senile1

A-Jay's method is the one I use the most, though all of them have their place. I also mix this method with the occasional hop and deadstick too. I like to subtly move my worms, creatures, and jigs and let them sit for a few seconds more often than not. On some occasions I will fish them more aggressively, but that would be further down the list of methods I use.

I think the OPs water is stained enough that he should have few, if any, concerns about line visibility; however for the reasons mentioned in RoadWarrior's post I use fluoro leaders as well. In reference to the post quoted above, I've read this many times in the past as well. I've even considered it as valid, but now I think it is taking an interaction and looking at it too much from a human point of view. Why? Because we don't know what is in a bass's mind when it sees these things. So we describe it from our own perspective, which is to say, we would know a lure is not bait so if a bass could recognize line, we think they would recognize a lure isn't real also. Let's look at this from a different perspective, which isn't necessarily a correct perspective either because we can't know for sure. However, it at least explains why a bass could possibly be spooked by line and not a lure. It has to do with what types of things in a bass's environment would put them on the defensive or make them feel threatened. A jig looks similar to a crayfish. It may have a hook and it may not be exact but if fits within the typical size parameters of a crayfish so maybe these things aren't as noticeable to a bass. On the other hand, fishing line sticks out from the front of the lure and does not fit within the size parameters of any type of actual bait that a bass would eat. It is something that could be seen as more out of place because it extends at a great length from the bait itself. While a bass may not know what it is, it could possibly see it as something that does not fit and this could prompt a sense of unease leading to the fish pulling away. None of us can know for sure all the things that create a sense of danger in bass, but that is my point. Just because a bass doesn't recognize a lure as inedible does not necessarily imply that it won't sense danger from line. I have read the reports of a number of guides on clear water lakes, such as Table Rock, where it is typical in some areas of the lake to experience 20 - 30 feet visibility. There isn't a guide on that lake who doesn't recommend fluorocarbon or fluoro leaders for visiblity reasons. I don't know if a bass is spooked by line or not, but in clearer lakes, I don't take that chance very often.

There are quite a few quality lipless crankbait brands. I think a mix that includes rattle, one knocker, and silent types is a good idea. I would add to that suspending, slow sinking, and faster sinking models. I do not have the models to cover all of these areas yet but this is what I do have: Rat 'L' Traps in 1/2 and 3/4 oz (sinking and rattling), Red Eye Shad in 1/2 oz (sinking, silent and rattling), Cordell Spot in 1/2 oz (sinking and rattling), and Spro Aruka Shad in 1/2 and 5/8 oz (sinking and rattling). I plan to add Xcalibur one-knockers and some Sebile Flat Shad suspending models to my baits this year.

I don't remember why. What was the question?

Catt is correct that the best locations to find bass in a weedbed are dictated by the structure underneath, as well as differences in cover (i.e. lines where two types of weeds mix or meet, wood buried in a weedbed, etc.). One reason anglers may be randomly fishing a weedbed is because they can't get up into the weeds to see what is underneath with their sonar. And even the best maps that they would have studied before going on the lake won't show any depth change less than one foot. Essentially, unless the angler knows the lake well, he or she is going to be unaware of what lies beneath the mats on top without some indicator of some kind. In situations like this, I check the shoreline for washes, slight gullies, old tree or shrub lines, etc. that may possibly extend further out into the water beneath a weedbed. I would also check the water out beyond the weedline for the same things to see if they continue to extend into the water beneath the mats. And the most obvious things to check for are wood or different types of vegetation as well as points and pockets that are visible in the weedbed itself.

I don't see too much fishing equipment displayed at the Kansas City Boat and Sport shows that I have attended, and it sounds like the description others have provided - boats, outfitters, and guides for the most part. However, they do a good job of bringing in current and past professional anglers for seminars. Quite often, we have two or three big names. The Kansas City show is coming up January 22nd - 25th and we have Dion and Guido Hibdon as well as Brent Chapman and Casey Scanlon this year. There are additional seminars on spybaiting, fishing jerkbaits, crappie fishing, and hunting Whitetails. There are also a number of seminars on taking care of your boat including the engine. Sometimes you have to look at the itinerary, rather than what is on the floor, to find the diamonds in the rough. The itinerary for this show is in the link below. http://www.kansascitysportshow.com/attendees/features/seminars.aspx

I have always used anchors with my bassboat. It is an absolute necessity on the main portion of some of the lakes I fish as the rollers coming in make staying on a spot a lot of work with the trolling motor. The trolling motor actually comes out of the water when the rollers are coming through. On the upper end of such lakes, and in coves, I can sometimes tie off to a tree but the anchors are used often in every trip. It allows greater concentration on what I am actually there to do - fish. Or course, I use the trolling motor to hold me in place sometimes too. It just depends on how rough the water is and whether I am searching or combing every inch of an area. With my tiny jon boat, I always anchor when there is current or wind on the water.

You're a great inspiration, Goose. You always have some nice fish to post up in the winter. Work has slowed since Christmas and air temperatures will hit the upper 40s to possibly 50 this weekend for me, though my water will still be in the low to mid-thirties. I'll be dunking a line.

Wow! Not only did you catch the fish of a lifetime but you also produced an excellent photograph of the fish.

That is a freak of a fish! Sam, I assume they adjusted for the weight of the plastic container. Otherwise, that fish only weighs 13.08 lbs and is a dink.

