Paul Roberts

There seems to be a mythology that develops around BIG fish: that they are smarter, craftier, etc... I think it speaks to our ego, and I don't mean "ego" in the derogatory; Instead, ego in the motivational sense. It sure feels good when we catch one. I think BIG fish are instead rare and in many cases represent individuals that have broken trophic thresholds taking them out of the normal range of most angler's methodology (think BIG swimbaits) and ability to delay gratification. This would describe me much of the time.

For a bunch of years I did research in ecophysiology with a lot focused on photoperiod, and I came to the conclusion that at my latitude (42N) the first day of "spring" was Feb 10th, and the first day of "fall" was Aug 10th. I was not talking about "the weather". The rate of change in photoperiod accelerates then, starting the ball rolling. It's most noticeable terrestrially -if you are watching. Aquatically, water's heat capacity buffers the changes. I break "spring" into stages: initial heat-up (heat, food), pre-spawn (sites), spawn (substrate/mates), post-spawn (food). I break "fall" into "cool down" (food), "re-heats" (food), and "winter" (habitat). Each tends to "slide" into the next, although winter often comes rather suddenly up here, usually with the first snow.

Tom, you are always well spoken and right on target.

I know I can't do that. I was once awarded the Tolstoi Award on a trout site a while back, taking it from a long-standing, and long-winded, member. I bet the two of us accounted for a third of the verbage on that site. I actually thought I did pretty well on my post above.

The spawn is all about sites and substrate. Winter is all about environmental stability. The rest of the year is all about security and food, which play competing roles for energy and attention. How this parses out is why bass fishing -and understanding nature- is such a challenge.

Grass, junk, weeds, veges, aquatic vegetation, submerged aquatic vegetation, macrophytes, ... Then there's algae, moss, gunk, snot, ... Depends on where you're from, how accurate, or formal, you want to be, or how frustrated you are: "dang #$%*^& snotgrass!!"

I've read an awful lot on light, color, and fish vision, and even talked to some of the big-wig researchers in the field. I "know" a lot. I can certainly talk theory. But I've never seen enough on the water to make color a major factor for me. I think I've seen some real empirical evidences -and I've got my druthers- but I also simply don't trust angling enough as a sampling method to say I "know". I've also seen and heard of too many instances like one KVD offers in one of his books on color (paraphrased): "A group of top finishers in a tournament were out sharing a main lake point, working hard, and catching fish on plastic worms. What was interesting was we had all divined a color that worked best. What was most interesting was that we had all divined a different color." I like Al Lindner's take (paraphrased): "Factors that affect fishing are like a giant tree, the fundamentals being the trunk, conditions and circumstances the branches... things like color are out there at the leaves." I for one have some trouble trusting what's out there fluttering with every errant breeze.

Yes, it's happening here too. Just had our first snow up here (8500ft) with cold rain down at my ponds. Water temps yesterday were in the upper 50's. Two days in a row I got blown out by wind. Plenty of fishing yet to be had, but my "fall" is disappearing fast.

Especially in small waters I'd all but ignore the idea that "deepest water is the home of the fish". Not true in probably the majority of my small waters. Two things draw bass during most of the year: cover and food. Cover offers both security and food. Food is not available or most vulnerable everywhere. There's other stuff -always- but these are primary. The annual exceptions are the spawn where substrate and environmental stability take precedence, and during winter when temperature stability takes a front seat, esp during periods of extreme weather. One part of your description stands out for me: "a lot of tall trees along shore". In small waters, shoreline vegetation -the taller the better- act as security cover as surely as weed walls and drop-offs.

Flatt Shad.

Keep track of -visit- each of your waters as die-offs are not consistent or generalized. Each water body can be different. Water clarity changes can have a more abrupt effect than temperrature, esp with light-loving plants like milfoil. I have ponds sitting side by side that have diff responses: some with little vegetation left alive and another still green and flourishing.

I wrote a long piece on this, complete with vegetation type (both photos and sonar images), and how to crank the weeds. It was a while back -2009 in fact- and in searching I see it wasn't archived. Too long and image heavy I suppose. Short story is, cranks can be fished in vegetation. Go slow, feel your way down, float up, pull through gently, and map the clumps and edges by "brail". It's the edges you can rip. If you try to rip into the backside of a clump, you'll bury. Gotta find the edges, so its a lot of deft, deliberate probing by feel to map out the water around you so you can visualize the edges. You are looking to set up the rips. On many days the rips will get you better than half your strikes. With a lipless fished horizontally I find the vegetation must be thin enough, or if denser I do best fishing more vertically. Ripping does trigger strikes -one of the best triggers out there. Very worth learning how to do it with both lipped and lipless cranks.

