Is this effective? Or possible? I have a lake with unbelievably thick matted hydrilla. About the 16 foot contour line it grows to a few feet sub surface. But from about 10 foot deep to the bank its matted very thick on the surface. Have been punching with a 1.5oz weight  resulting with low numbers, seemingly above average size. Is it possible to succesfully idle the edges and scan these mats, and actually be able to diferentiate fish.  Btw i rarely ever use side scan. Have elite t.i. gen 1, 9 inch units. Please input anyone with experience. I try to focus on Mats where there is also a contour change like points ,humps or drains ...the text book stuff. im learning to decifer by how thick the mat is and how it relates to the bottom contour. Thicker mats usually a high spot. Thinner usually a depression. Most bites seem to come from the thickest part in the 8 foot range+/- (Like so thick some times a 1.5oz wont go through) its tuff. Sonetimes it can feel like finding a needle in a hay stack. But i still love it  

I've used my side scan on a very weedy lake and have never seen a fish on it.  Great coverage of the weed lines, etc, but I've not seen fish.  Maybe there have not been fish as it is a very tough lake.  But I think its value is mostly to analyze the cover and structure.  I'm interested in the response of others more experienced with side scan.

I dont have side scan. 

I have a hummingbird helix with mega side imaging. seeing fish in a weedbed with any side imaging can be tough.

If the fish are hanging out on the weed edges my mega imaging will see them. it can't see through the weeds.

It is easier to distinguish fish if the bottom is soft. The fish will be a light spot. 

 In hard bottom areas the fish blend in with the background. often times on hard bottoms all you will see is the shadow of a fish. it will often show up as a black spot or line.

1 hour ago, Russ E said:

I dont have side scan. 

I have a hummingbird helix with mega side imaging. seeing fish in a weedbed with any side imaging can be tough.

If the fish are hanging out on the weed edges my mega imaging will see them. it can't see through the weeds.

It is easier to distinguish fish if the bottom is soft. The fish will be a light spot. 

 In hard bottom areas the fish blend in with the background. often times on hard bottoms all you will see is the shadow of a fish. it will often show up as a black spot or line.

That's what I have, didn't recognize there was a difference.  

1 hour ago, MickD said:

That's what I have, didn't recognize there was a difference.  

when i was trying to learn how to setup side imaging, I would find a school of fish with the sonar. Then I would drive by them with side imaging, to see what they looked like on different bottoms.

on soft bottom the fish were pretty easy to see. on gravel and rock, it was harder to see them. they were not invisible, just harder to see.