It's pretty cool that you have access to these articles. A few years ago, I purchased the Buck Perry 9 book guideline materials and they have been extremely useful. Some of the information is outdated, but the structural analysis is still worth its weight in gold (or I should say bass). I study the guides every winter when we hit the deep freeze, as well as referring to them now and then during the rest of the year to make comparisons to lake maps I am studying.

It could be that Ish may have discovered the congregation of fish first, and then noticed the wrinkle that was attracting them afterward. These small structural elements can be difficult to locate, especially in deep water, without a keen eye on your side imaging, or something else giving them away (as demonstrated by the bulrush/maidencane example from Roger above). Without the combination of side imaging, down imaging, and regular sonar in deep water they can be located as well, but the difficulty and time involved in locating the molehills, that are mountains to fish, increases exponentially. Still, without these discoveries, no matter the tools used, a lot of us anglers are missing the fish. This has been better than most structure threads. I didn't see this thread until a couple of days ago so I don't have much to add. I do want to compliment everyone on the inclusion of specifics. So often these threads are made up of generalities which are good to know, but which aren't much help to newer anglers without knowing how to specifically apply them. This especially applies to large lakes where the small lake angler can feel completely lost when he or she first attempts to fish there. Roger's post about 50 - 100 mile stretches of Lake Superior holding no Pike provides an important detail about fish holding water. I'm sure a lot of us can think of times we fished unproductive water before learning enough to avoid making those mistakes.

I don't know about bigger fish, but spoons are an integral part of my fishing in the heat of summer and in winter, especially on deep, clear lakes. On these lakes where the bass congregate 40 - 60 feet or deeper during those specific seasons, spoons and drop-shots are the main course.

LOL. Sorry. I didn't mean to be a killjoy. I just wanted to throw out some interesting quotes. I thought the one by Babe Ruth was quite humorous. (If it is actually true that he said it. I didn't research to confirm.)

I have no superstitions. The root of all superstition is that men observe when a thing hits, but not when it misses. - Francis Bacon I had only one superstition. I made sure to touch all the bases when I hit a home run. - Babe Ruth

I caught my first fish in the summer of 1969 during the first year of Nixon's presidency. We were visiting my uncle in Memphis, TN and he and my Dad decided to go fishing. I was only 8 at the time and I don't remember where we were. It was a creek and they set me up with a worm on a hook with a rod and spincast reel. I remember the creek was lined with lots of brush and trees and I could not see them from where I was standing. It didn't take long before I felt the tug that changed me forever. The fish was a bluegill and I was quite excited to walk down the creek with it dangling from the end of the rod to show to my Dad. I fished into my college years and then strayed to other adventures until I returned to the fold in my early thirties. As for being a natural, I wasn't. There are so many things to learn such as fish behavior and movements in relation to structure and conditions, techniques, knots, boat handling, etc. that I don't think anyone is truly a natural. Some people seem to have a natural ability for whatever reason that allows them to catch fish when others can't, and there are anglers, professional and otherwise, that are better sticks than others. I think it has more to do with starting early, having good teachers, and having good water to learn on than innate ability.

Thanks for the laughs! You could say you fish because you are a masochist.

That's an interesting post. When he was calling his shots and nailed them did you ask him what tipped him off? Was he seeing or sensing something that you were missing?

This hits the nail on the head.

Welcome to the forum, Charlie.

All of these things come into play and here is an example to help tie them together. I used to fish a pond where the fish seemed to congregate on one side more than the others, though on occasion I would find them in a different spot. The south side of this pond had a section of water that stretched for almost the length of the pond and it was approximately 15 feet deep. Near the west end of the pond there was a slight grade and the water slowly decreased to 10 feet a cast length from the western shore. It was this western shore where the bass usually congregated. Why? The water near the shore was 3 - 5 feet deep with a ton of coontail moss but then dropped off quickly to the 10 feet section that led to the deepest water in the pond. To the left of this western shore was a very shallow cove full of laydowns and coontail and the forage for the bass, bluegill, were thick in that cove because it provided a hiding place from the bass. To the right of it was another cove where the bass spawned. I determined that the bass moved to this congregation area after spawning and they could easily move to the cove where the bluegill were located to feed from the same area. They also had very good access to the deepest water in the pond from this location. They could access the deep water from the eastern shore too but it did not have a great spawning area and I rarely found any bluegill on that end.

The NRX is a bit more sensitive but you can't go wrong with either rod. My experience has been that rod sensitivity differences at the GLX price level and above is minimal.

Very nice fish! Congratulations.

I have three rods that I use for jigs: G.Loomis NRX 854C, G.Looomis GLX MBR844C, and a Powell Timax 734 HCF. All are excellent, but I give a slight edge to the Timax.

I have a short checklist I keep in my wallet. After forgetting boat keys once and a couple of rods on another occasion, I decided to make sure it didn't happen again. Regarding cold weather gear, I always remember that for some reason, and I always keep a rain suit and sunscreen in the boat. rods lures JJ's hat - Keeps the light from entering between polarized glasses and forehead enhancing the view. camera tripod boat stopper boat keys water (or drink of choice) food toolbox lake map (always want a hard copy of a map even though I have it on my fish finder) life jackets charge batteries (night or day before) lights (night or day before) tires (night or day before) gas (usually check the day before)