Paul Roberts

When did your spawn end? It was proabably at least 3 weeks long, with fish coming and going. Afterwards, they do go back to summer locations. But, not all fish do the same exact thing. I think from reading about fish habits (through the fishing filter -looking for patterns) we get the idea that all fish move en masse away from spawning sites to "summer haunts". The reality is that individual fish start the spawning progression at different times, then drop back to their summer location(s). Some likely move rapidly, others hang out around spawning sites, others probably filter back slowly. And I said summer "location(s)" because not all individual bass have the same habits. Telemetry studies often have individual bass that are home-bodies and others that are roamers, that cover large areas. Where they do though is pretty consistent: They go for the food. In natural lakes post-spawn is a prime feeding time when vegetation is still developing and small fishes still exposed. Your scattered fish may mean that there aren't areas that are excluding fish -yet. Too hot in the shallows, too little O2 in the depths. That may come later.

That was my first thought. We call it Threadleaf pondweed. But, I'd have to see a photo, and I don't know Georgia.

Some are obvious, like lightning. Others one may not expect. We often here about waders filling up and taking people down. This is B.S. But, there's something you can do that really is dangerous in waders -wade out into soft bottoms. There is a spot on a popular steelhead river I used to fish that captured and killed more than one angler. It's a tall clay bank that erodes into the stream and creates something akin to the storied "quicksand". If an angler gets a boot stuck, and falls over into the water, he can not right himself, and drown. I had something like this happen while wading a bass pond. I stood just bit too long in one soft spot and my boot stuck. I realized what I'd done, for what it was, a really dangerous predicament, looked around and there was no one around. I eventually pulled free, but it scared me. I continued my wade fishing by avoiding larger cattails and wading where the reeds grew (n harder bottom). Watch out! Think ahead. You'll catch more fish, and bigger ones too, with the rest of your life than you would in that potentially dangerous moment. Hmmmm...This maybe should be in the Everything Else section.

GatorBK, Wow. DO you use bait or snag them. I would think you'd have to hook them up front, in the snout , to get any control. Do you wear a harness?

Roostertails, I never thought of those things then like I would now. I have a little boy now and I guess things sink in a little deeper now. In fact, I have dreams about my little one (6 now) getting hurt or worse at least once a week. Maybe it's a payback, or readying me for things to come :-/. Speaking of rocks reminds me of doing pirouettes on diatom-slick river bottoms. They are like wet ice. I can't ski or ice-skate very well, but put a nice drift in river center and I'd get there. And the most amazing thing was how I could chase a big one downstream, slipping and sliding, doing some fancy ballet, and not take a dunking. I never fell. I even carried an SLR camera around my neck and thought nothing of it. Then, one day, after a dozen years of this supernatural footwork I stumbled on a boulder in mid-stream chasing a spicy buck 'bow and dunked my camera -ruined it. It was like waking from a 12 year stupor -how stupid of me to carry an expensive camera in the middle of a freakin' steelhead river! I guess I grew up just then because I never carried another camera into the big rivers again. And I got married shortly thereafter. Risking one's life for steelhead somehow seems to make some sense. But for bass? Maybe smallmouth. Oooooo -here's one that really scares me, to this day. My friend Craig and I hit the Genesee River for smallmouths. Our plan was to float a stretch in a canoe. As I remember, we put in at a town called Portageville, and floated on down stopping and casting to anything that might hold a bass. If the spot wasn't so interested we'd just cast as we drifted past. Now, I have a habit of not being able to pass up anything even remotely fishy. At one point we came into a flat wide and shallow riffle and I spotted a small log sticking into the water on the left bank. I told Craig I was going to stop and cast. We beached the canoe and I waded over. I realized the log was too shallow and then noticed the unusual make-up of the bottom. It was flat slate, like a billiards giant table. Instead of continuing the drift, intrigued Craig and I waded downstream a little ways and the riffle ahead just seemed to vanish. We continued on, and came to the very lip of one of the big falls of Letchworth Gorge! The current was fast but shallow and smooth and we were able to look over the edge. I remember there were tourists down below and they looked like ants. If I hadn't stopped to check out that log, the would have seen a red canoe and two idiots (who never bothered to look at a map) go over the edge. I still shudder when I think of that. (If anyone is from that area, I'd like to know how high that falls is). You know what, I wasn't die hard, I was just plain stupid. And there's more, but I think I ought to shut up now while I still have some semblance of respect around here.

