Bassun

That brings up an interesting thought. It's been reported there is a definate difference in "catchability" of Florida Strain LMB vs Northern Strain - where the northern are "easier" to catch - I've not witnessed it personally but I can't argue otherwise. Given the two bass are so similar and yet have different catchability ratings I think it is within scope to say genetics can play a role in catching a specific fish. We also know that everything evolves over time, and that survival of the fittest leaves the cream of the crop surviving while the dullards fall away. Given that, I can see the foundation for the premise of haversting impacting a fishery. Now conversely, I would challenge that very concept with this: Catching fish, and releasing them teaches them of lures and can train them not to hit. Therefore, by not removing some of the fish caught multilple times, you actually decrease the catchability of bass as they learn how to avoid being caught. If we accept catchability is a trait which can eventually be passed along through genetics - then it would stand to reason eventually these fish would become more and more difficult to catch. Dr. Dave Willis and Bill Cody wrote an article, "Largemouth Bass Angling and Catchability" (circa 2006) in Pond Boss magazine. They did a three month study of three like ponds stocked identically but fished at different levels of intensity. To summarize their study: the low pressure pond was fished at 170 hours/acre and yeilded 3 bass per hour. Medium pressure 340 hours/acre gave up only 1.2 bass per hour. And the High pressure pond was fished at 680 hours/acre and only caught .4 fish per hour. This clearly shows a major impact on catchability vs pressure. To qualify that further they did a second part to the study, restocking the same ponds with 75 fish, and fishing them each 23 times over the next 49 days. This time the low pressure pond was fished for .8 hours at each session, the medium fished for 1.6 hours each session and the heavy pressured pond at 3.3 hours per session. By the end of the study NO FISH were able to be caught in the high or even medium pressured ponds! However, the low pressure pond did still yeild fish even at the end of the study (although at a reduced rate). These two experiments would pretty dramatically show the effects of fishing pressure. Fish do learn to avoid being caught. To wrap back to the thought of Catch and Release vs Selective Harvest and the genetic influece of either -- while I believe there is potential creedence either direction, I cannot imagine many fisheries would be able to experience enough fishing pressure over a long enough period to aid in any type of significant evolutionary change. Given there are nearly 125,000 lakes in the US I think if we were to pressure a fishery enough to stop the fish from biting (aka study 2), humans would change their fishing locale well before fish would evolve to be harder to catch. Being sentient we would recognize an area not producing any fish and go elsewhere. Anywho -- that's my coffee table analysis...

Here's a starting point: https://www.bassresource.com/fishing/Bagwell/how-to-get-sponsors.html Welcome to the forums, it's nice to see another NRV angler.

The book: The Crayfishes of Georgia by H.H. Hobbs Jr (1981) is supposed to have a detailed distribution of the crayfish in Georgia. I'm sure if you find a copy of it at the library you could have a good sample set of species to reference.

I apologize as this is a little thread creep, but Tom, when you were fishing live craws heavily did you notice a difference in success rates depending on the claws? I read once, long ago and it escapes me where, that fishing crawdads with only one pincher increased catch rates. I believe it was targeting smallmouth. I tested the theory and found that the bigger the pinchers the less successful I was. If I removed one pincher success did seem to improve, but removing both seemed to have a negative effect. Realistically, I suspect part of the problem with the larger crawdads was their complete size vs just the size of their claws. I only experimented briefly over a summer in the local river and creeks. To be candid, I found the bigger difference came from soft shelled vs hard shelled. When I was lucky enough to find one with a soft shell, it was consistenly much more effective vs a hard shelled of about the same size. I also noted, if I remember correctly, that crawdads which had pinchers with blue lining were less effective vs the more muted color varieties. And whether it's true or not, I'm convinced the blue ones pinch harder lol. Given you fished them for nearly a decade I'm curious how your experiences were.

Sorry for your loss. I had an older neighbor who was an avid fisherman in his younger years. Some of the stories he would tell were just too good to be made up. He didn't fish as much for bass as striper's but man the knowledge and experience he had was amazing. It was always kind of funny, if I was working on something on the boat he'd come over an check out what I was doing. And without ever saying anything direct, he would always end up steering me the right direction. It's hard to replace experience... He didn't pass away - he just moved south.

I completely agree there are populations of fish which are more social vs more solitary, especially relavent to the younger year classes of fish for all of the obvious reasons. I suspect there may be some fish which do tend to stay in groups more than others accross all year classes, but yeah I feel the bigger impact is the environment. Most likely is a combination of both I'm sure. If you have fish predispositioned to gather, and a good gathering place - then I would expect to see more fish aggrigated there. We know bass relate to structure, so it only stands to reason fish of the same ilk would gather in the same locations. I just feel without a "reason" for them to gather, they are less likely to.

