Paul Roberts

RW, I've heard about anglers doing that, but it's never worked for me -Then again I avoid it at all costs (I'd add the "horror" smiley, but don't see it). (I'm not talking about the backlash thing, although I could be LOL). Are these sighted fish you've done this with, or just had bass take at splashdown?

Brian, I figured someone would react to the reaction bites comment. I'm on the fence too. The stimulation of hair cells causing a biting response requires a localized and appropriate stimulation. This isn't likely, very often, in fishing situations. The chances of tickling a bass in the cheek (not "hitting" either) without alarming it first, are pretty slim. I've been aware of and attempted to use this cheek and jaw tickling on difficult sighted females in spring, and believe it's actually worked on a couple occasions, but it's difficult to do without putting them off. They hate to be touched by the line I suppose anywhere but those haircells LOL. (BTW did you know that carp (an ostariophysid) can hear line in the water? I believe they can -appears to be a 6th sense). As far as how reaction bites fall into why bass bite, my money is on the circumstances surrounding OFT. Since we humans aren't up against intense selective pressures, I expect we'd be the last to recognize such things. But, I too am on the fence on how apparent "reaction bites" fit in. As a trout and steelhead angler I used to consider "reaction strikes" a part of my bag of tricks. I found that I could elicit a strike from a sighted steelhead by swinging a fly directly ahead of its snout. It had to be very close, and make a sharp swing in that small area. It really worked and if you could weasel yourself into proper position you could amaze the crowd gathered around some of these pools. But, the most interesting experience of this type of thing happened in one of those pay to fish trout pools at a sportsman' show (is that an oxymoron or what!). Anyway, I was young and curious and paid my buck, and was handed a short glass rod with a short length of braided nylon was tied, to which was tied a hook. The bait was small square chunk of black vinyl no kidding. I burnt my buck watching paniced trout race by my bait. They actually had a whirlpool going. As I was walking out I saw a very little boy not watching his bait and pulling his bait across the water's surface, and I saw a trout take a quick pass at it. I paid another buck! I let my crude bait sink then accelerated it in front of the throngs of on-coming trout, and one rushed and grabbed it. I dropped the rod and he spit it. I did it again, and again. This time my fish was inadvertently hooked and I was quickly ushered out my fish popped into a bag for me to take lucky me. However, that, I believe, was a reaction bite. Reaction bite could be one way to explain the effectiveness of burnin' a lipless crankbait -literally retrieving as fast as your reel can go. Bass CAN catch it. But it doesn't work all, or most, of the time. So I do wonder, is that really some deep-rooted physiological response, or a contextual behavior, and still under the constraints of OFT? The idea that you can throw a bait on top of a bass' head I just don't buy. Every time I've done that, they spook. But I've had many bass hit the moment a lure touched down on a cast but it didn't land on their heads, they saw it in the air and intercepted it at the splashdown. I bet those times are also when burnin' would work: Aggressive, likely even competitive, bass. Not just any bass, at any time, responding to something it just can't help. It's affected the way I look at fish reactions to water temperature as well. I've noticed that in warmer water often a faster retrieve is required to get a chase. I can understand why a fish might not be willing to chase in cold water, but why would they require speed in warm? It sure appears reactionary. In fact, I once caught a bass on a bare hook once, on a bet -by burning it in hot water -albeit a 9incher. No mature bass is likely to succumb to that. Anyway, why are we talking about this? Oh yes, ambush points...physical things that affect why bass bite, and energetics are part of the formula. I'm OK pushing the envelope -helps me decipher what questions to ask. I'll just continue to bang around inside my little capsule here, and radio in every now and then. Yeah, that little tiny piece of it sure can be special.

From my original post: I went back and checked out the little points on the island corners that had attracted aggressive mature bass during that front. Here's a photo of one of them probably the most attractive of the four. Not much to see is there! And I think that's the draw. It's a clean opening in the cover, with adequate depth at the shore, giving the bass a crack at bluegills and small bass under low visibility conditions. On the day I took this pic, it was bright and sunny and those little openings were devoid of mature bass. The small bass were happily cruising and chasing dragonflies, damselflies, and tiny bluegills. But the larger bass I believe were holed up in the dense vegetation. I caught and spotted several up to 16 in the cover, but couldn't find anything larger. Tucked down beneath I suppose.

