A gravel pit in my area was recently opened for public fishing.  It is only a few acres big.  There are no contour maps available for it.  No motorized boats allowed.  But it is frozen over right now.  Rumor has it that there's some big bass in there. 

Any suggestions on how I could make up some sort of rough contour map?

I was thinking of printing an arial photo off and heading out there with my ice auger and ice fishing sonar and marking different depths.  It would take a while but I don't have any other ideas right now. 

Not really necessary. You can learn about

the entire structure fishing contact lures

when the ice clears. A few acres are easy

to learn, my ponds are +/- 10 and I know

them VERY well.

More importantly, in ponds the big bass have

to search for food. Surprisingly, nearly every

inch of shoreline may be productive at times.

Fishing away from the bank, out 10-20 yards,

can yield big results, too!

8-)

Dude, its a COUPLE OF ACRES, no need for a map.  Do you need a map of your yard to remember where the path is?  Just get out there an fish it!

First of all, I can understand where J Francho's apparent annoyance is coming from (sort of), in that structure is rarely of great import in small ponds, only because, as roadwarrior points out, bass will often make use of an entire pond. Unlike a big lake, much of a given pond is all bass habitat. But, I do map the small waters I fish. In fishing, the devil's in the details and I don't always remember things as I jump around between waters over the years. It really helps to keep a journal and maps.

I fish ponds from 2 to 40 acres, from shore and from a float tube. I do map them, even the small ones; partly for fun and sometimes out of necessity. The larger ones (with plenty of water I can't reach from shore) are where mapping unseen structure matters most of course -and I rely on sonar for much of this. Most of the smaller ones I can cover pretty well visually and by casting. But I'll use whatever is at my disposal and makes sense to map my small waters: satellite imagery, sonar, visual, and casting. I use a digital voice recorder to keep detailed notes, although a pen and pocket notebook are good for quick sketches as often times it's easier to sketch than describe shoreline objects that line up and mark unseen structure.

Some Details:

I get depth readings both by sonar (compact LCD by float tube, rod-mounted wireless Humminbird from shore), and/or a metered anchor line mounted on my float tube and marked every foot (black) and 5ft (red). Plumbing though is slow going, but does accomplish accurate depth readings, bottom makeup (and temperature profiles) of discrete areas. It's not very efficient for finding unseen structure/cover.

Bottom dragging jigs or a C-rig can be helpful but is also slow and in my weedier waters not often the best, or at least fastest, approach. With most lures I simply want to know what's there first then I start probing with lures to understand details. This last is critical of course, but first you want to be close to something interesting.

I now check all ponds I fish with satellite imagery. I do this, at very least, to get the correct shape of the ponds as I map them in my journals. I check a number of imagery sources because areas may be shot at different times. I look for the ones that show the pond on a sunny day with no ice cover and no wind. It's amazing what you may see. I've located sunken humps I would have had to stumble on when fishing that have yielded good fishing options. They are now mapped and I can go straight to em and drop buoys, or start casting.

I make good use of brilliantly sunny days, walking or floating ponds, peering in and noting things. Several times, on different ponds, I've floated over sunken humps, boulder piles, or downed trees out away from shorelines. One sunny day, I floated over a small hump and spied a pot-bellied lunker LM holding on its edge. Some of these offshore shallows I find as the season progresses, when growing aquatic vegetation reveals them. In other waters, they may be hidden.

Since water levels may vary on some waters, I'll be sure to get out there at low water and see what's there. Here's a bay on a mid-sized pond that I checked out during a serious drought.

At bank-full level this area looks like a flat. I always passed it up, or just sight fished it in spring. I never knew those channels were there. They hold small bass most of the year, but in late winter/early spring they can hold a bunch of mature pre-spawners. I've never seen anyone else fish them. In another small pond at low water, I found THE wintering hole for the majority of mature bass in the pond. I later also found it, and another, in one very nice satellite image.

There's one small res that JFrancho might have fished (we share waters, but 20-30 years apart) that has two great sunken humps that you cannot see, but can reach, from shore. One gave up a bunch of 12-14 crappies, a 30 northern, and a 19inch brown trout of all things (those last two are a hint J ) The other gave up a 5+ and a 6lb LM (the 6 was caught by my buddy). These are the largest of each species that I caught in those ponds over several years -all from two discrete areas. I would guess, knowing that particular water, that these areas are still being used by mature fish.

Finally, I map found locations by orienting them with shoreline objects, and then I keep hand drawn maps of my ponds in my journals. Each time I fish them, I add more detail and observations. I review them before I fish because I just won't remember the details.

Oh yeswhile I'm at itMy sonar does have GPS, but it just isn't useful on the size waters I fish, as I can easily line up shoreline objects and get close enough to easily re-find unseen things by sonar, and then drop my buoys.