While I have no documented studies to prove my theory explicitly, my experience and understanding leaves me to believe they are individuals that will temporarily group up. I do believe there are general tendancies for location of bass, and those tendancies do differ from one fish to the next. Tom clearly illustrates this with his notable differences of near shore bass vs off shore deep structure bass. I think often times what is recognized as a "school" is really an aggrigation especially if you are finding them on a specific peice of structure. Most often I hear mention of shools of bass as being located off shore on deep structure; but rarely do I hear it mentioned relative to shorline structure. People will mention bass stacking, or grouping etc, but rarely do they use the term "schooling". I believe we are seeing a mix of happenings here. 1 - We tend to associate real schools of fish with open water. So when we see shoaling or aggrigated bass away from the shore we begin using the term schooling although they are not schooling at all. 2 - I think we notice an aggrigation of bass relative to deep off shore structure more easily than an aggrigation of bass along the shorelines. I think this happens for multiple reasons. The amount of preferable deep water structure off shore in many lakes is much smaller than the amount of structure available along the shallows. Given this, those bass which prefer locations of that nature have less to choose from, and will stack up on whatever available areas there are. This individual preference is noted as a school since the fish have aggrigated on that given structure. I also think we notice the aggrigated fish more easily because of electronics. If you are fishing a weedline 20 yards off your bow, in 5' of water you will not get a reading of those fish on your electronics. Since they are not in the cone of your transducer, you cannot see them --- however, if you are vertically jigging an offshore hump in 30' of water, you will have no problems seeing fish on your units. Mixing the idea that those deep water fish are utilizing a smaller number of structures and the ability to easily identify an aggrigation with electronics in that situation - I believe we tend to consider them schooling. Given all this, I believe the bass are coming to structure indivually whether it be shoreline or deep water. Once they are aggrigated in an area, there is a potential for shoaling; however, I do not feel bass legitimately school in the purest way. I think shoaling occurs not as a specific technique or standard practice, rather a technique used specific to a situation. If the fish recognize a better opportunity to feed as a group, they will -- if they recognize a better solution is to feed solo, they will do that instead. Again, just opinions and postulations -- but that's my 2 cents.

It sounds to me like you are interested in more than just catching fish. You seem to have interest in the ecosystem surrounding fish and hope to utilize a greater knowledge of the ecosystem to improve catch rates. With that in mind, I would absolutely suggest continuing your research and learning more about the differnt types of vegatation. You will find different plants will hold different fish and different populations of fish -- but a more generalized approach of understanding how the fish will relate to any general vegatation is more important IMO for simply catching fish. The specifics is just a pattern within a pattern - focus on the broad strokes for finding fish (weedlines, holes, etc.), then narrow it down to pinpoint your targets (a weedline of Hydrilla vs pondweed for example). Even if you don't "know" the name of it, you can still recognize the difference and utilize that to continue improving your pattern. Francho gave a good starting list and you can find a quick intro here: http://www.mainevolunteerlakemonitors.org/mciap/MaineKeyToCommonNativeAPS.pdf And based on your pictures I believe you are already utilizing the Maine DNR site which has some pictures as well as diagrams. What's the worst that can happen by learning to ID the plants? It may or may not make a bit of difference in your fishing - but you will be more educated and that's always a good thing! EDIT: Here is a map that shows current infestations of invasive Aquatic Plants in Maine. This may help you identify what you see: http://maine.maps.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?webmap=126b9dbc59f44f969f74739bc9bc4ade

Casting is very much like pitching a baseball. If you aren't focused on "something" then your pitches will be all over the place. If you are focused and trying to "steer" the ball to the mit then your going to "stiff arm" the ball and again loose accuracy. Like everyone has said, you need that happy medium where you are focused, but relaxed. That's why you see better success when you are focusing on "catching" vs "casting". When you are focused on a target, but not thinking about the mechanics, your muscle memory takes over and (assuming 1000's of casts) you will find your accuracy skyrockets. [practice, practice, practice] The instant you begin thinking about your mechanics, your accuracy will fall off because you are mentally changing the mechanics to "try" to be more accurate even if its minor or subconscious. To consitently improve ultra-accurate casts it will take tons of practice. The key is once you find a comfortable and accurate cast to replicate it, again and again. Again if you compare to pitching, the same techniques will help. Start with your stance - feet first - and work your way up. Once you are comfortable and casting accurately take note of exactly what you are doing, how you are standing, the specific motion used during your cast - and simply begin to replicate it from beginning to end. Subtle changes in your stance will affect your casting, and you will find that over time, your brain will begin to automatically compensate for those changes and you will become more and more consistent. It's kind of a double win -- the more confidence you have, the more you relax...the more you relax the more consistency you will have...the more consistency the more confidence. So as you get "better" the easier it is to be "better".

