Paul Roberts

I have an HB rod mounted unit. It is very limited in terms of resolution offering only a single tone (no grayscale) and large pixels. Sensitivity adjustments don't allow very good read on bottom hardness. It will tell you actual depth but not too much more. I tried running it over fish and it won't discern them from the bottom if small or anywhere near the bottom. Large carp showed as bumps that could just as well have been stumps. Waves also adds variation to the readings. Fun in a limited way but not a great fishing tool. Not like real sonar. My advice would be to save the money and buy a float tube. Then save again and get a compact sonar with good resolution. Oh yes ... The battery in the sending unit only turns on when the two leads are wet, completing the circuit. If they stay wet the battery will continue to drain. So, dry it well before putting it away. Sorry for the downer of a review, but I found the unit too limited and thought I'd throw it out there. As to shore fishing I do and have done a lot of it. Agree with Sam that positioning issues are a major difference between shore and boat. However, baits and lures are much the same. When and where to apply them still counts.

Again, Those are not answers to my questions. (My answers are in parentheses below): -Which of the variables I listed (or any others you can add) explain the variability in your (our) catch rates in the wild? (The answer is ... depends on the given day, or hour even) -And does it tell us anything at all about whether bass can learn? (No.) -If you wanted to find out if bass can learn, how would you go about it? (Fishing??? No. Enter a good university that has expertise in the field of fish behavior, acquire a good committee of those experts -you'll need em- and then do the work). As to "none of "your" research has validation by the scientific community. WHY?" : That's not the case at all. But don't take my word for it. I'm not one of those fish behavior experts. But I've done enough real science to know that we are not dealing with a bunch of fools in those fields. Go ask around in the right circles -those that have expertise in the field of fish behavior. Most are willing to chat a bit. As to "Why does the Jitterbug work after all these years?" I'll play along ... What IS a "Jitterbug" to a bass? And why do you think that stays constant? If the "idea" of a "Jitterbug" is not constant, WHY? Therein lies your answer (see below). As to WRB's, "This begs the question of why have thousands of lure choices for bass, when they have no memory?": I'm going to disagree with this as well, for the same reasons: Ignoring the bait monkey (our predilection to obsessively collect stuff) the VARIABILITY IN CONDITIONS AND CIRCUMSTANCES (my partial list above) is why we need multiple tools to catch numbers of bass consistently. Memory, conditioning, learning to SPECIFIC lures is not, or is rarely, involved. At least in my experience. Maybe on a very popular lake where boat after boat comes down a bank with white spinnerbaits, maybe. (You can be sure though that there are days (conditions and circumstances), and ways of handling them, however, when the ol' white spinnerbait on that same bank will still catch em.) The effects of angling are more subtle, and broader, than conditioning against a particular lure. In my present understanding, as an angler, memory/conditioning has more to do with a generalized wariness and discernment exercised by fish to anglers and their presentations. Cast to fish NEVER before fished to and you'll see -they are different animals than ones that have experience with anglers. Want to know the magic potion for replicating virgin fish on a hard fished lake? Take a deep overcast, stable temps (or inc/dec depending on season), add some chop, have most anglers home watching football, the right density of preoccupied prey fishes, your favorite res pulling water, ... etc ...and you'll come somewhere close.

That is no answer to my question. Which of the variables I listed (or any others you can add) explain the variability in your (our) catch rates in the wild? And does it tell us anything at all about whether bass can learn? And I'll add a question; this one for Brian: If you wanted to find out if bass can learn, how would you go about it?

If you used used TB as the place to decipher whether bass can learn or not, you'd never find out. It's a "Do what you've always done, get what you always got." kind of thing. Lighting (sky, water), metabolic/energetic variation ("activity level"), competition with other predators, proximity to other predators, proximity to prey, activity of prey, type of prey, proximity to cover, presence of other anglers, "education level" of bass, etc ... cloud the question to the point that any "results" are useless. Unless you mean to tell me you catch 100 bass off each structure every time you go out? The variation in your results, (and those we all experience "in the wild"), is due to which of the variables I listed? Fishing and research are two different things. The fact that bass can learn (some better than others) is worth knowing I think. But I agree it's no holy grail of an answer to all our fishing woes. Your point might be that it doesn't matter since none of us are fishing virgin fisheries. We have to learn to deal with all the variables. Lab and "controlled" studies of all types are not useless however. They each offer a glimpse of just what's important in a relative sense, opportunities to chip away at the limitations.