Development depends on temp. I don't have the figures in front of me, but it's about a week to hatch at "normal" temps (low 70s) and a bit less to "swim up" -that is, to absorb the yolk sac and start swimming and feeding. The male abandons them shortly after this, although I've seen males swimming with them and apparently still guarding.

Thanks, Catt. What line do you use? Braid, mono, fluoro?

Oh man...many times! Don't get me started... I used to steelhead fish regardless of weather; Steelhead will do that to you. More than once I had to take a frozen reel unscrew it and pop it under my armpit to thaw it. I'd regularly pop frozen egg-sacks into my mouth to thaw them enough to fish with. Single digits and anchor ice make things challenging. But the steelies were often willing, especially when there ain't no one else out there. We had a dynamite spot below a power station that required a wade, sometimes at literally the very brim of my Xtra-Long waders in 31F water and single digit air. Sometimes I did it alone. That is not smart. I used to (before I had a family) fish sun-up to sun-down, and the Earth always turned too fast. When a buddy joined me, after we'd pulled on the neoprenes at 5AM I'd quip, "Catheter's in! Let's git on 'em." You should've seen our waders more Goop and Duct tape than neoprene. I sometimes spent Christmas or New Year's night laying on my back listening to the Lake Ontario surf while waiting for a steelhead to celebrate with. My buddy, Manny, used to say "Fish on -Good Day." That's about all he ever said that made any sense anyway. I once hooked an early king salmon at midnight, on a 5-foot glass light-action spinning rod and 300 yards of 8lb. (I was fishing for trout). I had no control like fighting from a foot-long section of broomstick! I saw the knot at the bottom of the spool several times that night. I was not going to lose that fish. When you see the knot you stop pulling and pray they next run is back at you. I discovered that night, that after you fight a salmonid for a long time they, unlike warmwater fish, can deflate their swim bladders. Then you are fighting weight, as well as body depth and fins. He would then sit on the bottom and both he and I would rest (silly of me, but I was very tired after consecutive nights of nighttime trout fishing, and working during the day). But I was not going to lose that fish Who knows how big it is! In the end I finally had to set the rod down, wrap the line around my hand and pull him off bottom, and basically hand-lined him to the net at 5:20AM. It only weighed 24lbs. My friends were not happy with me. My reel, a Mitchell 300, was toast. Believe it or not, I even back-reeled to Chinooks! I'd vowed never to use drag, and still haven't with spinning gear. I went to work that day and was literally delirious from lack of sleep. You know, if you do something very important very intensively for some time you begin to react to ghosts. This would happen from goose hunting For weeks afterwards, any remotely goose-like sound would make my heart skip a beat music in a car next to me, children's voices on a playground,... . I was at work (security guard at a public museum) after catching that salmon and every time someone walked by and rattled change in their pocket I would leap to my feet! (We used coins to pin the line on the spool of our reels, and act as an alarm Hear the coins jingle and you've got trout from 3 to 18 lbs, or salmon from 15 to 40.) At one point a women walked in front me (slumped at my post) and all I could make out was someone walking in front of my fishing rods in moonlight! I leapt up and shouted, Lady! Your in my lines! You IN my lines!!! My boss sent me home. Neat guy we had an understanding. OK, I'm started... I fished out in the big lake too, mating on big boats, and in little, even tiny, boats too. Little boats and frigid Great Lakes are a bad risk. But, we'd fish thermal bars so far out you couldn't see shore in an open 16-footer. We once found a non-import Molsen bottle floating by! We wondered then if we were too far out. Nah!!!! One April morning my friend Tim (a leathered biker who looked like a real bad ***, but was sweet as can be) showed up at my door with a cheap 9-foot inflatable raft, and a little Sears 3hp motor. As we left the ramp, other anglers just stared. One guy shouted, Are you stupid?! We waved. Luckily it was too early for offshore thermal bars and we started finding fat football browns about a ¼ mile out. Those browns could tow that little airbag until it threw a wake! We did wonder what might happen if we hooked a King. (Since then, telemetry has shown salmon to cross the lake (40-some miles) on a direct bee-line.) But a salmon wasn't needed. There was a strong south wind, and we planned to stay inside the lee of the lake's south shoreline. But, the browns moved out, and then, the motor didn't start, and we began to skate like a cork out to sea (This was not the first time a little Sears motor had tried to kill me; The first was the only time I was picked up by the Coast Guard. I was 12). Tim pulled and pulled, more and more frantically, on that cord, and land got farther and farther away. It was the first time I'd thought about the 42F water all around us no PFDs of course. Tim put a foot up to kneel into it, and he gouged a big biker boot onto a valve, and air started to hiss at an alarming rate. FIND THAT VALVE!!, I yelled. And Tim found it. But the boat sagged and the motor was tilting over on its mount. Tim then began to babble and then giggle in a weird sort of way. I said, Tim, pull it together, grab that paddle and don't stop. Don't think, just paddle. We dug and dug and dug and it seemed as though we were not able to beat the wind. Those cheap flimsy plastic paddles would curl away from our work and we'd have to flip them over every now and again, but eventually we started making ground, got into the lee again, and then were lying flat on the beach feeling like we could just kiss Mother Earth. I think we actually may have; I have a recollection that sand never tasted so good on my lips and tongue. The next morning, when I woke, my arms were so sore I couldn't raise them more than a foot or so. One more story, this one was not me. I worked in a large tackle shop and often fished before I came in to work. One morning I was double-hauling to pods of rainbows and little coho's from the rocks when a guy in a very small flat-bottomed jonboat left the little harbor. He had an electric trolling motor. I almost shouted, Are you stupid! But I knew I was equally stupid and knew he planned to hug the shore for a couple hours till the trout and salmon moved off with the rising sun. The following day I heard the story in the shop. A guy in 10-foot jonboat and electric motor got line tangled in his prop and was located from a Coast Guard helicopter 15miles out at 1AM. That one still gives me chills.

