I seldom use my electronics as a fish finder. For me, the biggest thing I use it for is the mapping and depth. I have dozens of rock piles and bars in my favorite lake and most are in open water that without electronics, I’d spend way too much time searching for. With GPS, I can motor directly to the “spot on the spot” and very often will catch a fish on the first cast to that spot. I’ll use the depth finder to keep the boat positioned at a particular depth while I cast to the edge of the structure. On occasions where I’m on a big flat, usually with scattered weeds or a weed line, if the weeds disappear on the graph, so does my chances of catching. If I’m crappie fishing, I’ll look for standing trees or submerged brush piles and will look to see if fish are present, but I don’t depend on seeing what appears to be fish. When I had my AquaView camera, I found too many of the “fish” I thought I was seeing on my depth finder turned out not to be fish at all. I’ve never had the chance to use ffs, so I can’t comment on how that would work for me. I have side scan and down scan, but actually prefer traditional 2d sonar. 

I guess for me, I was thinking it could help me a few ways.

 

First, it's going to help me see the depth.

 

Second, it's going to help me find structure.

 

And third, it can help me see how deep the fish are. For instance, if I'm fishing an outside weed line in 12 feet of water. Are they sitting in 11 ft or 6ft, etc.

 

I guess if you have mapping, it can easily get you back to the structure you found earlier.

 

I guess I need to figure out how much more I'll be in my kayak.

 

I don't want to spend a bunch of money if it wouldn't transfer over to a boat very well.

3 hours ago, HawkeyeSmallie said:

I guess for me, I was thinking it could help me a few ways.

 

First, it's going to help me see the depth.

 

for sure it will.

 

3 hours ago, HawkeyeSmallie said:

 

Second, it's going to help me find structure.

 

Probably it will, so long as you learn how to use it and what you're looking at.

 

3 hours ago, HawkeyeSmallie said:

 

And third, it can help me see how deep the fish are. For instance, if I'm fishing an outside weed line in 12 feet of water. Are they sitting in 11 ft or 6ft, etc.

 

Probably not in the example there.  If the fish are in the weeds it definitely won't.  You'll see where the weed line is, but sonar can't see into the weeds- it's not x-ray.

 

3 hours ago, HawkeyeSmallie said:

I guess if you have mapping, it can easily get you back to the structure you found earlier.

 

That is a very useful part of it.  Scanning, finding structure, marking waypoints and always knowing where they are.  I have a bunch of rock piles marked off on one lake.  Most I saw when the lake was super low last winter.  I mentally saved them and then in recent trips I've scanned over them to mark the waypoints.  Of course I haven't caught a bass from any of them, but they are all good for a couple crappie.

 

3 hours ago, HawkeyeSmallie said:

I guess I need to figure out how much more I'll be in my kayak.

 

I don't want to spend a bunch of money if it wouldn't transfer over to a boat very well.

 

The good news is that any fish finder that you put on the kayak will transfer to the boat.  It is just a case of how much you want to spend on one and what you want to do with it.  When I moved kayak to boat this past winter I contemplated moving my helix 9 and mega live 1 setup to the boat.  I didn't in this case because the helix is being discontinued so the lifespan was limited, plus the guy that bought the kayak wanted it set up as is to save his own setup time and effort.

I'll take this from a slightly different direction. I have no electronics and here's what I feel like I'm missing out on.

 

Mostly subsurface structure and depth changes which hold fish when they move off shore. I'm pretty good at reading water, but man, it feels like moon man talk when I watch videos with advice that presumes I can just locate that stuff. 

 

The other thing is locating bait fish. Again like reading water, I can read nature sign pretty darn well. However there are some days and locations where wildlife just doesn't show to indicate that. 

 

With enough trips on a body of water I piece that stuff together. It's when I'm fishing new water that I really envy the folks with electronics. I'm probably going to get a small pull behind system (Deeper Pro 2) for my kayak next year. 

1 hour ago, casts_by_fly said:

 

 

Probably not in the example there.  If the fish are in the weeds it definitely won't.  You'll see where the weed line is, but sonar can't see into the weeds- it's not x-ray.

 

Darn it!

 

Figured it did that. lol

mapping does help.  contours, etc.  