The answer, or ability to refine the question, is obscured by all the variables in the wild. One way to get a quick understanding of it is to fish a pond that has NEVER been fished. I have a number of times and it is ... ridiculous. Such opportunities are so rare now that few will have the opportunity. We all fish for "educated" fish now. The Ridge Lake study is a classic. There are quite a few others, but none so long in duration and with such control of a lake system (They drained it very year and counted every fish). There's little question that bass can learn. From there, things get more complicated, especially "in the wild". There is no one "wild".

It refers to horizontal motion as winter fish tend to be unwilling or unable to expend the energy. There are exceptions of course, but this is a general "rule". This does not mean that aggressive retrieves are to be avoided, and can actually be necessary. It's just that horizontal speed should be controlled. Lures that excel in cold water such as bladebaits and lipless are used this way. Here's an idea of how slow slow can mean though: Every spring good numbers of bass would pile into a certain bend in a creek channel and I could catch them at a satisfactory rate with a grub or jigworm (in this case with a straight swimming retrieve). Once I figured this out I started arriving earlier and earlier in the season hoping to start the catching. But the catching didn't get good until the water warmed. I eventually found that the fish were there but that I needed to slow down my retrieve -switching to a bucktail or dense marabou jig with a pork strip. Encouraged, I started experimenting and ended up being able to catch the very earliest arrivals consistently with still the slowest lure I've ever used. It consisted of a 1/16pz Brewer Slider head, a good skirt of bucktail, a pork or plastic trailer, and a clip-on overhead spinner blade (Colorado). That thing sunk very slowly and was retrieved at a virtual stand-still. And my catch rate went through the roof again. I was pretty pleased with that rig.

Bass have been found to learn to avoid lures, and retain the "memory" up to several months. When testing responses to lures, researchers have to change out for fresh fish bc the previous fish learned enough to alter responses to lures, or avoid them altogether. Also, tank-mates learn from those that were directly edified. And you cannot "test in the wild" like you can in a controlled laboratory bc there are so many competing variables in "the wild" that in the end you have nothing to say. Lab studies control extraneous variables enough to tease out something specific -such as that bass can "learn" and retain the experience. However, there are field studies too that have shown that catch rates decline precipitously shortly after angling is introduced to previously unfished for bass.

I'm headed outta town. Will be away from almost everything electronic for a week. Will be interested to see where this thread ends up.

To simplify my last post: What defines "post-spawn" and when does it end?

