Paul Roberts

Fun topic. I used to play around some just to see what fish, or fisherman, would do. As a youngster I had access to an unfished pond that was chocked full of stunted bass. Every cast I'd catch one. One day I stopped counting at 130. At home I had a "Creepy Crawler" set (toy from the 60s and 70s with a little hot plate and molds to make plastic bugs and stuff). I had a "Tarzan" mold that made a little human Tarzan form. I melted some worn and broken plastic worms and made a little soft plastic human. I fished it as a topwater to the Jaws theme song. The limbs were fragile so it didn't last long. The torso worked just fine though. twitched. A bare hook. Different, and much more normal pond in terms of fish numbers and catch-ability. I cast some bait on a #2 hook and the bait flew off. So I cranked that hook in really fast, and a small bass nailed it. So I fished that for some time, just for the heck of it and caught a couple more. Never did try a larger hook. So you don't need a lipless crank for "burnin'". Which reminds me... A young kid invited me to fish a pond he knew. I said sure and brought several fine rods and an assortment of all the latest greatest bass lures. The kid had a cheapo rod and a band-aid box contained a snarl of snelled hooks, sinkers, a bobber, and ONE lure -a little chrome cheapo crankbait. He cast it out and just cranked it in as fast as he could and the little badly out of tune plug spun wild circles through the water. And he had 4 bass on the bank before I finished my first retrieve of my Purple Haze Red Glitter Gilraker worm, Mustad J-series gooseneck hook, fished on 12lb Trilene XT from my Shimano BMP250SXH and Skyline 6007 graphite rod! Did a lot of steelheading at one time. Got pretty a bit smug about it. One day I'd been watching a fishing show and got to laughing about the TV fisherman applying some magic potion "liberally" on their lures on camera, trying to look nonchalant. I then hit the river and upon reaching a popular hole with a few too many guys on it, thought I'd do a little clowning. I worked in amongst the fishless crowd and announced braggadociously that I was about to catch a steelhead. I pulled out a bottle of Dr Juice (which never seemed to make much difference before), loudly pronounced that it was indeed magic and must be "applied liberally". I then cleared my throat loudly and made my first cast. And darned if I didn't hook a good steelie!. I should've been beaten up. But I knew most of the guys there and we all laughed about it. Another time some Snoopy bobber's came in at the tackle shop I worked at. "Perfect!" I cackled. I took Snoop steelheading. We had a fine day together, me and Snoop. I caught 7 nice steelies with him until the 8th took Snoopy with him under a boulder. At one point a guy had came up to me and asked what I was using and I showed him Snoopy. The guy said, in all seriousness, "I'll have to try one of those." When I realized he thought I was offering real advice I showed him my various steelhead floats and told him Snoopy was just for laughs. Lessee ... -Carp on bubble gum. -Rock bass and smallmouth on the white tag from my shirt, dapped on the surface and vibrated to mimic emerging mayflies. -I design and tie my own flies and have done some fun stuff. But the first fly I ever tied was when I was 8 or 9 was a rubber band crudely secured onto a #6 bait hook with gray thread. I had my Dad's old steel pole and winch with black nylon line and I threw the fly out into a canal and let it lay. After a little while I discovered a carp had discovered my rubber band.

That's what I do: Roll the barbs down with needle nosed pliers. I'm not purchasing barbless hooks. No, I don't lose fish on them.

This is what I do. But I'm very focused when I do it. If the fish is still shaking its head, I'll loop it around again until its laying flat out. I've handled a lot of fish so I'm pretty confident. (Papajoe does this fit your Superstitions question? ) If the fish has multiple sets in, often with mouth pinned closed, I'll belly lift. It works very well. But .. and this is true with all fish handling, you have to beware of the fish giving an unexpected kick. After handling fish a while you get a sense for when they are uncomfortable, jazzed up, and what prods them to react. A fish with a face full of hooks I'll often keep in the water a bit longer until it stops fighting all together. Once laying out prone I'll belly lift. After I've freed one set, I then switch to the more secure lip grip. Another option that works surprisingly well is going barbless. Here's why I started looking into this option: This fish is a common sight in some public waters I've fished. That fish will likely lose it's maxillary and premaxillary on that side. Like this fish has: I found going barbless works just fine. I don't lose fish. However, I don't do this with just any lure. Works fine with soft plastics with light weights, and with most free-swinging trebles. I don't go barbless with jigs; The barb is necessary there. I don't go barbless with lipless cranks either -their compact weight seems easier for bass to throw. But other cranks and topwaters, I don't know I'm barbless until I have the fish in hand, and the hooks just shake out. Very cool. There are also micro-barb hooks out there that work very well. But the big barbed trebles, I can't stomach anymore.

