Team9nine

So 45 replies with positive testimonials for 25 different brands and/or scent variations. Sounds like either they all work, or we have an interesting case study in human Psychology going on. I may just have to test this out this year to figure out which ? -T9

Yes lol. Time applying; How frequent, or infrequent; You think you're throwing a bait with it on, but has it already washed off or become ineffective; How would you know; If you always use but don't have it for a trip, does your confidence now wane a little; Only some baits or all baits; Paste, spray, gel, or liquid; Applied externally or inserted; How much; Where does the spray go (carpets, fiberglass, fish finder screen, etc.); Bottles drip or leak in your compartments when knocked over; Spilling or dripping on your carpet or boat seats when applying, especially dyed scents; Getting on your hands or fingers, then getting transferred to everything, including your lunch; What happened to all my Z-Man baits - they dissolved; Their smell; Getting it on your clothing; Oh crap, I left it in the truck and it's 90 degrees outside. It can't hurt - really; Does it help - guaranteed; Will my current catch rates increase if I use it - promise; Is shad better than crawfish...or nightcrawler; Do I need all three; Is garlic better than all of those; If bass are feeding on crayfish but I only have the shad formula, am I hosed; Do I apply certain ones seasonally; Only $10 a bottle... Have just never seen a reason to use the stuff for my fishing, outside of many moons ago back in the days of the oil based Fish Formulas, where putting it on your bait would make it slide through thick vegetation better and keep long plastics tails from wrapping or sticking to themselves - but even then it was still inconvenient -T9

Never use the stuff myself. Have at times thought about testing some, but the (potential) inconveniences always seem to outweigh any benefits I might derive. Maybe one day. -T9

Glenn covered it nicely. Sponsorship is all business. Some of those business relationships last for a long time, and some don't. In the case of Bill Dance (or even the Lindner's and that similar thread), it is just as likely that the companies dropped them after a couple years as it is they hopped for money. Actually, I'd wager the former is the more common scenario. In that case, you have to remember they have shows and other such endeavors, their own businesses, and it is in their best interest to form new sponsor relationships in order to keep their own businesses going. In many cases, these pros are well recognized entities, and there are often other companies willing to try and cement a deal with them while they are available. Very similar in a way to professional coaches who get let go from one team, but get signed by another before the next season. And, yes, in some cases there are close personal ties that help bind companies and individuals together for long periods of time (KVD - Nitro), but like many other things these days, that seems to be less the norm. Al Lindner summed it all up several years back at a conference (very close paraphrase) - "Nobody in the fishing industry has a job unless they can sell someone something, and do it for a profit." That is the bottom line, like it or not. -T9

In another book thread @Smallieseeker mentioned Goodwill stores often have a surprising selection of books sometimes. Might be worth a stop. I saw they were selling several I-F books online last night. -T9

That book shelf packs some punch For northern natural lakes guys, as well as those who like to "pattern fish," Babe Winkelman's Largemouth Bass Patterns book is an easily overlooked gem

In the long run, if read with an open mind and a willingness to put it into practice, it will catch you a lot more bass (and all other types of fish) than a Megabass jerkbait will for the same amount of $$ lol -T9

Very nice collection. Maybe one of these days I'll get as organized as you and create a list of all mine for reference purposes. I've actually been trying to purge some to make more room in the office and keep the wife happy Of those on your list, I have to say that Royce Mallory's 1950 "Pork Chunk Fishing" booklet was a surprisingly fun and interesting read, a favorite of mine. And Bob Underwood's 1975 "Lunker" is another that has always been a favorite. On the flip side, I think the book that most surprised me (to the bad side) was John Hope's 2001 "Trackin' Trophies." I had such high hopes for that book when I got it, but was sorely disappointed. I learned much more from the double issue coverage of the subject in In-Fisherman Magazine by Ralph Manns, which even included contour maps and tracking routes of about a dozen of the big beasts, than I did from the book itself. -T9