Sure is a lot of ground being furrowed here. I understand the tangents. I'm apt to say, anywhere within such a conversation concerning the nature of complex cyclical events: "We can go anywhere from here." Definitions become important. And the closer I look, the more I end up splitting hairs A great time for making great catches including some big numbers IS "after the spawn" if one defines the spawn as still seeing some males shallow and guarding fry, and some (often little ones) even setting up late beds (without much of an audience often). In all but the smallest waters those bass done spawning have left the shallows and may collect on ... anything they can relate to, before vegetation kicks in and summer patterns related to it, develop. These pre-summer fish (as I call them) can collect up heavy on particular structure (or cover) pieces. I know a guy who fishes larger waters with much denser bass popns than my waters and he has had runs of 40, 50, and 60 mature bass from one such spot! If you miss such spots even by a little, or don't know specifically what to look for, you can cast to some sparsely populated water or just holding late tending males. There are some other "post-spawn" feeding opportunities that the mature bass take advantage of on the tail end of 'the spawn" when males can still be seen tending, in my, and many other, waters too. But...again I call this pre-summer activity. I see post-spawn as a pretty short window when actual egg dropping is not happening anymore and males are tending eggs and then fry. Some females are still hanging about spawning areas, but getting jilted by now tending males. After this they go on to feeding, and I call this pre-summer. The word "spawn" is not needed then -even though males are still seen tending -probably the sight most anglers label "the spawn". (In fact, I've even wondered whether "post-spawn" is a real period. I put this in parentheses bc maybe/likely in larger water bodies than I frequent, transitions take longer. My questioning this may just be an artifact of the small waters I fish -the "post-spawn" females and males getting to feeding virtually right away, albeit the females low in energy at first.) Such females are pretty low energy at the tail end of the "spawn". Many are still willing to spawn but most males are occupied with eggs or fry and they'll attack a still amorous female like an intruder. Here's a post I made a while back describing the capture of what I see as a "post-spawn" female, in my waters: Here's a pic of a post-spawn female that was hanging around a guarding male that wouldn't let her near. Sight fishing can tell you a lot about what's going on -why we don't catch them all. It isn't easy to make artificial food look real, or appear catchable -jiving with the given fish's energy level. This female, like most post-spawn females, would not chase so I had to drop and swim the tube just ahead of her. Too far ahead of her and no go. Too much vegetation to "kill" the bait in –no go. The swim too fast for her to commit –no go. She took a plastic craw-tube, gingerly, but I missed and then she avoided it. I finally got her on a standard tube with a perfectly timed fall and swim. Now I could see her. Imagine doing this blind, just working a shoreline! We miss a lot of potentially catchable fish. Baits that work slowly, or stay in place, have the best chance of getting bit.

Wow this threads all over the place. Understandable bc the subject is not simple. The deeper you look, the deeper you find things are. Science is more often about refining questions than coming up with answers. Gonads begin development in the late summer and fall for spring breeders. Winter just slows that development. Inc temp acts to inc rate of development. Photoperiod plays a role as does lipid intake in final development. IT's possible to get spring spawners to come ripe in fall and is even known to happen (rarely) in the wild under certain circumstances.

That was my question too. How does one define it and how is it recognized? Esp PS when one is fishing only weekends, and "prespawn" in the far south? Also, one should split out gender as well, esp post-spawn –where males remain aggressive and very shallow for an extended period and females ease out of being spawn minded. Anyway, to keep it simple... "pre-spawn" is a longer period (although I break it up) than post-spawn. And pre-spawn bass are esp vulnerable, esp up north where vulnerability to over-harvest is the historical (prior to widespread C&R) reason why bass seasons were closed at that time, and not opening until after the spawn. As I see it, "post-spawn" is a progression when (female) bass are transitioning from sex hormones to feed mediating hormones. Immediate "post-spawn" females are generally pretty low in energy. By the time they are feeding really well I’m apt to call it pre-summer, by definition. Some fish are in pre-summer, others are still “post-spawn”. Many males are tending beds, fry, and/or simply still very aggressive. If you are targeting males in your post-spawn catches (I don’t) then I guess you could consider post to be offering especially good numbers fishing. Now, these are from my observations on small waters where bass do not have to migrate any real distance between spawning and summer locations. My fish are relatively easy to find and transitions are less locational than activity level. Your results may vary , but my guess is that similar behaviors are happening for each individual fish everywhere, but pan out somewhat differently location-wise in larger waters. Bottom line I guess is, in pre-spawn EVERYBODY is feeding, when and where conditions and circumstances allow. Post-spawn is dicier (does that qualify as a word?).

Well ... bass are very adaptable, that's for sure, but there are a lot of things, basic physiology and behaviors especially, and responses to similar conditions and ecological parameters that can be recognized across waters. We certainly don't have to throw away all we've learned from one lake when we head to another. Good bass anglers can find the fingerprint of "bass" in any lake, yet from that basic starting point I agree that there's apt to be a lot of fishing required. When anglers say "a bass is a bass" they are not saying all waters are the same, even that each individual bass is the same, just that that species has limitations that can be fathomed and recognized across waters.