There's truth in these statements. Rarely do we write our success stories before they happen. Hindsight is 20:20. Foresight, a little hazy.

One fish is not enough to establish anything that would constitute a “pattern” –something repeatable, by definition. I can guess why Mattlures says “1” and that’s bc he’s a trophy fish expert. He’s looking for the often rare big bite. But for anglers trying to put a numbers catch together (say, a limit) it helps to get enough of a bead on what a good number of fish are doing during the time you’re out there, to put a good catch together. There can be any number of combinations of things that put fish in the boat, and lots of combinations that won’t. One fish could be a complete fluke. A pattern is something you can repeat. That’s what you are hunting for. You’ll know you’ve got a solid consistent pattern going when you’ve got several in the boat. Then you assess whether you want to continue hammering away, maybe fine tuning things to catch even more, or maybe look for another combination that puts even larger fish in the boat. There is no magic number that says you’re onto something. You’ll know it when you find it. It’s when you stop hunting and start catching. Often it’s a rate of catch: 3 fish over 3 hours isn’t providing much. The number may vary too, depending on the quality of the fishery, the time of year, the sky and water conditions, angling pressure, etc.. What's satisfying depends on what you're trying to accomplish: have some fun, vie for a top spot in a tournament, catch a trophy, .... Oh yes, search presentations are usually just those that allow you to cover water to locate fish, since fish are almost never equally distributed. Usually these are “faster” presentations but not always. Some locations and conditions require a slower or more targeted approach right at the outset. Being versatile in approach and arsenal, and recognizing appropriate circumstances to apply that versatility allows more experienced anglers to “dial in” quicker to the tempo of the day. Hope this helps.

Oh man...how about this one... "I GUARANTEE we'll catch em there!" I know I wimped out on this one. But ... I still am apt to say that somehow not learning that lesson. I chalk it up to as much good ol' enthusiasm as ego -or maybe they're close to the same thing. I finally dipped a camera (an expensive SLR) in the river after YEARS of wearing one. I think I was getting smug about it. Your broken rod ... yeah, it hurts. A buddy closed the car door on one of mine (and I looooved that rod) at 5am on the opener of trout season a long ways from home.

Ha! Fun post. Your fishinese comment had me chuckling. Warmwater fish can survive fine in some mighty small waters through the winter. They can tolerate pretty low 02, both physiologically and behaviorally (decreasing activity). And, enough sun normally gets through the ice to keep plants photosynthesizing. Trouble comes when there are TOO many nutrients -often from fertilizers and leach fields which produces too much bacteria which get teh lions share of limited 02. Coupled with a heavy snow capping the ice and blocking the light, the largest critters die first. Winterkills can be partial (often the bigger fish go) to nearly complete. Gotta be there at ice out usually bc dead fish will sink and you may not see it. That 2lb (~16") bass, in WI, is probably 6 years old, or maybe more. Maybe someone caught it elsewhere and put it in. But its more likely that it has survived a half dozen winters. That would not be surprising at all.

