senile1

Congratulations! That's a nice fish!

Congratulations on the PB!

Congratulations on the PB! That's a beautiful, fat fish.

Sweet! You are off to a huge year if this keeps going. Those are some very healthy hawgs. There must be one heck of a smorgasbord in that lake.

This is a bit off the subject, but Dixon is just a few miles north of the 20 mile special smallmouth management area on the Gasconade River. If I were in that area I know where I would be spending most of my fishing time.

I would be able to pick mine out due to all the scratches. I use my boat as the tool it is meant to be so I will take it into any space in brush that it will fit through. I would also be able to pick it out based on the 200 HP Evinrude Ficht motor on the back. Particular model years of the Ficht had major issues. From what I've read, some literally exploded and due to the bad image you don't see too many people running them. Mine had the recall work performed on it before I bought it and has been a very good motor in the 8 years I have owned it.

If I understand your question correctly, the cover has been removed which makes it difficult for bank anglers to pick out locations to fish based on what they see above the water. You mention that it was easy to target crappie during the spawn when the cover was there. The crappie should still move shallow during the spawn so that eliminates some water for you. Maybe their ability to hide from predators has been compromised but they should still be there. I don't know how big this lake is, but it is possible that the removal of the cover in that area has made another structure in the lake more desirable to the fish and you may have to find that new structure. As Raul stated, the structure used by the fish is still there. And you stated that the fish are still there, so you just need to locate the structure they are using. Casting a carolina rig, counting it down, and dragging it along the bottom is a tried and true method for getting an idea of what structure lies under the water. It takes time but you can learn the bottom fairly well using that method. There are portable and castable fish/depth finders that can be used as well. Once you know the bottom, apply your knowledge of bass behavior and movements during the different seasons to determine likely holding places for fish.

I've used Wave worms and have a couple of packages of them. There are times when their rate of fall and particular movement is what the bass want. Other times, different brands seem to work better.

I don't have a problem with it as they aren't difficult to find. There are those rare examples such as where a post is made with a generic overarching subject, but it may mention a lure and it gets moved to the tackle section. Moderators sometimes make mistakes about where to place posts also, but the vast majority of the time they are spot on.

Very nice video! In addition to the fish, I liked watching the sun come up as well.

It is always nice to learn a new lure and catch some fish in the process.

There he is! I was looking forward to your next report. Nice fish.

The OP never stated the Ned Rig was the answer to every slow fishing day. He just wondered why MLF anglers didn't try it when other finesse techniques failed. That sounds like a fair question with a few possible answers to me. As for an answer, I can only speak from my own experience. I am more familiar with finesse techniques like shakey head, stick worm, drop-shot, jigging spoons, etc. than I am with the Ned rig. There are times I probably should have tried it and didn't because I thought that one of those other techniques would work and I would catch larger fish. However, this year, I have purchased what I believe to be the appropriate "Ned-ware" and I intend on becoming more comfortable with this technique. Does that mean I will never be skunked again? No. But it does mean, I will have another technique up my sleeve.

If, by first lure, you mean the first one I had in my tackle box, I am not sure. The first lure that I used to catch a bass was a Rapala Original Floater and I had quite a few of those early on, as well as the Rapala CountDown models.

A good rule of thumb for an 18 or 19 foot boat is a minimum of 70 - 80 lbs of thrust and 24 volts. If you had a 20 or 21 I'd go with over 100 lbs and 36 volts. Your setup may pull that boat around, but a wind of 15 - 20 mph and above is going to overwhelm 45 lbs of thrust for a boat that size. You may be able to set it on maximum speed and handle some wind, but it is preferable to be able to handle the wind with a speed that gives you more control. Not to mention that fighting a windy lake with your TM on maximum speed will take your 12 volt setup down to nothing much more quickly.

Thanks for pointing that thread out to me. I had seen the title but hadn't read the thread yet.

Like FloridaFishinFool and others, I don't base a lot of my decisions on color at the lake. However . . . . as Goose, Catt, and others have stated sometimes something just seems to work. With regard to what a bass sees, I have read the literature and there are obviously a few uncertainties. With regard to the statements above, it isn't the orange as we see it that may be attracting the bass, but it could be whatever color it becomes once it is at depth. And whatever that is, I know Goose has posted some big fish for a few winters now, many of which were caught on that orange colored RES. Maybe any other color would have worked, but it surely does give one confidence when a certain color and type of bait seems to work year after year in the same season.

Yep, he's his brother from another mother. Nice fish!

Very nice fish, Goose! You catch a few stout ones on that RES color every winter if I recall.

You guys continue to slay! Very nice!

Incredible! I was just getting ready to comment on another thread you started with some hawgs. It never ends for you guys. Where is this lake again?

Those are some nice hefty smallies. What a great way to start your fishing year!

I agree with everyone that this is a difficult photo to use for weight guessing. My guess would have been between 5 and 6, similar to Blue's. Very nice fish, though! Congratulations! Like A-Jay stated, the actual weight is usually lower than we think when a scale comes into play.

It is these little "outside-the-box" ideas that sometimes can make a lot of difference. I can't believe I didn't think to try this.

I had a solid year until I injured my ribs in August. I was able to hit the lake by mid-October and got three trips in before I re-injured my ribs more severely. I'm pretty bummed about fishing only three times since August but I'm healed enough to get back on the water now. So . . . . the second half of my year was disappointing, to say the least.