Talk about an interesting risk/reward curve there!

Ha! So true. We're not following each other as much as we've been chasing the same critter for a while. I hear you on deciding when and where to spend one’s precious time. I have many entries in my journals referring to “beating a dead horse”. The neat thing about my Colorado plains fishing was that the weather could be very consistent for long stretches –the pattern being brilliant blue and calm in the AM giving way to building thunderheads in the mountains just west by afternoon. These would either stay put but generate nice surface ruffling breezes or winds, or bring those big black storms rolling down on my ponds. These ponds and little reservoirs were many and varied in make-up –a great “laboratory” overall. With that weather pattern, I got to fish bluebird conditions and dark skies almost every day. The results were … obvious. Same fish, different conditions. And yes, I got my butt kicked plenty. I do, however, carry a masochistic streak –that is, my risk/reward curve can be pretty steep sometimes -especially when I've been fishing a lot. A few catches under tough conditions can be more satisfying than a limit under “easier” or known circumstances. At least there’s the chance I’ll learn something new or figure something out. You are very right, the environments bass they thrive in, and bass responses, can vary enormously. But, good anglers will figure stuff out. Not all the time though. Every tournament result shows us that. I can't talk particulars about Mead bc I wasn't there. But here’s what Hank Parker had to say about it: “When Bobby Murray won the first Bassmaster Classic in clear water on Lake Mead, he found that if he cranked a spinnerbait from behind the fish and brought it in front of their faces suddenly, he got more strikes than he did by casting where they could see it coming.” http://www.hankparker.com/magazine-articles/baits-trigger-reaction-bites Also, realize too that this was 1971. I bet those Mead fish probably never saw a SB before. I wonder if SB's are still GoTo's there now? Not that someone couldn’t make use of them in times and places. KVD makes better use of SBs than most and they are GoTos for him under bright conditions, he essentially avoiding the "good look" issue by fishing fast and using proximity to cover and the surface film to obscure that bait. BTW: My "fancy footwork" mentioned above involved a white tandem SB, bulged. The trick was to throw long and off to one side then run the bank (I was on shore) to change the retrieve path to pass over the fish. If too much line was on the water, slicing it, it spooked them. I had to hold high and have only the blades disturbing the surface -then it got nailed, under brilliant blue and flat calm surface, and by fish that have seen SBs. At those moments it wasn’t a “SB” –it was “food!” But making it appear so was not just a chuck-n-wind affair. Another Mead pattern is "One-Ton Tubing" accredited to Gary Yamamoto in which he fishes a tube over a 1oz jighead. As you can imagine, it's a fast technique that doesn't give those fish much of a look.

In some ponds I've fished I've found that bass will stick around dead weeds but drop away from them, holding in confined open water just off. I suppose this could be bc there was no where else to go in these smaller waters. What was interesting was that the worm bite (in the weed beds) died but the bass were willing to take falling and swept jigs out beyond the weed walls at this time. It was a solid pattern. Worth a go I suppose before you abandon a good area.