Buck used bass as his example fish because he felt they reacted most dramatically to weather and water conditions and exemplified local and seasonal movement patterns, but he always said if any other species "got in the way" so much the better. For example, in "Spoonplugging" he covers salmon fishing on the Great Lakes. He also enjoyed saltwater fishing, but his approach was always the same. These northern fisheries where bass aren't the top predator became a somewhat controversial issue when the Lindner's and In-Fisherman capitalized on the fact that in some waters, bass couldn't really follow this deep water behavior. Still in other waters they are out there mixed in as you state. I think Buck would just say 'catch them all!' Can't too in depth because I'm trying to type this on my phone ? But Buck wrote that current is treated as a breakline. When you have no current, those breaklines would be eliminated. However, with current, fish would now have breaklines to move, follow and feed along, and even better, in the case of your downed trees, that would be a 'break on a breakline' scenario where fish pause and stop on their movements, and where you should expect to catch fish. -T9

I've measured them but couldn't find my notes. That said, according to Rapala/Storm: How much does a Storm Suspendot or a Suspenstrip weigh? 1 dot = .2g/ .007oz 1 strip = .25g/ .009oz

Nope, not unless you get lucky and find one online or in an old book store or garage sale where they might not know the value -T9

Everything you'd expect, and a couple you wouldn't For bass, crankbaits for covering water fast, casting and trolling. I also use Spoonplugs, mostly for trolling. For slower presentations, of course jigs and worms get the nod. Then seasonally, you know about jerkbaits and blade baits. I'm going to add swimbaits into the mix next year. It's not so much any specific baits as everything you read about can and will produce. It's more focusing on finding specific structural elements and then figuring out which ones the fish use regulalrly, where they make contact, and how they move on those features, both shallow and deep that becomes the key. With enough time and catches, you will figure out exactly where your best chances to catch a fish are most days and can then "milk run" multiple structural elements in a day, only focusing your time and efforts on known productive ones. That becomes the payoff for all the time and effort placed up front to figure it all out -T9

Yep, and one other comment for all you guys reading it for the first time. Don't hesitate to ask questions when you come across stuff that doesn't make sense or needs clarification - because you will have questions - -T9

? yep - if you catch adult fish on specific structure, breaks, breaklines, then that becomes a known productive structure situation, and as such you always keep it "in your back pocket" for future trips... -T9

I think you're close, but see if this explains where we're coming from. From a Spoonplugging perspective, Buck wrote that it is likely no two fishing trips are ever likely the same - there are simply too many variables; time, temp, weather, water clarity, oxygen, cloud cover, fishing pressure, and on and on. If that is the case, then how could you ever rely on any of those things to help you catch fish consistently each time you hit the water? In your example, what if the next time you hit that spot there are no shad up shallow, or even anywhere around? Or it's a different time of year? You still think you can repeat your catch in the same manner? Instead, what rarely changes are the structure, breaks and breaklines in the area that the fish likely are using. As such, you approach each day assuming you'll have to relocate those fish in the area. Today they may be shallow, deep, or somewhere in-between ? And you won't necessarily catch them at the same depth or speed/presentation. In that regard, you were speculating that your bass might have followed the shad up onto the flat, but even you don't know if that's the real "why" they were there - and the point being does it matter? Because if they're not there, you'll adjust your looking shallower or deeper, and when you find them and catch 'em, you'll have a new theory as to why - but so what...you'll still catch them ? -T9 Edit - just saw Catt replied while I was typing with a simpler explanation ?

Awesome - enjoy the read! -T9

Going OT, but back then, I think "why" in regards to a lot of environmental questions was simply unknown. Not that they didn't want to explain why, but they actually didn't know. That said, Buck did always say that every time you caught a bass, you needed to ask yourself "why" that fish was there (more in relationship to how he got there though). Technology now allows us to dig deeper and get answers to a lot of these questions, but back in the 1950s and 1960s when much of Buck's theories were developed and shared, they didn't have readily available and affordable things like personal underwater cameras, tiny radio transmitters for telemetry tracking, lithium powered micro batteries and transmitters, etc. They barely even had depthfinders - lol. I don't think they could explain a lot. Instead, they used angling as the means to identify "what is," and then fit the explanation to the result. What else could they do? What amazes me is how well some of these theories still hold up 60 years later. I have to admit I get a big kick these days watching all these GoPro anglers, offering a host of explanations for why they're catching fish in their videos - "They're feeding on crawdads in the rocks, and my bait is a perfect match," or "The wind is blowing into this pocket stirring up the invertebrates and piling up plankton, and the shad are following," even, "These rocks are holding heat and making these bass more active," yada, yada, yada. Did you cut that fish open and see what it was feeding on? Do you somehow see these schools of baitfish in the water you say these fish are feeding on? Did you take a temperature gauge and test this rock heating theory out? In a way, things haven't changed 60 years later -T9