A lot of my ponds are as you describe. There are likely locations where bass will come closer to shore, or areas where the cover is broken and you can get past it. You can look for shallow areas of slop too (froggin'). Mornings and evenings bass may be more willing to come inside, and to the top. Otherwise, here's what I do:

Lemme get back truer to the topic here. My GoTo's haven't changed much over the years. Except now I fish under higher visibility conditions (clarity and sky) since moving west. I do add new things every year though, either entirely new tools, or upgrades. Yeah, the search feature will suffice for me I guess.

I learned on my own, then took my Dad fishing! But, I had lots of help on the way, mostly from Al and Ron Lindner, Dave Csanda, Rich Zaleski, Spence Petros, Rex Grady, KVD, etc...

Oooops! Sorry Raul. :-[ An online friend of mine went on a quest to catch more big bass in his heavily fished waters in Indiana, by applying "science". Here's his site. http://www.bigindianabass.typepad.com/ There is no forum so it won't be competition with this site. It brings up some interesting topics and has a place for commentary from readers.

Great thread. I realize I can "get by" with just a few lures, especially if I'm fishing just a handful of similar waters. I have two thoughts towards this way of thinking: -Many anglers (if not most) have a few GoTo's that they have developed confidence in. They then look for the locations, and fish, that these lures operate well in. -Many anglers not only have confidence baits, but confidence retrieves that go with these. There's likely more that can be done with each lure than many anglers actually do, that will allow some adaptation. But I approach my fishing differently, partly out of necessity and partly out of curiosity. It comes from having been a multi-species angler, over many different water types. And now, I fish a lot of different small waters: ponds, quarries, and small reservoirs. Not only can they be quite different in make up, but since they are small I don't have the option of finding other locations or fish. I have to make it happen under the whole gamut of conditions that fall before us (me and the fish we're in it together!). I can't just run down the lake. I can leave and hit another pond, which I may do at times. But for the most part, I've got a masochistic streak and can't let a good cold front or hailstorm go by, LOL. So, I've come to realize over time that certain things work better than others under certain times and conditions. Take for example...the floating Rapala. I use it in several different ways that are a standard part of my arsenal. It's a GREAT topwater, especially in the early spring when water is cold, and when water is very clear, or calm. It casts well but lands very quietly, and has a rolling action on the twitch that is a super trigger, and the lack of much horizontal movement is the ticket in cold water. But, as the water warms and bass are more willing to commit to a chase, I use it as a subtle waking bait. I go up to the #13 (from the #11), take the front treble off so the nose rides up a bit, and use it under similar conditions as above, just that the water is warmer and waking allows me to cover more water, without putting calm water fish off (spooking them). If the water is a bit turbid, but still calm, I'll stay with the #13, but twitch it (as fish cannot find it as easy as in clear water, and a more stationary bait works better again) often after a good pop, to draw attention. With some chop added, I could fish the #13 with pops and short rips. That flash is great. But a popper can be better. The popper (spitter) throws water and the splashdown isn't such an issue, in fact, it's an attraction. Depending on the visibility, the popper can be fished subtly, or aggressively it's simply a more aggressive bait than the Rapala. That's just one example of subtle changes that can be made as conditions change that can make a big difference. Going further, I've identified lots of such tools and where they shine, and may employ them in succession. I'll have three rods with three different such tailored tools, (say a waker, a swimming jig, and a tube / or a walker, jig, tandem spinnerbait / or... depending on the water body, season, and conditions at hand). I cast one, then the other, then the other, and catch more fish from a given spot than I would if I only fished one. Why? Several reasons: -Presentations are never perfect from splashdown to rod tip. One bass may see the wrong thing and shy away, whereas the next in line you pass on the retrieve sees FOOD! and BANG! On the next cast, the first bass may already be distrusting of that thing, and still shy from it. (Although this may sound, and be, anthropomorphic, I've come to this through sight fishing, as well as results.) This is especially so in heavily fished waters. -The follow up lures offer something different enough that you can often take that first fish, or another that won't commit to the surface. -I believe some individual fish like different things. So, I go for versatility.