Tenkara smallmouth?!

My small waters are now in the 60s.

Hmmmmmmm..... I go after tough conditions too, at times -purposely. I'm not a tournament guy and I've fished, and caught, a long time now. I'm more interested in how stuff works, so I will purposely pick tough scenarios just to see what I can learn. Just this week I shot a video on bluebird skies and "swimming pool" water bodies -a true double whammy. There were other guys on the water and they all blanked. I didn't . But, it was tough -my errors glaring- and potentially frustrating if your expectations are otherwise. It was also fun. Agree with Turtle135: Greater challenges make the results more satisfying. Are you nuts? Yes. But, more seriously, obsession and diligence/focus are two different things.

Doug Hannon has written that the largest bass are often the most aggressive ones -the fastest growers. He felt that many potential giants were most vulnerable to be culled by anglers.

Probably the saving grace is... that bass can be very aggressive fish and willing to chase stuff. Just... not all the time. And... not always what we'd like them to.

Roll in the potential mix of wild cards and variables -conditions and circumstances- and across water bodies, and latitudes, and it's a wonder we figure anything out.

Google "Stan Fagerstrom" and "casting".

Curious, I've not fished big swimbaits -yet. Do you mean with chop, or without?

Yes, both the "ambush-type" behavior bass can employ, and the use of "ambush points" are very important. The latter is in play virtually all of the time, (as is "triggering"), and is often the difference between random catch rates and something better than random. The difference, or problem, with clarity -or visibility- is that the fish are SO much spookier that we may not be able to make use of the others as well as we might otherwise, esp in shallow water where the majority of anglers like to fish. I've come to the recognize that, at least a chunk of the time, the reason we have to go to deeper water fish and denser cover/shade, (and chop), is bc of this spookiness. Mindless, broadcast chuck-n-wind can kill you on such days. Bringing this back on the specific topic (always love when I can do that )... KVD has talked/written a lot about increasing speed in high vis conditions so as not to give the fish too good a look. Under such conditions nothing looks right to the fish, it seems. Now, he's certainly making good use of "ambush points", and triggering, too. And the surface film is the easiest one to find. It's just that the fish may not be willing to expose themselves. As you say, these last two and location/position stuff are the most important factors anytime. I am suggesting that visibility can crush a day of fishing if you are not vewwy vewwy careful, or better, catch some breaks along the way -like a good chop. And... so some don't get the idea that inc speed is a cure-all for high vis conditions. No! It's just a tactic that can help. There are other more important things at involved, as John is alluding to.

In all my observing, and video shooting now, I've found that bass are often still hunting under bright sun. (Prey capture success for those bass appears to be much lower though and they adjust accordingly). From the angler's side, I think that the heightened wariness factor under those conditions, particularly in shallow water, is under-appreciated by a lot of anglers.

It can be both, or either, or... other stuff. A chop definitely can obscure the worst presentation offenses under high vis conditions, namely the lure flying overhead, loud splashdowns, line landing, ... . A chop obscures this stuff, and allows fish to feel safer about exposing themselves at the surface. Many times a wind-ruffled surface has allowed me to pull out a little buzzbait and get smacked despite high skies and clear water. I carry a little 1/8oz white triple-wing for just this purpose. It's small enough to tuck into any box.

When searching I too start fast and high , and then slow down and/or more bottom or cover oriented. If they'll respond to fast then... great! It being fall now I'm expecting aggressive fish so I often start with a buzzer and a burned lipless. If they respond I can pile up some fish pretty quick. In the small waters I'm fishing I know where they are so if they don't respond, I adjust retrieves (triggering) and then slow down and dredge em up. I can usually come up with something. But "times a wastin'" if I can instead move fast and they'll move with me.

I like to use translucents and metallics in really clear water, or something that matches the substrate. But this may be more me than the fish. I felt, long ago, that I did better with translucent soft plastics under high vis conditions, and have stuck with that (mostly) ever since.