Thanks Tommy. I‘ve experienced both extremes too, when I’ve been able to catch sighted bass and they seem to pay little attention to me, and other times the bass are put off by my presence. Sometimes their reaction is obvious. Other times it’s darn subtle. I’m talking about hunting bass and not the spawn as there's different stuff at work there -based on changing intensity of parental investment through the spawn. In terms of hunting bass there are lots of potential variables involved: fish experience with anglers, fish being hyper-focused or distracted, fish feeling secure or insecure due to lighting and/or cover density or proximity to it, and fish individuality (every piece of research on bass “catchability”, however it’s looked at, turns up fish –entire segments of populations even– that are described as “uncatchable” or “immune to angling”, as well as individuals that are repeatedly catchable). And there’s certainly other stuff that could be included in the list of variables that affect catchability at any one moment. One, brought up by others above, and documented in at least one research paper (with walleyes and gizzard shad) described fishing success against shad population sizes –when shad popns got really high, angling success plummeted. I would venture a guess that this is most apt to happen with schooling prey species in open water zones, although I've seen "selectivity" to prey size in bass ponds a number of times. My quip above, “Pray for clouds and a good chop”, was double entendre: Sometimes it’s emotionally easier not being able to see what’s going on, and, clouds and chop can make fish WAY more approachable. Under high visibility conditions (high brilliant sun and calm surface) bass are so easily spooked that I’ve seen them turn inside out at a sparrow flying overhead. In fact, every fish in the pond is on a knife’s edge. I’ve watched big schools of bluegills and carp convulse in a synchronous spasm, bolting for the depths, when a Cessna passed over 1200 feet up! Interestingly, it has to be right overhead or have the shadow pass over them. It’s like an overreaction, as if they are paranoid. And they are; the reasons are obvious if you spend much time there as the list of fish-eating critters is impressive: bald eagle, osprey, pelican, four heron species, kingfisher, mink, raccoon, not to mention a nearly regular parade of anglers. On those brilliant days, my lure flying overhead puts everything down. If that didn’t do it the splashdown will, sending them bolting for cover. Even a mono or FC line landing on a calm surface under such lighting freaks them out (Tip: Try braid ). I saw this so often that I came to realize that each cast is essentially clearing the retrieve path of catchable fish. Yet, these fish are still hunters! I’ve proven this to myself with some fancy footwork, that is scarcely worth the effort, but fascinating to realize that many of those fish actually will take, if you could just get an appropriate lure to them in the right way without sending them scurrying for cover. And the "appropriate lure" isn't always my favorite finesse worm as I’ve also found that fish in ultra-high visibility conditions can be very, very, picky. They look, but obviously see something they don’t trust; the problem appearing to be the "look" part. It's become apparent to me that how well fish see is proportional to available lighting, and this plays a major role in catchability as well as "spookabllity". Light attenuates rapidly underwater as conditions erode. I’ve been doing some diving and snorkeling of late and seen that the difference across depth, sun vs clouds, sun angle, and surface conditions has an enormous effect on light quantity and quality down below. The range of lighting change is profound with every passing cloud or surface ruffling breeze. While fish are adapted to seeing underwater they still have to deal with the effects of such variation in lighting. In some of my harder fished waters the bass just plain do not … trust. And the problem is exacerbated tenfold under high visibility conditions. Some oft-quoted research has shown LMB having a vision advantage over bluegills in low light, this reversing under bright light. I believe I see this regularly, with groups of bluegills spotting and streaming away well ahead of hunting bass under brilliant lighting. The number of active chases I see, and the overall demeanor (activity level) of the bass seems diminished, muted. It appears to me they are conserving energy. Now... add clouds, chop –reduce visibility– and the fish are entirely different animals. Bluegills are more at risk (and more apt to be feeding and distracted), bass are hunting with vigor, and chases are either visible in places, or evidenced by surges. Under prime conditions, dark overcast, dropping BP, humidity up, temperatures stable, and my lure flying through the air does not spook those bass, they chase it and meet it at splashdown. Some of my ponds have dense milfoil beds and the bass, on overcast days, like to hunt the tops and upper crevices of those beds. Bluegills are up there too taking emerging midges –a common summertime activity pattern on my ponds. I purposely throw high over the beds to let the bass know my lure is coming, and several wakes give chase to each cast. It’s really fun to see. But have the sun break out and the surface flatten and … they’re back to paranoia. But those two conditions I just described -brilliant sun with flat calm, and deep overcast and an impending front- are the extremes. Much of the time we have sun but some chop, or hazy clouds and calm conditions, or roiled water, or… any mixture of factors that affect lighting quantity and quality. I’ve got some things that work especially well under certain conditions and I pull em out as conditions change. Even under bright sun I often have a buzzbait rigged and ready, awaiting the afternoon breezes that simply adds some surface chop. Or, if clouds or chop give way to calm bright periods, I often stash the ruckus presentations and goto a med spinning rig and jigworm –Bam! Back in business. Cloud rolls over or a breeze kicks up and I whip out the buzzbait or spinnerbait again. Good overcast with a calm surface and I’m apt to choose a waker, or ... . There are LOTS of potential permutations of conditions and potential tackle options to meet them. But this doesn't mean anything goes. Those mature fish are not stupid. They may not be "smart" but they carry some "wisdom". That wisdom is what makes us "smart" critters beat our heads against walls. Yeah, it hurts. We're lucky that it's only our egos that get bruised nowadays. Those walls are what we need to get a grasp on. No pain no gain, I suppose. I’d venture to say that much of the time, at least some bass are on the hunt, but in various levels of activity/motivation. Under advantageous conditions they can be very aggressive, under poorer conditions they conserve energy. How this actually pans out depends heavily on prey type and availabilty, cover, structural characteristics, etc.... Those bright days when you have to punch thick vegetation, bass are more apt to be moving little, willing to eat but not willing to expend much energy –move very far– for dubious return (I’ve actually watched this –the bass strike range much diminished, the bass interested but lethargic). At times though, when bass are happy to hunt under bright conditions (notably in spring and fall especially) I think the reason we are relegated to punching cover is bc those are the only fish we can approach without putting down. Ditto for the adage, fish deep during bluebird weather, in many cases it’s bc shallow fish are almost impossible to approach. This is some of how I view catchability. Conditions weigh heavy but while they can be complex there are patterns to behavior, a tempo that can be understood to some degree, but rarely controlled or predicted to any fine degree. We can take some solace though in the fact that the fish don’t have all the answers either. They are responding to providence too. We’re just a step removed, up the food chain a notch and, at very best, a step or two behind. And that's when you fish every day.