Tournaments add a whole 'nother aspect to fishing. I don't tournament fish because I don't want to get into all the other things Ts bring to my fishing. For me, it's the fishing that's fun and interesting. Having a social side to fishing is nice -in proper doses. That's just me. Some guys just love the tournament side of it all.

Because the C-Rig will let you feel the bottom, and pinpoint specific elements, in relation to where you are sitting. I'd like to hear more from others on the details they look for, and specific examples of spots that produced.

Sometimes in midsummer I'd get that. I'm sitting in my boat, and suddenly see how ridiculous it is to be spending my time and money chasing fish! Or I start thinking about winter steelhead. Then mid-winter would come and I'd be dreaming of summer. But that was when I fished -A LOT. Now I just don't get that kind of time, so my fishing days are much more appreciated. The sentiments sound equally ridiculous to me in reverse -Who wouldn't want to spend every waking hour chasing fish! No worries. Take a break. The joy will come back to you. Or try a switch up -go bluegill fishing.

Wow. Congrats, again! I've started, slowly, creeping toward some trophy hunting. But i got side-tracked again! It's just ALL too cool. Heat of the day you say. Interesting.

Welcome! That is a very large northern largemouth. All any formulas can do is get close. What you have is probably a pretty good estimate.

Hey Sam! Congrats! You're advice is excellent and practical, and you are quick to pop in and welcome newcomers. You have a warm respectful on-line presence that is very much appreciated.

Yeah, the casting is the first hurdle. Control is the name of the game in fishing and fly tackle is simply a bigger challenge. It asks us to "throw" in ways we aren't used to. And tackle has to be matched (line to rod) and configured correctly, especially the leader. The quickest way is to get instruction, either by reading, video, or best, in person. I'd suggest you start with the roll cast, then move to aerial casting. As for tackle, there's one thing I wouldn't skimp on, and that's the fly-line. If you can afford it, get a good line. What you want to avoid is a cheap soft line that sags in the guides (Cortland 333 does this, unless they've re-configured it since I angrily threw mine in the trash so many years ago). You want a hard-coated line that will shoot through the guides. One thing about fly-fishing though -it's generally less efficient, less fast, at pulling fish out of the water than with conventional tackle -except for insect eaters like sunfish and trout. You can learn to adapt the tackle to most fishing tasks at hand, but it's mainly a shallow water game. And until you get really good at controlling your line, it's a longer learning process than conventional. Most people head into it after they've got the "gotta catch" bug out. Fly-fishing is worth learning -it's really wonderful: The casting, the intimacy with water (not just being poetic -you'll see), and creating your own flies, and fish fight better (long rod and direct hand connection with the line). One of the reasons might be because such posts are relegated to the "Everything Else" section! Shouldn't this be in the Fishing Tackle section??

OUCH!