Bassmajor's question may seem a little naive to some but I guess that makes me naive too. I've been contemplating charting a smallish pond with my flasher unit and GPS too. It is true that most acreage in a smaller pond can potentially hold fish but not so much in the extreme seasons of winter and summer. And if the lake is too wide to cast across (or a portion of the lake is inaccessible from shore) I can see where charting it can be helpful. JMHO.

I didn't say not to chart it.  What I meant was, it seems like way to much work to wait for winter, drill holes, measure depth, and note GPS coords to make a map.  Its a couple of acres - turn on your graph, and get fishing.  If we're talking about something bigger, say 20-50 acres, by all means, start graphing that baby with a purpose.  I still do it on waters I've fished for my whole life.

I didn't say not to chart it. What I meant was, it seems like way to much work to wait for winter, drill holes, measure depth, and note GPS coords to make a map. Its a couple of acres - turn on your graph, and get fishing. If we're talking about something bigger, say 20-50 acres, by all means, start graphing that baby with a purpose. I still do it on waters I've fished for my whole life.

Agreed, charting a small pond is really too much work if you insist upon breaking it down into contour intervals and all that.  Just general depths are sufficient.  If you don't have a boat (or can't use one), walking out on the ice, drilling holes, and marking depths seems to be a good way to go.

what might be better, and easier, is keep a log of the lake.  Draw a simple map, make notes of what you caught, when you caught it, what time of year, etc.  After a while, you'll be able to see the areas that you catch fish, and the areas that you don't.

Just fishing, over time, finds me some good areas. But a couple days with sonar can add more areas, and key spots within those areas than I could collect in a year or two by casting alone.

All ponds are different though -some the bass are mostly shoreline related, others have good away from shore areas. Never know what you might find. And good spots can be mighty small.

The main reason is because its a gravel pit and I am thinking there might be some significant depth changes, humps, ledges, ect. that would be beneficial knowledge.   Also, they only allow canoes and rowboats.  I have a flasher I could use in a small boat, just don't have the small boat yet.    

First of all, I can understand where J Francho[ch8217]s apparent annoyance is coming from (sort of), in that [ch8220]structure[ch8221] is rarely of great import in small ponds, only because, as roadwarrior points out, bass will often make use of an entire pond. Unlike a big lake, much of a given pond is all bass habitat. But, I do map the small waters I fish. In fishing, the devil[ch8217]s in the details and I don[ch8217]t always remember things as I jump around between waters over the years. It really helps to keep a journal and maps.

I fish ponds from 2 to 40 acres, from shore and from a float tube. I do map them, even the small ones; partly for fun and sometimes out of necessity. The larger ones (with plenty of water I can[ch8217]t reach from shore) are where mapping unseen structure matters most of course -and I rely on sonar for much of this. Most of the smaller ones I can cover pretty well visually and by casting. But I'll use whatever is at my disposal and makes sense to map my small waters: satellite imagery, sonar, visual, and casting. I use a digital voice recorder to keep detailed notes, although a pen and pocket notebook are good for quick sketches as often times it's easier to sketch than describe shoreline objects that line up and mark unseen structure.

Some Details:

I get depth readings both by sonar (compact LCD by float tube, rod-mounted wireless Humminbird from shore), and/or a metered anchor line mounted on my float tube and marked every foot (black) and 5ft (red). Plumbing though is slow going, but does accomplish accurate depth readings, bottom makeup (and temperature profiles) of discrete areas. It[ch8217]s not very efficient for finding unseen structure/cover.

Bottom dragging jigs or a C-rig can be helpful but is also slow and in my weedier waters not often the best, or at least fastest, approach. With most lures I simply want to know what[ch8217]s there first [ch8211]then I start probing with lures to understand details. This last is critical of course, but first you want to be close to something interesting.

I now check all ponds I fish with satellite imagery. I do this, at very least, to get the correct shape of the ponds as I map them in my journals. I check a number of imagery sources because areas may be shot at different times. I look for the ones that show the pond on a sunny day with no ice cover and no wind. It[ch8217]s amazing what you may see. I[ch8217]ve located sunken humps I would have had to stumble on when fishing [ch8211]that have yielded good fishing options. They are now mapped and I can go straight to [ch8216]em and drop buoys, or start casting.

I make good use of brilliantly sunny days, walking or floating ponds, peering in and noting things. Several times, on different ponds, I[ch8217]ve floated over sunken humps, boulder piles, or downed trees [ch8211]out away from shorelines. One sunny day, I floated over a small hump and spied a pot-bellied lunker LM holding on its edge. Some of these offshore shallows I find as the season progresses, when growing aquatic vegetation reveals them. In others they may hidden.

Since water levels may vary on some waters, I[ch8217]ll be sure to get out there at low water and see what[ch8217]s there. Here[ch8217]s a bay on a mid-sized pond that I checked out during a serious drought.

At bank-full level this area looks like a flat. I always passed it up, or just sight fished it in spring. I never knew those channels were there. They hold small bass most of the year, but in late winter/early spring they can hold a bunch of mature pre-spawners. I[ch8217]ve never seen anyone else fish them. In another small pond at low water, I found THE wintering hole for the majority of mature bass in the pond. I later also found it, and another, in one very nice satellite image.