Only electronics i use is my garmin gps stuck on my winshield of my car to find new lake locations.

20 hours ago, Scott F said:

I seldom use my electronics as a fish finder. For me, the biggest thing I use it for is the mapping and depth. I have dozens of rock piles and bars in my favorite lake and most are in open water that without electronics, I’d spend way too much time searching for. With GPS, I can motor directly to the “spot on the spot” and very often will catch a fish on the first cast to that spot. I’ll use the depth finder to keep the boat positioned at a particular depth while I cast to the edge of the structure. On occasions where I’m on a big flat, usually with scattered weeds or a weed line, if the weeds disappear on the graph, so does my chances of catching. If I’m crappie fishing, I’ll look for standing trees or submerged brush piles and will look to see if fish are present, but I don’t depend on seeing what appears to be fish. When I had my AquaView camera, I found too many of the “fish” I thought I was seeing on my depth finder turned out not to be fish at all. I’ve never had the chance to use ffs, so I can’t comment on how that would work for me. I have side scan and down scan, but actually prefer traditional 2d sonar. 

This is pretty much me. I rarely look for fish themselves except bait . i mostly have spots marked and go to them based on my hunches and seasonal patterns. im sure sometimes there are no fish there and its not as efficient as graphing for the fish themselves but its just how ive always done it. our lakes also have alot of grass so the fish can be there but you cant see them.

Not at all. 90 percent of my fishing is from the bank fishing by my wits. Don't like to watch bass tournaments when the scope dominates, either. 

Good Fishing

Too many ways to enumerate here.

I will give you one example:  Set the unit on side scan and record.  Drive slowly down an area recording.   Move out to a good location and play the recording.  As good looking cover shows up mark with waypoints.  Then pull up the mapping and go fish the waypoints.

I’m a bank beating junk fisherman, rarely fishing deeper than 10’. Only use my electronics (no FFS 👎) for the water temp and to see the make up of the bottom. Electronics have definitely not changed how I fish, the lures I throw, etc.

Not gonna lie Livescope has definitely changed the way I fish, but because that's how I prefer to fish now.  What I do is I use my mapping to identify areas I think may hold fish. I then use my side scan to scan across those areas to identify brush piles, rock piles, drains, etc. and I mark them. Then I use livescope to see and cast to exactly what is there....   As far as techniques, obviously I use the jighead minnow and the neko rig much more than I did before. I still like to flip heavy cover and laydowns and I don't use electronics really for that except for mapping. I still like to toss a wacky rig around up shallow, but by far livescope as changed my method of finding fish and has brought me new techniques to use to catch those fish. It also makes you way, way more efficient by eliminating dead water. 

As I so subtly alluded to in a post of my own earlier this week, Spot Lock has made it easier for me to be more effective. We have now been actively seeking main lake points and other offshore structure to fish because it is so much easier to hold the boat in position than it was before. I can also turn off pinging of the transducer while hovering in a spot. 

Not much at all. I fish out of a 10ft Pond Prowler. No electronics at all. I fish shallow and that is about it. Our lakes in Iowa are pretty shallow so it's not too bad. 

Very little.

Not one single bit!  I use my sonar to find structure, water temp, bait fish level, thermocline, and then I turn it off and go into stealth mode with no pinging.  I use my eyes and ears and study my surrounding without staring at a screen all day.  I may turn it back on when changing locations.  But once fishing I do it old school.

I have three answers to this question:

 

1. A lot

2. Too much

3. Not enough

 

On my kayak I run a Helix for mapping and a Garmin for FFS. The Humminbird Lakemaster is a fantastic tool and important for me because many times I go to a new lake and have only a day or two of practice or no practice at all.

 

FFS is a blessing and a curse. It's great for seeing fish, especially fish hanging out around structure in deeper water. But it can be distracting as well, especially when you haven't mastered it and I have not mastered it.

 

There's an art to using it, but it takes time to master that art. I often head out with the intention of trying to master FFS, but I get distracted and start fishing instead of testing and studying.

Somewhat.

Depth and water temps are nice to know.

 

Off-shore structure is not much of a consideration on many of the lakes I fish, 200 - 300ft deep.