Paul Roberts

Well I'm no expert on BIG bass. But...from what I have seen, it's tougher to guess weight on bass as they put on girth. Seems most top end N LM all crowd the 21-23in length mark. Girth matters. And most of us just don't see enough slobs to be a good judge. Beyond that, there does seem to be a competition thing inherent in lots of anglers, something I wish could be surgically removed bc, either side of the fence, it skews reality and good info sharing.

That's a darn good start. In many waters, that'll take you much of the way.

I fish locally, in unsung small waters. I regularly visit about a dozen waters. They vary amongst themselves, and even within depending on circumstances year to year. I'd say across all my ponds a good bass is about 16" (2+lbs). But some it's 18" and others it's 19". I have two I really enjoy that I've yet to break 18". I have only one pond (used to be 2) where I can honestly say (with tape in hand) that it would be 20".

I assume you mean strategy (game plan) and techniques (presentation)... It's a game of timing: Within a given body of water, bass are pretty habitual -or prefer to be. -There are seasonal calendar periods (spring,summer, fall, winter doesn't cut it) that help us home in. -Then there more local effects relating to water and sky conditions, and prey availability/catchability, ...and other stuff; Any of this can change hour by hour. -Then there's triggering strikes. In our ponds you can basically expect your casts to be near some bass much of the time. What do you need to do to trigger them? I try to stay on the fish. But if I'm not getting out much I refer to my knowledge and experience (good reason to keep records, esp if you re-visit waters often like I do) to get close. Then, each day (often hour) I have to adapt to what nature dishes out to us (the bass, prey, and me). If your schedule is flexible, fish by forecast -it helps. You want the best shot at catches -shoot for pre-frontal. You want to know what goes on under brilliant sun -shoot for post-frontal (couple days after is best shot -but be ready to take your lumps on our shallow waters), etc. ...

Chris, What camera did you use for that first pic? Very cool. You've got some great fisheries. I love big sunfish of any kind. My son and I go on a "sunfish hunt" every spring. We use fly-tackle and hunt for the biggest bluegill, green and pumpkinseed we can find. We already know which ponds offer what, and go to town. It sure is fun. But they offer nothing like yours do. Our best is an 11" green. Wish I had had a camera for that one.

Nice to have a fisheries department that at least spends some resources managing waters. I was spoiled in NY. Here in CO warmwater management is in it's infancy and there is no track record to speak of. The managers I've chatted with say they are just starting to sample and collect data. I'm pretty much on my own here in this regard. So far, I look at clarity, cover diversity (mostly vegetation here), and bluegill size. Bigger 'gills tend to indicate bigger bass.

Definitely worth another shot or two to be more sure. Can you contact your DNR? Do they do surveys? With an 18" limit it is probably monitored. I get to know my local fisheries people and they are often willing to talk.

They are still excellent. And they re-issued them this year.

Bass can be attracted to the splash. It's the reason the standard advice for certain topwaters is to wait for the ripples to subside after splashdown. You're waiting for the bass to home in on the disturbance. But there can be more to it. Here's what I see in the shallow clear water ponds I fish: Shallow and high riding bass in clear water can see a lure in the air. Their reaction to my lure in the air varies with sky conditions. In short, under dark skies, active bass chase the airborne lure; under bright skies, the bass bolt away from the lure. Under dark sky conditions, esp pre-frontal, I often purposely cast high and may see wakes shoot to intercept the lure. What I'm seeing are those bass that we often have strike at splashdown, and surprise us. We don't see them all. So, if you think you have very active bass under dark skies and your fish are shallow, cast high and be ready. Under bluebird skies, its exactly the opposite. I've done a lot of sight fishing and the lure in the air scares the heck out of those shallow bass. Here, splashdown also turns the bass inside out, but...usually they are gone before splashdown because the lure in the air does the job! The line landing (mono and fluoro)on the water scares them too, as does the line dragging over the surface as you retrieve. So, what you're left with is the retrieve path of every cast you make devoid of bass. > It's (almost) comical to watch the sun come up on a popular pond on a bluebird day, and the shoreline is rimmed with anglers catching bass here and there. That is, until the sun breaks over the treetops and then the dejected anglers leave one by one. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > By 10AM they're all gone, except a few die-hards or completely green newbs. And they take their beatings. :-/ :-/ I've watched bass hunting in these conditions, so those post-frontal bluebird skies don't always send the bass into hiding, but it sure changes the game when fishing for them.