Thanks Brian. Excellent as usual. You've hit feeding and competition, and introduced conditioning, activity level, and the vagaries of triggering. I think ambush points are more important when things aren't easy. Keith Jones mentions that there is no such thing as a reaction bite. That bass' reactions to lures are a calculated feeding response think OFT. Bass are not making rash decisions, but calculated ones but one that results in the bass commiting or not. An ambush point, as I understand it, is centered on triggering a fish to commit, and these CAN be structural in nature. But not always required, especially when things are easy feeding bass in high competition, say. Hmmmm... I'm wondering if when throwing up the bank the lure isn't, at times, perceived as escaping into the safety of the shallowsas in Cliff's hotspot. As a bank angler, I've been aware that the shallow lip of a drop can be an effective ambush point a time and place not to be asleep at the switch. Yes. Feeding bass are the ones we want. They are 90% of the bass we catch. (Sound familiar Brian? LOL). Can we trigger more fish to commit, using ambush points? Not if we can't see them I suppose. Which brings to mind a day of smallmouth fishing a couple weeks back. Smallies, and some big ones, were cruising just off the shoreline of one of my ponds. Much of the time they stayed just off the weed edge, and well above bottom. Throw these cruisers (huntng they were) a lure so that their paths met in open water and they would shy away. Not surprising lures often look silly in the clear open water that ain't no preyfish. All the bass I caught were taken blind casting at or inside the weed edge, (See my thread Surprise in the Slop in the My Fishing Tournament or Outing section). The two exceptions were one 15 on a flick-shake (at the surface a la Leisenring!) and one other 19 fish in particular that stands out. She was close to the weed edge, and at a very ragged section at the edge of a stair step depth change. I spotted her and cast beyond, and as my lure approached she spied it, moved closer, then started to turn away (another rejection). But my lure by that time had reached the ragged stair step and I let the jig swim into that step. She immediately changed her attitude, bolted into that little corral, and took the jig confidently. I believe the jig suddenly had moved into a vulnerable and catchable location, one she knew well a place where she knows from experience she can catch prey. Chasing bluegills out in the open, under high visibility conditions, is an exercise in futility. Put one close enough, corralled, and it's dinner. I thought that was pretty nifty, but realize the frustrating truth. Such catches mostly occur in happenstance, since we just can't control the circumstances. I wonder how many catches such events account for, beyond the reckless competitive feeders? I've done enough sight fishing to know how many bass see, and bypass, our lures. The lure has to do something special, and I think ambush points, or whatever we should call them, play a role in at least some of our catches. As to making good use of such things in deep water, I suppose if you can't see the structure and cover, and the fish's response, it would be awfully difficult to tell. I read something not too long ago by Dave Fritz, using this term, but he didn't elaborate. Just what is an ambush point to Dave?

Raul, you're right, a swim bladder is not just a balloon. But, as you allude to, there are two basic types of swim bladder, those with a valve and those without. Trout possess the former and can adjust depth more easily. Bass and most other spiny finned fishes have the latter, and cannot adjust rapidly. I believe they have to diffuse the gas out through the blood -I'd have to look that one up. Bass truly are prisoners of pressure, but appear to be able to handle substantial pressure changes while feeding, or being pulled to the surface, over at least a 15 foot range, at least for a limited time. I've read that deep caught (not sure how deep) bass popped into a livewell can resist the pressure for a time, but will begin to bloat if not returned in time.

OK, I have a question for you deeper water guys -CJ, Brian, others... Concerning proper "angles on structure", might the idea of an "ambush point" as I describe above, be at work in some way? Or are deeper bass simply less spooky (and competitive) and all that's required is getting a lure close? What's happening down there, surrounding presentation angles?

Crestliner, Yes! Having a dark front roll through is often the best of conditions. Does the pressure have an effect, or is it the visibility conditions? My observations have me watching the sky, not the barometer. I had a day last year in which bright sun made fishing (for mature bass) really tough -nary a bite. Dinks were thrilled as usual though. Then a heavy cloud mass developed in the afternoon (afternoon thunderstorms are common here near the mountains) and I started getting banged by the bigger bass. I could picture them starting to rise up out of there hides. Or maybe they were there all along and my casting put them down. I've seen this many times while sight fishing. I think both are at work under bright conditions.

WRB, Excellent post. The one thought I've had concerning the kinds of pressures involved does make me wonder if such a change in buoyancy, however small, can affect a bass' ability to capture prey in any way. If you add up high visibility conditions with rising pressure (commonly associated), this might put bass off. But, the same works conversely. Falling pressure would make a bass slightly more dense. What advantage or disadvantage might this bring? LOL -Listen to us. All for an ol' green fish! Are we nuts??

I'm not up on the latest. Just don't skimp and calibrate whatever you get -regularly. I use light dumbell weights. I've got a Chatillon spring scale. Rather expensive and old technology (20 some years now) -which may actually be a good thing!

The barometer may be an pre-indicator of weather change, but my money is on the weather change and associated conditions, rather than the pressure reading, or even the pressure itself -as miniscule as it is calculated to be. As to winds, they vary in effect in relation to weather depending on where you live, both geographically and topographically. Such a formula would have to vary too. BTW, I like a north wind in early spring because it blows warmed surface water to the south shore and makes the 'gills and bass come alive! I guess I do put the least effort forth then, because all I have to do is camp out at a good south shoreline location. Course my arms can get tired LOL.