Wow. Truly great stuff everyone. You don't know what you know until you try to explain it. That's a big part of the great challenge of teaching, and writing. Similarly, trying to organize and explain stuff often brings out glaring holes in your thinking. It's separating the faith and opinion from the knowledge. The former keeps you going the latter, hopefully, comes over time. Opinion is easy, everyone has one. But knowledge takes one hell of a lot of work. paraphrasing Carl Sagan. No, you can't control em, but you can control yourself. You can learn what they mean, and how to avoid, work around, or work with them. Your brain is the most amazing computer there is. It's all about potential. Maybe that's what the faith part is.

I can definitely see where anglers, especially new ones, could be confused by all the fishing information and advice out there, especially if there isn't a really good framework to fit it into. In-Fisherman built such a framework (F=L=P=S, water body classification, calendar periods, and activity levels) that offers a pretty good start. Yeah, you sure can't chase someone else's fishing. Paul, that's a great post. About the epiphany thing though you didn't have that until after you'd read a lot. You need some basic knowledge before you can get there. But, experience is what brings it home. So, all, what's your take-home here? Here's one of mine: Keep it simple and enjoyable, expand at a comfortable pace, keep your expectations in check, don't close your mind. Good thread, Tom.

Thanks for the encouragement, FD. Remember, it's a fishin' book (or might be someday). A lot of money won't be needed. Guess I'm one of the anyone's. Tom, is that a cheap shot? ????? Does your "major in biology" qualify you to make such a statement? Yes, there is something wrong there. Don't blame the what-you-call "biology". Sounds like this thread has run it's course.

Do you fish the same stuff in the same way all year round? Why, or why not? Would you suggest the exact same stuff to everyone, everywhere, in all seasons? Why, or why not? If you wanted to describe lure presentation in a nutshell, that could help someone year round, all around the country, in all water types, what would you say? If the only book on presentation is just a list of recipes, how do you know when to apply which? And do you just go through the ever enlarging recipe boxes every day; buzzing, burnin, bulging, ripping, walking, waking, twitching, yo-yoing, swimming, slow-rolling, ..etc...ad finitum? Or, are there some times and places where these things might make more of a difference than others. Why? Realize these are presentation (retrieve) techniques, not presentation methods. Is there anything that ties these things together? Hmmmm, doesn't sound so simple to me. Can you explain all this, and have it exportable to varying waters around the country? Might there be anything that ties some of this together? Might that be helpful? I don't know anything about solunar, but weather matters, to both fish and the fishing -but not in equal proportion LOL). We can't control it, we can work around, or with it, but it matters -sometimes a lot. If an angler had a choice, and you were offering advice, would you suggest they fish before a front or after and why. In early spring in the north? In summer in the south? In a spring lake in Florida? In mid-summer in a muddy pond in Pennsylvania? A clear one? Why? Does the why matter? Again, I see an ever fattening recipe book here -a lot like that wildflowers by color book I mentioned above. It's early spring in a small pond in Maryland, and again in a large reservoir in Kansas. It's about to snow. What advice would you give? (Stay home isn't an option). It's mid-summer in a small pond in Maryland, and again in a large tree-filled reservoir in Texas. What advice would you give? Etc...etc... Is everything time and place specific? Do we really have to re-invent the wheel every single day? Or are there some recognizable patterns? And how do you go about discerning them? Might any of these even become predictable? This isn't a test, or in need of immediate answers. Just stuff to think about. Or should we just not think about such stuff? Maybe the advice we should offer newbs could be just one article: It might say pick three lures, choose one water body, (preferably a small one), and fish it (mechanically) for life. The empirical approach might suffice there -eventually. Last questions: Was all your reading helpful at all? Was some better than others? Do you think that the IF calendar periods and lake classifications were helpful to anglers? Yeah, those scientists really are fools, just playing their silly games. It's actually all a conspiracy to make nature seem more complicated then it really is. I think the issue here is more about avoiding complication, rather than trying to understand nature. The issue is confusion, not that nature is complicated. Lost in complication is confusing. When you are not lost in it, it's power. Describes science to a tee.