There[ch8217]s one [ch8220]small res[ch8221] that JFrancho might have fished (we share waters, but 20-30 years apart) that has two great sunken humps that you cannot see, but can reach, from shore. One gave up a bunch of 12-14[ch8221] crappies, a 30[ch8221] northern, and a 19inch brown trout of all things (those last two are a hint J ) The other gave up a 5+ and a 6lb LM. These are the largest of each species that I caught in those ponds over several years -all from two discrete areas. I would guess, knowing that particular water, that these areas are still being used by mature fish.

Finally, I map found locations by orienting them with shoreline objects, and then I keep hand drawn maps of my ponds in my journals. Each time I fish them, I add more detail and observations. I review them before I fish because I just won[ch8217]t remember the details.

Oh yes[ch8230]while I[ch8217]m at it[ch8230]My sonar does have GPS, but it just isn[ch8217]t useful on the size waters I fish, as I can easily line up shoreline objects and get close enough to easily re-find unseen things by sonar, and then drop my buoys.

I like that photo.  Reminds me of my childhood.

There was a pond in Swansea where we lived that was formed by a mill dam.

Don't recall if it was a drought or they had to work on the dam, but it looked much like those "gutters" as we old salts call them, just not as rocky.  The bottom was primarily mud. 

When it was exposed and dried, large cracks formed in the surface.  All that remained in the upper portions of the pond was a tiny creek that you could jump across.  Near the dam, there was a good sized pool.

Wish I'd have known then what I know now.  Just about all the fish must have been in that pool.

As kids, we were more interested in exploring the exposed areas, because they were usually out of sight.

I can still see that little crick winding its way from its source to the dam.

Same thing in Westport.  A mill pond was drained down to make some repairs to the dam.  It was a smaller pond, but to a ten or twelve year old kid, it was a great attraction.

The creek bed was larger than the first pond.  Frogs and turtles could be easily found, and black clouds of small catfish, about an inch or so long, could be seen as you walked along the edges of the channel.

The main reason is because its a gravel pit and I am thinking there might be some significant depth changes, humps, ledges, ect. that would be beneficial knowledge. Also, they only allow canoes and rowboats. I have a flasher I could use in a small boat, just don't have the small boat yet.

Yeah, when I read gravel pit I thought humps, ridges, potholes, and boulder piles. If it's a deep one, and many are, then shallows (where much of the food is) wherever they are found, are key they produce food, and/or attract fish. The deeper/steeper it is, the more likely these areas will be important. Depending on water clarity, these areas may be THE show. Definitely worth running around with sonar, if you can.

If not, on calm sunny days, walk it before you fish, esp if it has high banks. I've even been known to climb trees, and it has paid off. I used to fish a lagoon' that had a creek running through it. The channel held LOTSA bass in the spring. I always caught a bunch at the two obvious bends I could read from shore. But I climbed a tree once and spotted a good deadfall along a straight section, and after crashing through brush found it also held fish. I rotated through 4 spots in that lagoon and had people always asking WHAT I was using never WHERE! I never let on it was too small a water, and too close to a town, to share what I knew.

If it's not too large, you say it's only a few acres, just fish your way around with bottom bouncing (and/or known depth) stuff. For future reference, if it's a somewhat larger water, be sure to check the mapping websites out there. You'll likely see (by topo/contours feature) steeper and flatter areas (most important I suppose in natural/dammed than dug ponds), and by satellite views you'll possibly see the bottom in shallow areas. One site I like is http://mapper.acme.com/ .

Near the dam, there was a good sized pool.

Wish I'd have known then what I know now. Just about all the fish must have been in that pool.

During the serious drought (when I took that above picture) the bass and bluegills became consolidated into the remaining depths often pretty small areas. The bass I caught from them during this time were FAT! Drawdowns can be really good for ponds, for a number of reasons resulting in booms. They can also be really bad at times, resulting in busts. Winterkill affected a number of ponds during that drought.

Man made pits are very different from small natural lakes and ponds. The banks are usually steep sided walls on 3 sides with very little shallow water near the edges and one open side that tapers more gradually.

The pit should have an access road entering the open end. There is no way of knowing what has been piled up where or where isolated rock piles may be.

If this quarry pit freezes over and you can walk on it safely, then a flasher type sonar and GPS unit can be rigged on a sled. You can pull the sled and watch for changes in depth and note any rock piles or other structure elements on a hand made map. You could fish the same pond for a long time without discovering a boulder in the middle of nowhere.

Good luck.

WRB

I printed a large google earth type image of my small pond and record where I catch fish, hit snags, all that jazz. It has helped get my numbers up. I have since printed two maps one for fish caught and another for depths and detected structure. I also printed the fishing log from the tackle box section on the top tab here. Filling out this each time has really added up... just my .02 cents.