Cliff, really great observations, and fishing. I'll bet everyone has spots like these. If they don't, then they are probably are one of the confused newbs. Keep lookin', Keep castin'! Your second spot hits my idea of an ambush point (opportunity zone?) very well. The first likely does, somewhere, but without knowing particulars of the structure it would be a guess. Here's my guess, and it fits nicely into another similar ambush point (triggering point?): I'm often a bank angler too. The shoreline, or more accurately, the lip of the shoreline (or, in your case, the drop-off) often draws a strike from following fish, because it looks like the lure is going to escape into the shallows, and the bass has to react or lose that meal. This happens a lot. It also happens at the water surface. How many times have you seen or heard of someone say it took right at my feet! Or, ...right at the boat! There is often an ambush point under your rod tip, and it follows you around LOL. Recognize it, and be ready! A famous fly-fishing technique called the Leisenring Lift (after the late Jim Leisenring) is centered around this very thing. Also, how many times have you heard a really good structure technician say, "I have to line up on that spot perfectly, to maximize my catch." This is likely because some angles make best use of "ambush points" while others miss 'em. Dave Fritz and Brian Waldman come to mind.

Awesome! Great bit of work here. I've kept my mouth shut on barometer because I haven't attempted to do what you've done. I've not kept barometer data mostly because I always figured I could go back to weather records someday. But I've yet to do it, for some other reasons: I don't believe bass have to wait for a certain barometric range, on top of all the other requirements for good feeding opportunities, to feed. The barometer mythology (along with solunar and in many cases in application, lunar) seems to assume that feeding for bass is as easy as sitting down at a table or putting on a feedbag! Selective pressures on fish around predation is very intense -a real chess match -and there are MANY more losers than winners. If bass wait at all to feed it's because of visibility conditions (sky and water), temperature, oxygen concentrations, preoccupied (often feeding) prey, and cover (for baitfish) density disruptions. Drag an anchor over good crayfish and sculpin substrate and the smallies will come alive -barometer be damned. Further, how does one really control for angler effort and success? Who's to say that on my tough day of fishing, someone else didn't find the motherlode? Was my poor showing due to the barometer? If my sampling methods were so keen and consistent that I could win every tournament at will, and always find the mature bass in something even close to equal success, then I would be someone to listen to surrounding barometric effects on fishing success. There are too many variables in there that affect angler success that I can imagine that the barometer (or solunar) could easily lead one astray, without really stringent controls and an enormous amount of sampling efforts. There, I feel better.

I like that. Or Opportunity zones. Neat clip LBH. I did a fair amount of fly-fishing for stripers, and got to see tides in action. Neat because they are more intense than current changes in reservoirs, lakes and even streams most of the time. It pays to be multi-species and multi-water. Yes, it would be interesting to know just how they are relating to such (deeper) sweet spots, ambush points, or opportunity zones, or... Have you guys read or heard about John Hope's "funnel spots"? Sounds like they're right up the alley of this discussion.