Likely your canal, considering where you are, is a manmade or man-altered one. It shouldn't be complicated. Find out where it comes from and where it goes. Google Earth it, and/or ask around at marinas, your local USGS office, state waterworks, DNR, etc... Water flow is related to something, and therefore predictable at some level -probably precipitation, possibly ground water, possibly tides, and/or some sort of artificial regulation. As to the fishing, current has a major influence on fish activity as it can corral fish, esp prey fishes, and make them predictable/vulnerable in places. An example: I used to fish a canal that had current issued by locks that moved boat traffic at irregular times throughout the day. When a lock opened and discharged its water (and boat) a surge would be sent on down the canal. When the surge came through (current increased) in my particular area I'd make good use of it. Some specific examples: Pike are really sensitive to current as places to hunt from. I would fish bends in the channel that created eddies that sucked in prey fish, the pike set up there in ambush. Without current things "loosened up" enough that the fishing wasn't there. But when a current ran, things "tightened up" and BANG! Another spot on the same canal was a backwater lagoon that was separated from the main canal by a small channel cut between two rip-rap lined bars. Fishing was slow until the current picked up creating an oscillating current into the lagoon then out, like a giant lung inhaling and exhaling. This current sucked silversides into the eddies tight along the downcurrent ends of the rip rap bars and smallmouths, walleyes, white bass, and crappies were on them! The hot fishing was along the downcurrent ends of the bars, where the swimming ability of the little minnows was compromised. The current, again, oscillated, changing direction every hour or so, and the fishing with it, until the current subsided (until the next lock opened). Another current story … I know of a small channel in a local pond, all of 30 feet long, that gets wind generated current through it strong enough to impact bluegill swimming ability. The largemouths take advantage, and so do I in turn. Give me enough wind from the right wind direction and it becomes part of a milk run. I could tell a lot of stories of such current induced opportunities. Start hoofing, have fun, and find your own! They are there. You just have to see them.