Catt wrote: I see. Exactly. Excellent. That's been my question too. My rather lengthy thoughts on this are in the Reaction Strikes? thread. In that thread I questioned whether "reaction strikes" actually exist, or are just part of the continuum of feeding reactions. You are also right on in recognizing how anglers often use human concepts to describe what they think they are seeing in fish reactions to lures, such as anger, or why a bass might hit such a "crazy contraption" as a spinner bait -as if they somehow perceive it the way we do. Just as we can only see the world through human perceptions, bass can only perceive the world through the limits of their perceptions and interpretations. Without the intellectual and technological tools available to them that we have, they are MUCH more limited in this regard than we are. I've never questioned that a bass could easily perceive a spinnerbait as a preyfish -or as simply something worth trying (I could go on about this one but, I've got a living to make here). This is much easier to get away with under certain lighting conditions, naivete of individual bass, or those in high competition for food. One things for sure, it ain't static down there, and that's why bass are complex creatures, and our fishing results with it. OK. Comprende. However, I do give Keith Jones', and other's, work some credit in illuminating behaviors, however isolated or seemingly esoteric they may seem. Studying bass in controlled environments is very useful; just be careful with your speculations. From what I've read of Keith Jones work, including some of his early pre-Berkley stuff, he knows where to draw the lines. BTW: He is an angler, and has fished some tournaments. His fishin' talk sounds like he's at least up on what's going around in the bass fishing world. He may not be KVD in disguise, but that's not fair. How many of us are? Good stuff. This IS a cool topic. BTW My posts in Structure in a Functional Sense address the other half of the coin: how the environment might shape the bass' perceptions and ability as to just what defines prey. Bass developed into what they are in response to environmental limitations and opportunity. It only makes sense to try to define what those might look like. As anglers can we recognize them and take advantage of them? I believe we can, and do. I know my posts are dense, so I'm trying to offer a little framework to it. BTW (again): This isn't my tack it's that of a behavioral ecologist. The groundwork was set long ago.

Catt wrote: I guess I don't quite understand what specifically you're getting at. Your blanket statement is easy to rebut. What specifically are you calling to task. That would be helpful. It's not all speculation. There are actual experiences/experiments that have illuminated behaviors -many are not at all what is expected. Then there is interpretation of those results. The quality of those interpretations vary with the interpreters experience. Then there is speculation.. allowing for a wider range of thought, beyond mere and careful interpretation of results. It may lead to the next, and often more refined, experiment. Not all those interpreters/speculators are idiots and fools. Catt, I hope you don't think you are the only one to have questioned the use and quality of interpretation? If our senses and sense really can't yield anything of use, then we would never become better anglers over time. Think back to when you first started. The greenest newb would be right in there with KVD and Buck Perry. So...what separates these people? Is it really nothing??

Since I don't have time to do this excellent subject justice right now, I'll pull up from the archives some previous discussion on closely related subjects: Blind Bass http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1240362308/0 Structure in a functional sense http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1215534692/0 Reaction Strikes? http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1231459691/0

SammyLee, very cool observations. Thanks! The only other thing I've read about this (of substance) was from Bob Underwood's book "Lunker". Bob's the guy who used scuba to observe bass and based his book about it. Anyway, he claimed bass got very spooky and nervous during such a storm. But, the way he described weather wasn't very clear to begin with. He also said little about number of observations (in and out of storms) so this has been just an asterisk in my mind. Thanks for that diving story.

Man...this is a big and fascinating discussion. Would love to weigh in but it scares me to think of the time it would take to put it all together, considering my work schedule right now. Lots of pieces that can fit together here that explain a lot I believe. Another time unfortunately.

You can read and read -and that's good! But the fish are the real teachers. You're over the hump! (The first one anyway LOL).