Very well said. I almost didn't respond initially bc I didn't want to just sound like a naysayer, or… like I’m stompin on people's dreams. I’m not. But I think proper perspective is important. I hear too many “stretched truths” from northern anglers telling me their PBs weighed 8 to 12lbs, and then call a 1.5lb fish a "3lber", or a 5 an “8”!. I feel bad for them, rather than “like I’ve been lied to”. These numbers are derived from top southern fisheries and end up used as comparisons and expectations for the whole country. When a kid feels he has to tell me his 4lber (maybe the top fish from that particular pond) was a “6lber” I feel bad for him. And know that I can’t get the real scoop from a lot of the anglers I share waters with. I've been aware of your focus Speedbead, and your truly impressive results. Anyone who can break 7lbs on northern waters by design is doing more than one thing right. Either they have some rare waters open to them, have the know-how, or most likely, both. And probably a few other things I'm not even aware of. I've only done a little of it, just to explore that aspect of ... the food chain. And I broke my PB and several pond records in the process. As I understand it, exceptionally large bass in most (average) waters are those that have been able to jump into a different trophic level by genetic happenstance and/or pure aggression. Most waters simply don’t produce many –if any– exceptionally large bass. If one wants to see them on anything more than an astronomically low probability basis, they have to find them and then fish for them. They'll certainly earn 'em. Otherwise, do me a favor and buy a friggin’ scale!

Do you mean: When have you found a "pattern"?

DD bass are indeed special fish and earn the term Trophy (with the capital T) just about anywhere –even in the south. Bass that large occupy a whole different trophic role in a system, eating bass that most anglers would be happy to catch! They also tend to be rare. To catch one you have to be astronomically lucky, wealthy, OR exceptionally knowledgeable and exceptionally dedicated, as well as lucky! However the same can be said for smaller representatives of the species in the north. Which brings us to the other thought stream concerning DD bass: Guys, I appreciate your enthusiasm. Truly! I can feel it from here! But, the truth of the matter is that DD bass are essentially non-existent in the north. In light of this fact, Bassmaster only recognizing DD’s as open for recognition is a snub to the knowledge and dedication of northern anglers, OR maybe it’s just a vacation travel plug for the south! In the north, there are regions that seem to give up bigger bass than others –in particular the NE states near the coast, and this includes SE NY, MA, and NJ. This band of what I am guessing is a coastal climate influence continues into the mid Atlantic states but this is getting “south” enough that DD’s are not just complete freaks of nature. Looking at catch records in the past, it’s appeared to me that in SE NY you can add about a pound or so to top end fish compared to the rest of the state, or the non-coastal NE, or the rest of the northern US for that matter. The farther north you go the further from DD they get. Of course, this all may just be changing with current weather trends. Along with birds arriving and flowers popping earlier, southern Canada is documenting gains in warmwater and losses in coldwater habitats annually. So who knows?! I’ve not been following lately, so I’m curious: How many DD fish are you guys aware of from NY, or the rest of the north? In my mind, you can’t just cite the state records bc such fish tend to be freaks –not uncommonly being sterile fish that put calories into growth rather than reproduction, and/or with very unique feeding opportunities. The Colorado state record was 11-4 and "only" 22.5" -a trout stuffed freak (and I wouldn't doubt sterile to boot). A 22.5 in average body condition weighs in the 6+lb range. I don’t see any “fairness” issues here, unless someone actually believes that an angler who caught a 10lb LM in the south is a more accomplished angler than an angler who caught an 7lber in the north.

Well, all three species are not likely to be all crowded together. Do your research on where you are going before you get there.

There's TONS of info out there on structure. Start with the articles here and do some Googling. Some suggestions for familiarizing yourself with what flooded topographical structure "looks" like: -Search "topo maps" in Google images and spend some time getting familiar with them. The jargon is pretty straightforward. -As Wayne suggested, look at land as you travel around and imagine it flooded. -Get to know how deep your baits are and how stuff feels like under there. -Read about how fish relate to structure.

