kind of swamp monster LOL. I loved it. I continued clamping fish between my knees. They become instantly subdued and easy to get a liplock on. Yup, even with treble hooks -with care. Many of the bass were thin, especially so the smaller ones. There appears to be a gap in the food chain, or a lot of competition in that size bracket. Compare this 15"er with one of roughly equal length from the adjacent (midge infested and swallow covered) pond: Granted each are the extremes for their respective days, but the trend is real and portrays the trophic differences between two ponds lying side by side.

Thoughts/suggestions: -Bright sun is a bigger detriment when sun angle is high (summer). What months were talking depends on what latitude you hail from. In the cold/cool water periods high sun can be a plus. -Bass may go into heavy cover. Break out the flippin'/punchin' stick. If you cannpt get to them (tackle, technique), then pick deeper waters or those without cover. Use stealth. -When fishing shallow under bright sun bass can be paranoid spooky. Lures in the air, splashdown, and even line splashdown can clear the water in front of you of fish. Among my responses to this has been to use braid. It lands like cotton thread -a huge advantage. -Learn to stop casts just above the water for a silent entry. Some lures land more quietly than others too. -Plan your approach and casts. Don't just start bombing. -Look for areas that offer shade or steeply convoluted cover -like ledges, steep shoreline, towering trees. It's not just that these hold fish -they might not -but presentation is easier to get away with in some such locations. -Pray for wind. Some more chatter on brilliant blue days (what I think tends to be going on): http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1250965728/8#8

I've seen this, typically late post-spawn into summer until water temps reach something near 80. I've taken it for heat soaking/sunning. It's happens on sunny days in which the shallows heat rapidly. I've caught these fish too -usually a weightless worm or killed jig. Somewhere in my journal I have a description of such a day in June here, in which the shallows were crawling with bass. Many came so shallow their backs and dorsal fins broke the surface. I commented for one big female, "Ooooooooohhhhh, that feels goooood." ;D Curious, what were your conditions like? Was it post-frontal sun?

Thanks CWB. Good review.

The most important factors are the cover you'll be fishing in and fly (hook) size. A rod is a casting tool, and a fighting tool. Don't go too light for LM. In terms of power: A 6wt is akin to a finesse spinning rod. 7wt = M spinning 8-9wt = MH spinning/M casting I use a 9wt for LM bc of the dense vegetation I'm up against. I think an 8 would be ideal all around, but you'll have to look at the waters you fish. As to the other big factor, fly size (air resistance or weight), IMO you cannot use too big a fly for LM much of the time. There are times when a small (3") streamer is important, but a lot of places and times BIG files attract LMs -esp topwater, or a heavy one for deep dredging. There are LOTS of good rods out there. The only recommendation I would have is to get a fast action rod. Stay away from more moderate actions. The reel does not need to be fancy. Drag is unimportant as you handle that with your line hand. Leaders: I use a tapered leader bc the butt section is mated to the fly-line and is rarely changed. The rest of the leader will be altered for various uses. For the butt, mass is what counts and I use .023 for my 9wt. The tippet used depends on the fly (hook size), and the length of the leader. Trying to accurately control a non-tapered leader of lengths over ~4ft is difficult. If I'm using a large topwater then I might have only a two-part leader (.023, .017). If I find I need a smaller streamer (#2 hook) I may add a short section of appropriate tippet (say .014 for the #2). If I need a longer leader to gain some depth or to fish flat water or..., the taper becomes important for cast control and overall leader strength -you can't step down diameters too sharply. You can buy factory tapered leaders but I found that just getting a few filler spools of Trilene XT or Maxima or other tough mono is far more versatile. They'll last you a long time. One advantage to knotless factory leaders is there are no knots (Surgeon's) to catch algae. But this is a minimal problem really. With factory leaders (at $3 a pop) end up whittled down and you end up tying knots anyway.

Interesting. We might be getting somewhere. I caught a few feisty ones today that leapt a few times then wrapped me in cattails and I noted tinges of red. Water was 61F. What's really needed is a controlled study.

Ditto. I don't have any Salad Spoons, but it's on my wishlist.

What's the thinking behind the tail-down attitude of a Sammy at rest?

I tend to take issue with the long arming. I've seen them done well, and realize that this is subjective, and can be a case of "Artistic license". I guess I've grown tired of them. I guess what bugs me, and it comes up with EVERY In-Fisherman mag I get in the mail, is that to sell magazines and lures and rods, .... the fish have to look larger than life. I know I'm not the only one looking, but I'm tired of it. In IF's case is it BS, or advertising hype? They print a LOT of pics of 3 and 4lb northern LMs distorted into... what?? Why??? Then they have LOTS of pics of Erie SMs. Guess I'm just tired of the hype. And it seems that the bar has been raised so that anglers (or is it editors) expect to see distortion. In my mind, a great shot can be taken without such distortion. See FishChris pics. What I like about his pics is the stunning sharpness and color -not just the size of the bass -which are appropriately displayed I think. He works on that harder than I will. Fish are gorgeous creatures. Distortions, at least in my mind, are unnecessary, and appear to be trying to say something else altogether. I guess this has some more history with me too. I once submitted an article to a national fly-fishing magazine about big small-stream brook trout -how to ferret out "big" brookies from your respective watershed. The then editor bought it, saying he loved the tack and the inclusion of non-jet-setting anglers; The "back forty" anglers guide to finding "bigger" brook trout. Then, before it went to print, that editor took another job, and the following editor wouldn't print my article, saying it was a great article but the fish pics were of "small" brookies. (They were 12"ers.) His brook trout issue was full of brook trout from Labrador and lakes (footballs), with one article (by John Gierach) saying basically what I was saying -MOST brookies tend to be small fish, and that angling adventures are relative. As to bass, I sure don't like to see someone (esp from the north) feeling they have to apologize for their 4 or 5lber, or have to make it look like something else.