I've spent a lot of time just watching fish. It's just plain fascinating. But it's not always all that helpful, at first, because it's apt to point out just how difficult catching fish actually is. But that's good information. Want to keep a cool head? Fathom what's actually going on down there and you can relax rather than beat your head against an invisible wall. Lures aren't "food". And get this, most prey aren't "food" either. They have to get caught by the predator first. That's not easy to accomplish and more fish starve to death than survive to maturity. While predators like bass are super-athletes, so too are their prey. Plenty of studies have shown this. Did you know bluegills are quicker than bass? To catch one, bass have to be in position and that's what a lot of bass hunting behavior is all about. A lot of those maddening "cruisers" you see are often in process of hunting. But there are a lot of unseen “economic negotiations” at play that have to be met before "hunters” become “biters”. Again, lures are not “food”; they are chunks of plastic, metal, wood, and feathers. And they look pretty stupid most of the time. They approach wrong –wrong angle, wrong speed, wrong distance from cover, quirky posture or articulation, etc. … -they don’t fit. Couple this with fish that have been casted to (bombed) and pricked before and you can start to appreciate the real playing field. What you are looking for are “in's” as I came to call them -opportunities. An obviously distracted bluegill, one busy feeding during a midge hatch, is vulnerable. Distracted bluegills in broken cover, even better. Distracted shad on the edge of the school, in broken cover, corralled against the surface, or a ledge, are potentially vulnerable. Prey fishes pushed by current or sucked into its vacuuming eddies are suddenly predictable and therefore vulnerable. These are your potential opportunities too. But … don’t let your lure spook them, make sure they can find it or conversely make sure its fakeness is properly obscured. Make sure it’s speed is appropriate to one of the various states of arousal/motivation that confine fish. And on and on with every variable that can rear its head between you and that bass. There are an awful lot of them. Daunting? Even depressing? You have to work to balance your own risk reward curve. If it’s too steep, don’t look. Or pray for clouds and a good chop. Providence/chance/luck/faith can cure a lot of what ails us. But your eyes have to be open, and it helps to know what you are looking for.

When fish are shallow, we can see them. And then we get to see how silly lures look most of the time. If we could see all that goes on down there around our lures, we'd probably hang it up. Don't take those fish, snubbing you, personally.

WAY too little info given. And that's not from you. It's the sonar image itself. First, turn off the fish icon thing. It's not helping. Realize, that is not a horizontal view of the lake bottom with fish hovering over it. Could be, but just as well could be not. There can be a lot of stuff down there that is not "fish". A strong return could be a weed clump, a log, a heavy branch (appearing to be "floating" by its lonesome bc it's sliced off by the sonar beam or just wider out in the cone). Best way to get to know your sonar is to meter known stuff. Find some clear water on a sunny day, turn off the "fish", set the sensitivity to manual, and play. For example: Find some a hard cobbly bottom and set your sensitivity so that it shows as a nice solid line. Then find a soft silty bottom and watch the line disappear. Inc the sensitivity to pick it back up again and then find a soft to hard transition, or soft bottom with hard areas like boulders or stumps. Then try something more confusing, like trees, or brush, or vegetation. Soon you'll start to get a feel for first, what your sonar actually does, and second better at your interpretations. These interpretations are somewhat contextual too so the better you know a particular lake the more you can "assume" you are looking at. Also, I don't know what resolution your unit offers but you want as much as you can afford. Sonar's come way down in price so skimp on the bells and whistles and purchase some resolution as many vertical pixels as you can. Hope this helps.

Thanks, John. Hey, that's a great avatar shot there. Barefoot? Even better.

Not enough info provided. If you can't provide more, then .. that might be the problem right there. Not trying to be funny. The question is: What did HE know that you didn't. Also, there's an advantage to running the boat in terms of game plan and positioning. A lot of it could be there. But if you don't realize how that was to his advantage that day, then I'd go back to question #1.