I wouldn't blindly take out small bass. If they are very thin (like photo below) and big-headed, then go ahead. But if they are fat and happy, they may be part of a good year class and worth letting them contribute in their time. Large bass and small ones don't compete; they eat different sized prey. Bob Lusk may have more to say on this. Also, check articles on this site, and on PondBoss site.

I have photos but they aren't digital. You can search Google (images): Here are some common ones from NY (I used to live there)... Milfoil There are native species but the widespread common one is Eurasian watermilfoil "Myriophyllum spicatum" (lots of it through N end of Cayuga). Looks like coontail but is sparser leafed, stalk is pale yellowish or pinkish and cord-like. May mat on surface when mature, where waves don't sever it. Likely flowering right now; An indicator of post-spawn to pre-summer in smaller waters. Coontail "Ceratophyllum demersum" Like milfoil but fronds denser, feathery overall in appearance, softer (engulfs lures quicker), and leaflets are very slightly toothed (held up against sky). May matt on surface when mature. Hydrilla "Hydrilla verticillata" Kind of like coontail but much wider leafed. I don't believe it is common in the north, but that might have changed. Potamogeton Several species, often deeper than coontail. Potamogeton perfoliatus, great fish habitat and nice to fish through. Dies back by mid-summer, more common in north. Potamogeton crispus curly leaf, is common but rarely dense enough to be great fish habitat. Potemageton filiformus, thread-leaf, is common, impossible to fish through cleanly but luckily normally sparse. Normally outside coontail beds -too sparse to be good fish habitat. Potamogeton natans looks like a small egg-shaped lily pad. Can be dense enough to offer overhead cover. Nice to fish through. Chara Actually a macro-algae (huge algae). Also called skunkgrass or sand grass you'll know why whenyou crush it in your fingers. A deepwater weed that carpets the bottom in clear waters, growing as high as 2 feet high from bottom. Normally you won't see it, but will dredge it up on hooks. An indicator of harder, gravelly bottoms. Crayfish love this stuff. Filamentous Algae -Often called snotweed this is stringy like hair when out of the water, but like a mushy mass when wet. Grows up from bottom, then drifts free. Wind will blow it into mats. Look for mats on wind blown shores, especially in early summer. If there is a foot of water and a nice heating day, bass will crowd under it right against shore. (No one knows they are there.) Clumps on lures but can be fished over, through, dapped, or punched. Just clean off after every cast. Can be worth it.

Often anglers slightly under-confident in what they are specifically doing will fail to hit fish on the first good point and then it's downhill from there. This is a time to change. Not necessarily away from the crank though. I'm willing to bet (because I've done it too and see it often) that if you don't hit fish soon you begin doubting. Which leads to a lack of concentration. Which often results in your fishing too fast. It's easy to fish a crank too fast. It's the main reason people fail with crankbaits I think. "crankbait" just calls for speed right? Wrong -much of the time. Sometime speed is great, when you have active aggressive fish willing to chase. But this is probably accounts for about 20% of the time. The rest of the time fish it like a jig, interspersed with accelerations, deflections, and rips. I'd suggest that you could continue with that crank around the lake making sure you are fishing it accurately (banging stuff, ripping walls) and slow crawling in between. If no go then I would assume the bass are not at the depth you are fishing and switch cranks to a medium to check higher in the water column. I'd then try a shallow crank over the cover. You can check a lot of water with a few cranks. But you really have to be deliberate. A tell tale sign that you are either too fast, (absent-mindedly) or putting fish down (is it sunny with clear water?), is that you don't even catch any small fish. If still no go then change locations entirely -go to real shallow overhead cover and check things out with...what the water calls for. Or try deep. In general, in most waters, fish are shalllow ot higher in th ewater column early in teh year and deeper later. Lastly go back to your starting point and fish something entirely different from the crank. If still no go, you are probably out of time and must simply suck it up. There's always tomorrow.