No rule, but instead what Buck referred to as a Guideline - he had a bunch of them. The nice thing being you didn't have to care or worry about why a fish did or didn't, would or wouldn't, do something - it really doesn't matter. You follow the guidelines and they'll tip the odds in your favor for catching fish as quickly and simply as possible. It reminds me a lot of Rick Clunn's mentality. I have an article where they were asking him (Clunn) about deep water bass fishing, and how he determined and fished for deep bass. His point was simple - he didn't care why they were there. Thermocline? pH? temperature? Didn't matter - his theory was you only stop and fish if you see fish on the finder, regardless of "why" they might be there. I love, and can appreciate, the science and details as much as anyone. But I've come to the realization that simplicity in approach and reason with fishing has a certain allure to it also -T9

Since we're still discussing KVD and Cayuga, here's a little something tied to Paul's picture and question that I ran by him off-line. What follows is a large portion of the write-up that another site did covering KVD's win on Cayuga that Paul used in his example (literally copy/paste). What I have inserted in bold are my comments in regards to how one Spoonplugger/structure fisherman (myself) "interprets," if you will, what is being written, but using "our/Buck's" terms - kind of a thought deconstruction. Lots of ways you can spin/analyze the scenario, whether Paul's "form/fit/function," or some other interpretation. My point was simply that based on the details, you could easily construct an explanation that fits nicely with Buck Perry's message and teachings. And a thought in regard to Todd2's question: Just another thought based on Buck's guidelines. Anything in shallow water (8-10' or less), you have to fish the entire water column, top, middle and bottom. However, once you move out into deep water, you only fish the bottom. That's not to say that there aren't fish suspended up higher, but in most cases the more active fish that you are likely to get to bite are the ones that have moved in contact with the structure (on bottom). If the suspended fish are active at all, you'll likely discover this in the process of your fishing by them either hitting your bait on the drop before it ever reaches bottom, or hitting as you reel in after fishing the bottom. But you don't waste much time intentionally trying to find and catch suspended fish (that may or may not be there) above these structures in deep water. -T9

Good deal! Take your time though I think it's impossible to digest it all in the first reading. Even after many, many years, I still find small things that I overlooked or simply couldn't understand properly the first times through. My reading copy is highlighted, page marked, and referenced constantly -T9

If you do a simple Google search for Shimano Reel Maintenance, the first link that shows up (Reel Maintenance Instructions - Shimano) has a variety of great PDF files showing basic step by step instructions with good pictures to cover all basic maintenance, regardless whether you own one of their products or not ? -T9

Good stuff. Seems to run a bit larger in diameter for the same labeled breaking strength, at least the few lower wt. spools I've bought did. More strands in the weave if I'm not mistaken compared to base PP, which makes it rounder and smoother overall. Gore fiber built into the mix which PP doesn't have. Seems to be pretty popular and well liked - no complaints from me, and I'd certainly buy again. -T9

Lol - Humminbird got on my bad side today Guess I'm just taking it out on their apparent $$ greediness since mine was a mapping issue also. Would be much better if they integrated all these separate applications at least to some degree so you didn't have to lay out good change for every little thing they come up with. - Rant over - -T9

lol - Sorry, but I'm not dropping $140 for a program to suggest fishing spots to me ? They already gouge you enough just on basic mapping applications. -T9

You are on the right track with what you've highlighted. Focus more main lake in winter and summer, and more cove/embayments in the spring and fall. The area down toward the dam produces a lot of bass at times. Plan on working what you have marked (which will take a while) so you don't end up marking so much you skip through them too quickly and never really learn each spot. -T9