I wouldn't put any hard and fast rules to it. Likely he was offering general advice, and overstated things. Going subtle is good general advice but not all there is to the subject. IME the issue with clear water, bright skies, calm surface is spooking the fish in the first place. It can be darn difficult not to clear the path of your retrieve of fish with every cast under such conditions, at least in shallow water. So.. the talk tends to go toward light and natural, or fish deep. And this is good GENERAL advice. But I've tried some (not entirely convenient) things that have illuminated some ... reality. In frustration from spooking fish under such conditions I've at times taken to casting way high and off to one side of sighted fish, then walking or moving the boat to bring the retrieve over the fish. This has worked. And they took just fine. I found that I could not let the line saw through the water's surface though, and found a tandem SB to work well (in white/silver to obscure it in the surface film) that I could bulge just beneath the film offering enough resistance to hold the line up off the water. A bulged tandem is a commonly used "reaction bait", but one that can scare the hell out of bass under high vis conditions. But when applied appropriately, it can still catch them. KVD introduced the idea of using speed (and flash) under bright conditions, not giving the fish a good view of your lure. It does work, but better under some surface chop I find than through a calm surface, unless you can throw mighty far. I do find it easier to just reach for the light spinning rig and jigworm -preferably translucent- for those flat sunny periods that come and go during the day here. I almost always have one with me. But it doesn't always save my butt. Which brings up the second problem with those conditions: Lures can look really stupid in "swimming pool" conditions. I've had days when I've watched sighted fish ignore or spook at my best and most subtle worm presentations, I watching those bass eyeball my ultra-cool 5" slim Roboworms in those complex cool translucent color schemes they have, and say "Nope."

“Are there any "rules"?” Yes. But they are not as clear cut as “plug in A and get B”, or, maybe better, not that simple. I knew a guy who fished one of the ponds I fished, appearing evenings after work. He fished one lure –a small black buzzbait parallel to the shorelines. He’d make a loop around the pond, then head off for home. His theory was simple: “Sometimes they bite, and sometimes they don’t”. He didn’t show up until mid spring, saying it was “too cold to catch ‘em” earlier. He fished through the spring and then disappeared until the following spring, missing maybe the best buzzbait period of the year in that area –fall. In summer, the shoreline bite tends to die out, as many of those bass move away from shorelines. And, by midsummer, most years the water gets too hot for midday action, but there is a first-light bite our guy apparently never saw. There are reasons for things that a small buzzbait fished along a shoreline in the evening just can’t get at. It’s too limited a sampling tool and methodology. And realize this was practiced on one pond. Imagine zooming out in satellite images from that pond, to surrounding ponds, to that watershed, to surrounding watersheds, out to the entire range largemouth bass occupy. Fathom that! “Spring” and “fall” aren't supposed to be anything, don’t mean all that much, viewed across that range. But narrow things down in location, and timing comes more into focus. Ever heard, usually from experienced anglers, that “timing is everything”? Getting that nuanced is backed by a lot of knowledge and experience, and then, on any given day or hour on the water, a lot of “flying by the seat of your pants”. Scary? Get used to it. No you are not overcomplicating things. Not recognizing what’s most important in any given moment, maybe. But you are far from alone there. Nature is enormously complicated. If you want to understand it, you’ve got a lot of work ahead of you. Hopefully it’s fun work. If you really want to catch bass consistently, esp over a large geographic area, you not only have to understand largemouth bass (to choose one), and the other critters they interact with, but the nature of waters and the atmosphere. Overcomplicating things? Hardly. We all want to simplify. In fact, we must simplify; it’s all too friggin’ big. And our brains are devised to do just that –to make/find sense in the immense complexity nature dishes out– to our detriment sometimes as much as to our benefit. But considering the enormity of it all, we do pretty darn well. Well, you gotta start somewhere. Every morning each one of us has “supposed’s” in our heads –best attempts at “prediction”. These tend to pan out better for more experienced and well edified anglers than for newbs. But no one can cover it all, and everyone gets thrown curves –has to adjust. This you can expect. How well you can adjust has everything to do with the knowledge, experience, decision making, and effort you can bring to bear on the problem. “Fishing in the moment" is great. But that’s quite a leap. One has to have real stuff to draw on, and those are: knowledge and experience. Imagine someone who’s never bass fished before “fishing in the moment”.