Thanks for the kind words, Paul. I agree that there is more to a bass' life than just the food, and it's great if you can find it all crammed into a certain area. And there is more to structure than what I'm focusing on here, such as general food production, security (real or remembered), and travel routes to spawning or wintering areas, are part of a bass' life. I guess what you're suggesting is that having all those things close together in a small area is more apt to produce, or hold, a really big bass. That may be, I'll have to take your word for it as I'm not a trophy bass chaser. I'm focused on mature bass. In my neck of the woods that's mostly bass between 15 and 20 inches. I think that one thing that allows a bass to reach maturity in the first place is access to food. I guess my thoughts were more on the aspects of structure (an all inclusive lay of the land), particular locations, that offer a hunting advantage. What prompted this thread was CJ's comment in Catt's structure thread, and my fishing the other day in which I found mature bass concentrated on a few very specific locations. The structure could have been considered the island, I guess, but actually there are bass all over this pond as it is shallow and produces food over the majority of it. What was key to locating and catching these bass was the little clean points at the island corners and at the base of a flat that I believe gave the bass a hunting advantage over other nearby areas. Exactly what the advantage was at the little points I'm not entirely sure. The base of the flat I believe I understand, as described. On my next trip I'm going to spend some time wading around that island hopefully getting a better idea of what the draw, or advantage, was. Here's my theory: When engaged in fishing, we are trying to get bass to attempt to capture our lure. I believe there are certain places to put a lure that puts it in greater danger of being attacked and that these areas are inherent in the lay of the land and cover. I've seen this many many times over the years with many species. So, while structure may attract bass, for all the above mentioned reasons, it's certain key elements that bass use to hunt off of. These may be static, or as in most things in nature, their utility to bass varies with conditions (light, current, vegetation, water levels, etc...). They can also occur as happenstance, bass simply watching for an opportunity that could appear by happenstance a cruising bluegill that makes a wrong turn. (It's also why bass hunt together in loose groups, flushing prey using one another as loosely coordinated allies.) But, if the locations bass hunt on are consistently advantageous, then I believe they will attract bass regularly, and offer a better than average ability to incite strikes. Heck, those island corners were VERY different in terms of bass use than the straight shoreline areas of those islands. This, btw, is how stream trout feed, and this is well documented. They sample foraging sites within a stream pool by rotating through the possible sites (dictated by current) and stay put when capture rate (drifting insects) is acceptable. There's no reason to believe bass can't figure out something similar in the course of their lives. Low Budget hits a really good, related point that energetics (energy budgeting) plays a key role here in when and where a bass decides to make an attempt at capturing prey. In fact it explains, in part (there's other cool stuff too -another post someday), why such locations mentioned are needed. A while back someone posted about the similarity between bass and cats. Sounds a little odd, maybe, but I've always noticed the similarity, and fish behavioral ecologists would probably agree too. You couldn't pick a better mammal to compare a bass (or other predatory fish) with. Cats (mature ones that is) are very energy conscious, being very stingy with there energy. Lions sleep or rest for 20 hours a day, hunt and eat for 4. All wild cats are this way to a large degree, including domestic cats. Pull a string for a kitten and it'll attack til it drops to sleep. But a mature cat is apt to act ticked off if you keep goading them. It's simply part of their nature as top level predators; They learn when to strike, or starve in the process. Many fish are known to be stingy with energy around feeding. There is a large body of research pertaining to Optimal Foraging Theory how fish regulate energy in/energy out in their feeding. The two species most studied in this are bluegills and trout (introduced above). But bass have similar issues. Now fish don't sleep for 20 hours a day. But they do learn when it's worth burning energy to attack. I've seen this, as an angler, with many species of fish and with bass too. Thus, my thinking on where and when bass have an advantage on prey. It's one reason, I believe, that lures are so often NOT hit. Bass in open water away from cover are apt to follow lures, only to discover something wrong with them. But place that lure in a vulnerable position, from the bass' perspective, and she's much more apt to make the attempt. Further, such locations obscure the details of the lure/presentation, making it more apt to fool a bass into making the mistake of trying to eat that piece of wood or plastic. I call these locations ambush points and I'm not the only one who uses this term. Most probably I picked it up somewhere long ago, and although bass are technically not ambush predators (something Ralph Mann's gets all bristly about), it's a loosely apt description. Hey, if anyone can come up with a better term I'd love to have it, if anything to assuage Ralph, LOL. Energy budgets explain, in large part, why older larger bass are tougher to catch than younger ones, and why lure size can matter to large bass. It also helps explain why ambush points are real places and circumstances. As angler's, we should recognize what is happening, and look for it. That's my assertion anyway. Am I all wet? Do I think too much?? LOL Feedback?

Matt, that is all supposition. I can't offer much more, but... Again, here are some articles on the skeptical side of the issue (worth reading): http://www../bassfish/articles/T199.htm http://www.midcurrent.com/articles/science/ross_pressure_myth.aspx

Yeah, many anglers assign hopeful, or relative weights to their fish. I think the magazines create unreal expectations for most waters, and much of the country . Here's a great piece on the subject http://www.bigindianabass.com/big_indiana_bass/2006/12/all_fishermen_a.html