Went to a reservoir that was above capacity. As in smaller trees underwater and larger trees had trunks partially submerged. So lots and lots of shoreline timber. It was mid to high 70 degree highs, and water temp starting at 64 degrees and I left at around 69-70 degree water temps. Totally blue skys. A cold front early in the week rolled through, but I figured by now the it should be good. And it sucked. Landed one 4lber (4.26lbs) but other than that it was dead. Not a single other bite. No signs of fish life. Literally dead. I fished every stump and branch throwing a jig/texas rig craw. So my question is, what's the strategy? I didn't really have a backup plan, and I don't want to randomly cast out deep. Do I need a nice depth finder to find them out from shore? 

 

Hmm, won't let me embed pic, here's pic of 4lber:

http://imgur.com/wzKXh8n

 

 

 

Next time try fishing the "normal" bank which will be a little further out and deeper.

 

On 4/30/2017 at 1:28 AM, th365thli said:

Went to a reservoir that was above capacity. As in smaller trees underwater and larger trees had trunks partially submerged. So lots and lots of shoreline timber. It was mid to high 70 degree highs, and water temp starting at 64 degrees and I left at around 69-70 degree water temps. Totally blue skys. A cold front early in the week rolled through, but I figured by now the it should be good. And it sucked. Landed one 4lber (4.26lbs) but other than that it was dead. Not a single other bite. No signs of fish life. Literally dead. I fished every stump and branch throwing a jig/texas rig craw. So my question is, what's the strategy? I didn't really have a backup plan, and I don't want to randomly cast out deep. Do I need a nice depth finder to find them out from shore? 

 

Nice fish! ...But I have to say, I don't see any difference between "randomly casting out deep" and fishing every single visible stump and branch. Both are haphazard approaches in my eyes. My suggestion would be to pay more attention to the bottom of the lake so you can focus your efforts in places where you have an increased chance of catching a fish. It wouldn't take a "nice" depthfinder, either. Now days you can get a solid unit for not much over $100 bucks that would give you enough information to locate these type areas. Perhaps you already have one.

 

The old bankline that @roadwarrior mentioned is one great example. Another might be focusing on those cover areas closest to the deepest water, or any place you might have found an inside or outside edge to the flooded cover. Maybe somewhere where a ditch happened to meander through a bunch of that stuff. It would be a much more efficient use of your time until you start catching a few and can establish a more specific pattern. 

 

-T9 

I agree with road warrior and t-9, what would he the bankline at normal water level is often the best place to start when fishing flooded lakes.  But don't pick just any bankline, choose banklines with quick access to deep water and spawning flats with a clear migration route between them.

 

BTW, a 4 pound fish tells you that you were doing something right, think back to exactly the spot that it was caught in and try to replicate it.  Not just whether it was a tree or a bush (although that could be important also), but things sch as depth and how close it was to deep water and spawning flats!

Post front fishing sucks and i find it the most difficult.  Going shallow on rising water makes a lot of sense but then the other factor is the front.  With the blue skies i would think they would be very tight to cover.  I might have thrown a swim jig also to cover a little more water or tried a frog in the shade or shadows if there was any.

7 hours ago, Team9nine said:

 

Nice fish! ...But I have to say, I don't see any difference between "randomly casting out deep" and fishing every single visible stump and branch. Both are haphazard approaches in my eyes. My suggestion would be to pay more attention to the bottom of the lake so you can focus your efforts in places where you have an increased chance of catching a fish. It wouldn't take a "nice" depthfinder, either. Now days you can get a solid unit for not much over $100 bucks that would give you enough information to locate these type areas. Perhaps you already have one.

 

The old bankline that @roadwarrior mentioned is one great example. Another might be focusing on those cover areas closest to the deepest water, or any place you might have found an inside or outside edge to the flooded cover. Maybe somewhere where a ditch happened to meander through a bunch of that stuff. It would be a much more efficient use of your time until you start catching a few and can establish a more specific pattern. 

 

-T9 

That's a very good point. At the end of the day it's all random. And I do have a perfectly fine depth finder, so no excuses there. Next time I'll have to concentrate on edges or ledges or any transitional areas. I also thought of one more thing. I didn't fish the main lake channel. It was too windy for my kayak. I may very with missed a huge opportunity, I had to fish the coves. That being said even in the coves I could've still followed the above advice. 

4 hours ago, Angry John said:

Post front fishing sucks and i find it the most difficult.  Going shallow on rising water makes a lot of sense but then the other factor is the front.  With the blue skies i would think they would be very tight to cover.  I might have thrown a swim jig also to cover a little more water or tried a frog in the shade or shadows if there was any.

They probably were very tight to cover....just deep cover haha

Thanks everyone for the responses they really helped. I'm investing more in deeper and ledge strategies such as Carolina rigs, football jigs big worm Texas rigs or shaky heads etc. I also invested in a better anchor for lakes as opposed to rivers. Hopefully I'll get em next time.