Not all of them matter, or at least all the time. The idea is not to get lost in minutiae, but know the big foundational pieces for what they are, and use them to ask better questions and make better more confident decisions. This is a huge part of the challenge the writing (which I revel in). I've got to take this stuff to ground meaning relate it directly to fishing scenarios anglers can relate to. Helping a varied audience stay with me is going to be a real challenge. I...think...I can do it. When it's easy, that's great! But... Why? We can't always answer this, but I like to at least have some REALLY good ideas as to why, based on some good work. In fact, I want as many such good possibilities as I can get, so that I can weigh their likelihood and make some decisions on how to adapt, before I call it a day. Since we cannot often see what's going on down there I look at fishing scenarios as a set of probabilities. I want as much good information on my side as I can get. I know I can't eliminate all the I dunno's. I have no illusions about creating a panacea, nor even an integrated whole. Maybe part of the issue lies there; I don't believe there is an integrated whole, as each of the players in any system are individuals, not cloned robots. And those individuals are responding to environmental forces they, in turn, do not control. They have it tough too! It's not just us fisherman that are up us against the lake, the day, or the hour; it's the fish's problem too. They want to eat, we want to give them something (fake) to eat. What's the problem? A lot as it turns out, from both sides of the fence. Fishing is often about finding some threads of sense in chaos. Sometimes it's easier, or more obvious than others. BTW: The writing I'm working on is not about scientific fishing. It's just my own ideas on what's going on with fish, and I have some useful background in the sciences, as well as fishing, to call on. I think, from anglers I've met and conversed with, that many could have a better understanding of the environments they fish in, the limitations living things have, and what their lures actually need to be doing down there in relation to the former. I think it's very astute of Tom to question the merits of bringing too much esoteric science into our fishing. It may lead people to sore heads rather than sore arms! Tom's experience is considerable, it shows, and he's smart to raise the question. My simple answer is: Science is simply a powerful tool to be used along with your common sense (what you already know). It's not the focus.

Cute, (really!), but I wouldn't wave off the powers of science so lightly. And realize, those aliens may not have caught you but they'd do pretty darn well "fishing" in downtown NY -especially at noon with a pizza for bait. Fishing for exceptions is not good advice. But, then again, how would one know what's an exception? Cast, cast, cast, cast, CATCH!! Was that one an exception?? Me too. But realize, I don't read some (typically obscure) journal article and go out and make direct use of it. It's a cumulative thing. Ecologists, limnologists, physiologists, and others have been working on a better understanding of how nature works, and it's worth knowing. There is order in nature. Interestingly, Catt's comment: is THE definition of ecology -how livng things interact with their environment. What these sciences have brought to the table is worth adding to your mental arsenal, if you really want to get a better handle on the overwhelming amount of information that comprises an understanding of nature. Will it make you a better fisherman? I think so but not without the proper approach. Here's an analogy that describes the way some people approach nature: Say you want to learn your wildflowers. You can get a book that shows pictures of flowers, organized by colors. You might find your specimen in it, or one that looks a lot like it (???), and then the book spits out a name. Over time you might have a collection of flowers you recognize, but, and here's the problem: Arranged by color (and maybe season) in your mind, you end up with an awful lot of disparate things to remember. Eventually it gets unwieldy. There is a MUCH better way. Botanists, on the other hand, take a phylogenetic (evolutionary relatedness) approach, having recognized patterns of plant structure, and are able to break plants down into categories which share characteristics. Thus, you don't have to look through a vast array of pictures to get to one that looks like the one you picked. Instead, you see alternate leaves and flowers in a raceme and know that it's of the mustard family. From there the key further separates the mustards until you get your specimen. Interestingly, this works great because our minds handle hierarchical categorizations easily, in tiers like computer menus. Hence, pattern fishing, calendar periods, and other such attempts at understanding fish. If you know the infrastructure you are more able to recognize things for what they really are, ask more enlightened questions, and make better decisions. The problem is much of science literature is dense material, written in lawyer-ese like jargon, and in general it just isn't easily accessible to people without the background, access to research libraries, and the fishing experience to make it relevant. I'm in process of trying to better put all this great information together into something useful. I've had a long and serious interest in teaching fishing, and other outdoor related stuff. This is why I do all the writing end of this; I'd like to put a book together, or two, that gleans from the sciences and offers a framework for understanding aquatic systems for anglers. This is no small task, and knowing my penchant for process over product, and need for depth, it may be my son that finishes it LOL. But I'm plugging away, and all these discussions here help keep me focused on what's important. Who knows, maybe Catt and others will convince me such a book doesn't need to be written, or that I'm not the guy to do it. If so, that's fine, I'll just keep the process going for myself. I'm too enchanted to stop, practical enough or not. Guess they'll just have to peel my cold stiff fingers off my nets, binoculars, microscopes, books, and fishing rods someday LOL.