Past juvenile stage, mature bass in rivers do not “drift feed” like insect eating trout do. River bass do use current to their advantage though, just like they do in reservoirs pulling water, and wind swept lakes and ponds. Current constrains fish movement in a relative way, offering opportunities for predators. Bass are bigger than their prey and press that advantage wherever they can. IME, river bass tend to be less affected by bright conditions, although they may appreciate shade -more so in slower water, less so in stronger current. In rivers, water levels (current speed) and water clarity are the biggest factors. Smallmouth “like” current better bc they evolved as a river fish (as did spotted bass). A better way to say it would be that SM are more efficient than LM (which evolved in more stationary waters) in current. SM are built better for current in terms of body form and energetics. You may be finding some Suwannee bass there, Micropterus notius, a different (and also riverine) species altogether, which you’ll want to read a bit about. Google ‘Suwannee river bass’ and you’ll get lots on your own water. There are articles, discussions, and the Georgia DNR is a great source. River tackle and lures depend on habitat: Is the water big and slow? Is there vegetation? Wood? Rock? Is the water “riffle and pool” type water? Are the pools smallish? Or large and more pond-like? Are these LMs in slow water? Are they SM near current? Are they Suwannee bass –a SM like, current loving, crayfish munching, and not terribly large, critter? Basic river lures depend on the answers to the habitat questions above, which will then determine the rods you should pack. Will you need a MH spinning or casting rig? A M spinning rig? A L or UL spinning rig? I’d probably bring all three. Jigs (grub, twister tail), in-line spinners, small topwaters are standard river lures for M to UL spinning gear.

Really good stuff above. All I might add is that a buoys purpose is to orient me to unseen landforms and cover underwater. The important details I fill in as I fish the area. A buoy or two just gives me a stationary reference. I then build the "picture" of the important stuff (fish, breaks, or potential "ambush points") in my head while fishing. I feel for them and "map" them in my head. I've been fishing long enough that I have a "feel" for the unseen underwater stuff. The buoy(s) just orient me n terms of angle and distance. The rest is... fishing. If it’s a complex area (often the best) I may drop additional buoys. I don't drop them on top of fish, breaks, or "ambush points"; I’m pretty circumspect around such spots, esp in clear water although this relaxes a bit in deeper or dingier water. I drop to a known side and distance from the break and in relation to my existing buoy(s), shoreline markers, and internal map.

Wow. Here to reminisce too I guess, since it's been a long while since I fished there. When I was 10 years old (that was over 40 yrs ago) I used to bicycle there from Fairport to fish. I loved that place. Still do, even though I haven't seen it in years. I used to fish plastic worms, topwaters, SBs, from shore. Much later I put boats on it, with a flasher once in deep pond. I have maps I made in my journals. We also ice fished it some for pike. My buds and I took a number of bass from 4 to 5lbs (weighed and measured), and pike -mostly smallish ones. We never took any smallmouth and am betting on mis-identifications there. However, for a couple seasons we took some large old brooder rainbows that were dumped in, and easy to catch. All the ponds are actually glacial kettles, but it shows best in the smaller ones -those steep undercut drops. 100 acre is one too, and has the same ledge-like rim around it but it's long been buried in detritus. From a canoe or car-topper we would flip the undercut rim where ever it was exposed and took some nice and very dark colored largemouths. Our best flipping lure was a black shad Gillraker worm -John Reynolds introduced that one to me (He won the Roch Bassmasters Classic in 97). The flash of silver on that ribbontail style worm was killer in the dark peaty water at the edge of the undercuts. Also used SBs. One of my favorites (and still is -got 3 left) is the old Strike King Grass King. I've written to SK several times over the years all but begging to have them reintroduce it. Maybe its being held a secret by SK?? Best heavy and broken cover SB there is, and a big fish taker too. We took some nice crappies there too, up to 15inches during their spawn. Deep Pond also had good LM, and I did best on plastic worms off the drops and "froggin" the pads. Back in the day I used Bill Plummer's Bass Frogs to great effect. Wish they still made those. I could probably make em myself actually, and may someday. There were some nice bass in those pads and just off the drops. Pike can actually help the bass fishing in some small waters I've fished. I believe the YOY pike kept down bluegill and young bass populations leaving room for growth of the remaining bass. I've also seen small waters that were overrun with little pike but these were usually very small waters. Winterkill is possible in a place like 100Acre. But don't give up because. There will be survivors and they will grow quick. The good numbers of 12"ers mentioned sounds like the next wave on the way. Expect about 1.5" of growth or so per year. Follow up. It could be great and others will have given up on it. Anyway, thanks for the memories.

I finally went barbless for soft plastics. Holds fish fine and the hook just backs out.

Fun read, Will. And some mighty nice smallies.