Apologies to you too, Todd. Assumptions made I guess, from our exchange on that other thread. Wasn't sure what you were getting at there I guess. So, by "fisheye", what focal length did you use? I've seen em down to 8mm (!), but not looking at a fish lol.

Thanks Bizz. I just saw that thread. Apologies to Cart7. Not sure now about the second, so I'll go ahead and delete.

Awesome fish Troy. Love the description of that lost 7.

The guy holds three patents: -an injection molding system for multi-color plastics (2003) -two for soft plastic lures (2007, 2009) No details are listed, as yet, in PACER, beyond "patent infringement".

I've never seen such a beast. A buddy of mine just took one 24". That's a big one here. No weight though. It was a beautiful fish full of eggs he said. Wish I'd seen it.

You have the WR goldfish?? Are any fish food companies aware of this?? ;D (Couldn't resist).

You'll make a liar out of yet. Jeesh, with friends like you... ;D

Excellent post. You can learn more from sight fishing than almost any other way. Be ready to swallow your pride a lot of the time. ;D

I'm still using a 25yr old Chatillon. "Only" weighs to 10lbs though LOL. If I catch a state record, I'll never actually know. I'll post a pic of the scale floored. ;D I also paint dots every inch on all my rods, using phosphorescent vinyl fabric paint. They only go to 24inches on my bass rods. Haven't broken that yet. Jees, if that 28" CO fish turns out to be true, I'll have to add a few inches.

I find it funny that those that bust others chops or have are some of the same that photoshop their own pictures. We have had guys call others out for no distorted lense, only cause there was a green tree on the hill side in Oklahoma and some green rye grass in the back ground in Jan. So theres now way that bass was caught during that time frame. LOL So he's a liar. People are getting pretty sophisticated with reading photographic images. I guess those that keep records lists should get caught up. I like the tape measure requirement idea. I've occasionally noticed stuff like that too -things out of place. I rarely say anything. I tend to just roll my eyes. :

When I get tired, I stop working and begin just going through the motions -I start to chuck-n-wind. What helps, for me, is to eat -so I always pack a really good lunch. Seems to bring me back around. If not, I might as well go home. If I find I'm unwilling to re-rig, that's a sign to stop and EAT, man! Getting enough sleep the night before helps, but good food is essential.

I suppose a photo on a tape would be easy enough. One of those fabric sewing tapes that fold or roll up would be perfect. I don't see people "busting" others very often, but corrections are made here and there. Everytime someone posts a "How big was it??" post, the subject comes up about how cameras are poor at documentation, and then..."Get a scale, dude." More particularly I was referring to the specific threads about this that have come up. Maybe I'm aware of them bc I've been involved in them. Do you think you see many that could use correction, and don't get it? BTW: The best way to judge a bass' size in a photo is by looking at the angler's hands. It's a real giveaway. It's tough to keep one's hands and fingers outta the way. The images I "distrust" the most are those who are practiced at hiding the hands. In-Fisherman folks are experts. There are a lot of 3 and 4 lb bass in there that look like 8s. We used to joke about the early photos that used wide lenses to purposely distort, re-naming the angler's Bill "Big Hands" Dance, and Al "Popeye" Lindner, etc... . ;D

To be fair, the problem for state record keeping is that it's about public relations. State fisheries departments tend to be low budget operations -and this is especially so for CO, and even more so for our warmwater unit. Also, most people, anglers included, do not understand how easily distorted photos can be -just an inch from the lens this way or that affects our impression greatly. Photos are simply NOT accurate evidence. But to get a photo of a fish on a tape is asking too much. I think fisheries units, for C&R entries, are doing what they can. I would rather have the C&R records available to foster that kind of thinking than not, and just be ready to roll my eyes when I see a 28" LM or 58" tiger (hybrid) musky. What Randall brings in is the monetary incentives to lie that exist. From what I read, (and this may or may not be true) that potential WR LM that was foul hooked from CA might have been entered, if someone hadn't seen it and called them on it. Don't see another way around the present systems in place. Maybe IGFA could handle records for states, and magazines, and clubs, ... ?? :-/ Nope. No one could pass the stress tests required. It's a believer's beware kinda thing. On this board anyway, members seem to be pretty hip to the lens distortion in photos, and BS doesn't get too far. That in itself is pretty cool.