We all know different water bodies fish differently. We also know that there are things that work better than others under certain seasons, conditions, and situations. Why?! Many ask How? Where? When? Great, if you can get someone to tell you, or better, show you. But what if you are going it alone like most of us on any given weekend? What if we fish waters that don't have a huge following, with guide services, and lots of buddies, even discussion groups? I'll bend a proverb here: When helping out a novice angler, I not only tell them where, when, and how, but why. If I told someone to go to such and such a spot, at such and such time, tie on this lure, cast in this way, and retrieve it this way, I would have showed them how to catch a fish. If I told them why that spot, why that time, why that cast, why that retrieve, I'll have given them the tools to find similar situations, and adapt to similar but altered ones, regardless of water body.

Catt, Good post One that needs to be addressed. That would be me! Agreed. I think for a lot of people, without a strong foundation in biology/ecology, it would be difficult to apply a lot of scientific research to their fishing and have it make a huge difference. It might make it more interesting, to some, which I believe is your point, Tom. But, I'll stretch FishinDaddy's point some and suggest that, beyond experience, we modern anglers take for granted what scientists have brought to our understanding of bass and bass fishing. That said, I also acknowledge the enormous inroads anglers have made empirically in the catching end of things why's be damned. A lot of my allotted fishing time is not about putting as many bass in the boat as possible. I'm out there to learn about how aquatic systems work, and often this means spending time just taking water temperatures, netting and keying out aquatic insects, superimposing observations onto weather data, reading seemingly esoteric research articles, or... I'm into the discovery, and it is not necessarily all fishing. In fact, I've spent the last two spawning seasons not fishing at all, just taking temperature profiles and observing spawning behavior. It's fascinating all by itself, but the practical aspect for the angler in me is that I can now look at trends in conditions, and bass in the water, and quickly know where in the spawn they are which is important since different water bodies spawn at different times. In fact, I can ascertain the seasonal window present in one water body and extrapolate pretty accurately where the bass will be in the behavioral sequence in other water bodies in the area. This affects where I will start my search for bass, and what lures I'm going to have with me in the ballpark as I put it. Beyond the spawn, I'm darn curious about cold front effects, how bass respond to light intensity, heat, what controls insect emergences, plankton regimes, and other stuff. This isn't fishing, or putting bass in the boat, at least for the moment maybe never. So, Catt, you are right on. No one needs to ask why, really, to catch some bass. But I do, for my own often esoteric reasons. And there are certainly much simpler ways to go about enjoying fishing. On the other hand, I know a guy who fishes only a black buzzbait and a black plastic worm. He says that's all you need, and then, "Some days they bite and some days they don't." My guess is there are some water bodies he doesn't revisit anymore (good ones), and I never see him before the spawn (during which time he's likely to say, "Too early yet. Things'll pick up when the water warms".)

Catt, KISS works, but only some of the time. I have to ask: Do you ever go out there and just don't know why a bite turned on, or shut down? Or do you just not ask why? Sure, you can go try to scrounge up another pattern. But wouldn't it be great to know a lot of those why's? If you knew why, you'd put yourself in position to predict it. A lot of natural events are (loosely) cyclical, and if you know the particulars that lead to an event, you'll recognize them again. Yes, pattern fishing works, but in spite of itself. I want to know the "Why's". It's the question that leads to deeper understanding, than "How" and "When".