I've fished mostly in NY and CO: state records for both are 11lbs. We aren't shooting for DD bass there.

No one's suggesting anyone not go fishing -except maybe the phone app.

I read somewhere that Eric Clapton hunts. Dunno if it's really true.

In my experience, immediate conditions affect fish most. Large scale catch-all's miss the important smaller scale stuff. We all gravitate toward, look for, the easy and simple way out ... reminds me of the bubble headed girl selling some wonder health elixir at a local fair I met. She finished her perky spiel with a vacuous "It's simple! You know, nature's really simple when you get down to it", finishing with a cute, and emphatic, little shoulder twist. I had been politely half listening but I think my jaw dropped when she said that, and I could only respond, "No. No. It's not. It's very very very very ...complex." Does this mean that all measures taken of natural phenomenon are useless? No. The devil is in the details and that's where the complexity begins to show. But some measures are more useful than others –notably the stuff you said you weren’t asking about: “conditions”. Understanding them -combining knowledge and personal experience- ARE the shortcuts. In no time in history are there more "shortcuts" available than now. They won't include running your finger down a magic table, or having your phone beep, and tell you it's time to cast. Not meaning to sound short, but I guess I've jumped to the middle ground between Roger's kind and harsh responses.

Cham93, It's possible the bass in your lake never go deeper than 20ft. The advice from many above that deep is relative is very true. Things that can keep bass shallower can be: -water clarity (the more turbid the shallower the bass -even the majority of the food chain- tend to be) -temperature (thermocline can limit bass depth, and is seasonal) -predominate prey species can have bass away from or closer to shorelines. -competing predators (big pike and muskie and even walleye are known to affect how deep bass may be in some lakes). So... you may already be fishing the depths the majority of bass are in your lake. But to make full use of those areas you can’t see, regardless of the actual depths, will require as reason said: “time on the water learning the lake”. As far as finding "offshore" structure: In many smaller lakes especially, the "offshore structure" is often attached to the shoreline, or associated with that "attached" structure. Huge reservoirs and lakes by contrast, with large areas of changing topography across the lake’s breadth, can have a lot of structure not attached to the shorelines so directly. There actually are “shortcuts” (but certainly involve time spent not casting) and that is using electronics –the best you can afford and find time to learn to use. The reason offshore bass were/are such a new phenomenon is that they are not something everyone is equipped (technologically and experientially) to find and decipher. Catt suggested that we are primarily visual creatures, and that it very true. That holds a lot of us back. But that's not lost on sonar manufacturers and sonar visual interfaces have come a long way since the old green box. (Actually I loved flashers, and paper, but use color lcd now –would love side/down scan.) But vision is not our only useful sense. Buck Perry did it the hard way, by systematically using lures and tackle he devised that allowed him to strain depths incrementally. It took him a lot of time most of us can’t or won’t put to it. With sonar and knowledge available now, it’s whole new world.

If every shad in the lake were able to be eaten, and your lure looked enough like a shad, your lure would be eaten too. There are a couple things wrong with this in reality: -Every shad is not eaten. Bass work hard to catch their prey and many starve trying. There are times and places where bass find an advantage over their prey, and they exploit those. If those conditions aren't met satisfactorily than bass won't bother. They hold their precious energy in reserve for when hunting success is most likely. Some years are tougher on them than others. -Your lure (any lure) only "looks like a shad" to bass in certain (and often rare) circumstances. It's really not just a chuck-n-wind game, unless occasionally getting lucky is good enough. It's more about recognizing and finding opportunities and cashing in. There is no small amount of luck involved there too. But the more you know, the more experience you have, the more luck you'll recognize and find. If it's all new to you, then a lot is going to slip by. Keep at it. The quickest road is an education that includes knowledge and experience.

Can't have an empty tray. So you fill it. Then you need a bigger box. Then there are empty trays! It's not just simple consumerism. It's the tool maker/user in us that makes the bait monkey so insidious.

I haven't done it (beyond live bait, and downriggers for other species). But I'm going to guess: vertical? Will be curious what others say. (You probably know this, but ... be aware of bladder issues with such deep fish, esp if you're going to put them in the live well.)