Mattlures wrote: Well, I'm going to agree with Matt here, whether he does or not LOL. IMO it's really difficult to imitate living creatures. It takes certain water conditions and circumstances to even get close. When you catch a bass, esp an educated one (fished for), it simply made a mistake. Most bass that see your lure, don't make a mistake. As to super-realistic lures in proper context, such as Matt's 'Gills in a spawning bed, I think you have a better shot at mimicry. I've been a long time fly-fisher and fly designer. What we think looks like food may not to a fish. The important attributes are size, color scheme, motion (often very subtle), water conditions (appropriate visibility), and then proper context. I've fished LIVE nymphs to trout and screwed up the presentation (getting subtle drag) and suddenly that nymph is "NOT FOOD" to the trout. To a fly designer, that's scary news! Presentation is number one. After you get this in good control, specific fly designs CAN make a difference. Matt also once wrote in a similar thread about NOT trying to get specific with details -that a somewhat amorphous bait can be best. I've thought this too. Often, esp under bright conditions, this is a good way to go as its tough to get the subtle details of color shape and shading down. An amorphous bait potentially makes mimicry that much easier, esp with something large like a bass lure fished in still water. Bottom line: If you have a hungry bass that is hunting for food and you can offer something that looks like food, esp food she knows to look for, GREAT! But it's not easy to do.

That's really good advice. Bass are curious critters. Sound can bring them in to investigate. Fishing a jig below is not too much different in this regard than fishing a frog on top. The bass often can't see the frog but will come to the action of it moving over the mat. They then ascertain the size and direction of the frog and POW! I use two basic hollow frog types: One with a tapered head that will slip through algae and walk in the openings. The other is one with a popper head. The difference in the number of strikes you can get with that popper can be amazing. If I had to bring one topwater frog the popper would be it for the exact reason Catt brings up. There are times to be quiet. But in dense vegetation, making some commotion is one of the best things you can do.

First thing to do on this board is search your topic. Use the green Search tab above. Most topics have been hit pretty well. For this topic try "Match the Hatch" for starters.

I talked with a couple guys years ago who decided to fish through an electrical storm. They told me that as they fished and the cell got close their graphite rods started making pinging sounds. They looked at each other and their hair was starting to frizz -standing up on end. They got the HE!! outta there. They told me they talked to an electrical engineer buddy who told them that, being in a 'glass boat, they had become a giant capacitor. I don't know electricity well so I don't know how good this explanation is, but it's enough to scare the H outta me. I remember fishing at the edge of a huge black cell, watching it and thinking it would miss me. It did. But I read in the paper the next day that a man was watering his garden further from the cell than I, in the sun! And he was struck, blowing his arm off where he held the hose, and killing him in front of his wife. Lightning just isn't worth messin' with.

Is there a limit to how many times you can shake it before people start questioning you? 8-) after 3 shakes you are just playing with it. Playing is not allowed.> More seriously, I think that new anglers freak out (get their confidence down) when they get into weeds. Fishing vegetation is not a chuck-n-wind kind of thing, unless you want a wad of weeds. There are certain specific things you can do to get you through weeds and trigger strikes. Ignore these and you'll likely be frustrated. That shake is a way of working your jig/T-rig through vegetation without fouling up. You feel your way through, then pop it free, and BAM! It's similar to fishing a crankbait (treble hooks and all) through dense vegetation. You gently feel your way through, then rip it free at an edge. But you have to know where in a weed clump you are. I fish milfoil a lot, (many of us probably do too) and it's easy to bury a lure, especially a crank. A tip that will work for jigs too: Cast short. Identify prime breaks in the weeds and target them. Pull and shake (don't shake a crank) the lure through deftly, then when you reach the break, pop it free. Rip too soon and you've got a wad of gunk. It's not chuck-n-wind. ID your target, fish deftly, and throw the trigger (the rip) when you can. The more triggers you throw the more fish you catch.

I see proof it affects fisherman. Hey, good luck tonight. Put the hammer to 'em.

Now wait a minute. I'm confused. Do you shake up and down or side to side, or a little of both??

Thanks Tom. I wonder if this is more apt to happen with larger bass. Since fish eggs do not vary much in size, larger female would carry more eggs, and one would assume would spend more time extruding eggs. Plus, maybe more body mass is more apt to damage the tail.

Micro, I read a study (on bluegills) in which cattails offered by far the greatest productivity (food chain production) in the lake, which also had other aquatic vegetation. The largest 'gills spent a lot of their time in the cattails.