To echo the sentiments loosely posted above, I would be remiss to offer advice on "what" to do without a study of the fishery in question. I would suggest contacting your local DNR and have them ***** the fishery. (You can provide them with catch logs and they can advise from that alone if needed, provided the logs are through.) They should be able to advise a short and long term plan of action to correct the balance of the lake(s). You may be in a situation where you actually need to introduce more predators, vs just removing a stunted population. Surely, it does sound like your looking at an overpopulated fishery resulting in stunted growth and resourse depletion ultimately creating a situation where the "target" fish are not succeeding. I suspect that keeping some bluegills to "thin the herd" a bit, and introducing mature bass to the ponds both would help lead to a better fishery. There is tons of information about pond management here: http://mdc.mo.gov/your-property/improve-your-property/pond-improvements I would look at the PDF "Missouri Pond Handbook" and pay close attention to pages 43-45. They give examples of what different catch rates represent and what the general corrective action should be. Of course, that is only part of the equation for effective pond management, but it's a start.

I personally practice CPR pretty much exclusively, however, I completely agree that selective havest is essential for a thriving fishery. I just rarely eat fish so I put them back. I've seen many small ponds as a kid that were just plumb full of gill's and dink bass but had few keepers. Then, you could go to a different pond where the "old guys" would keep a mess of 'gills to eat quite often and voila - suddenly you had bigger bass. I'm sure they kept a few dinky bass too, but the effects of overpopulation were and are obvious. I've seen some of the local farmers literally throwing bluegills up on the bank when they catch them just to thin out the numbers. I thought that was bad, then I saw an example of far worse impact. Without naming locations, a semi-local catfish pond was bought by an adjacent landowner. They apparently had trouble keeping people out of the pond -- so they poisoned it. They litterally killed all of the fish (and we're talking some massive catfish too) just to keep people from fishing it. That was by far the worst I've seen. BUT - it is also a fairly common practice to completely drain a pond that is out of control and restock with prefered fish. Some people will poison a pond as well to restock but they then have to deal with the cleanup of the fish kill... but at least they are restocking, not just killing fish to keep people from fishing for them.

I've had some overhand casts which have somehow become exceedingly high. I've been bombing away and end up WAAAY up trees, or on top of two story docks, etc. Kind of embarrassing if anyone else is around, lol.

To that point, I have read that storing fishing gear in a garage is actually a bad idea. I don't remember the specifics but the general idea was that the fumes and such associated with garages will "scent" your lures, especially soft plastics. Many bass like the motor oil color...I don't know that they would like the taste, lol.

I too am curious about this. I've never pulled reels off the rod other than on the rare occasion I am travelling and the rods are in a pod. Obviosuly if I'm cleaning or working on a reel I take it off, but as for storage - they stay attached. Usually with line on them. I tend to do a line swap in early spring spooling up all the mono and floro at the same time. My braids I run for more than a year. And to Felixone -- mad respect to someone who comes here and posts they are a terrible angler. If you read the posts of most of us one may think this is a veritable think tank for the most elite of pros. It's cool to see someone toss their ego aside and admit to a struggle with catching. I suspect that mentality will lead you to a high level of success in the future as you are likely willing to read and listen to advice and then actually apply what works vs being stuck in your ways and missing new or better opportunities. Good luck!

When I head to the lake, my checklist is more about the boat than the gear. I generally take 95% of what I have with me. But the boat I always do the same thing before I leave. Trim up an lock the motor in place Check the back tie down straps Unhook battery tender/charger Hook up to the truck and lock the tongue Flip back wheel, remove chauks Connect chains Connect wiring Check crank and safety chain to the boat Flip on lights and flashers to check lights Walk around to check lights and tires Double check that life jackets are in the boat Check that the key is in the boat Bump the motor to ensure it will turn over Once at the lake I do a second quick checklist Unhook tiedowns Plug drain hole Prime gas Unlock motor Disconnect crank and safety chain Spin the prop when I walk by. I dont know why, but I always do, lol. Put anything else on the boat like coolers etc When I leave I do another quick check off Remove drain plug Raise and lock motor in place Connect tie downs Spin the prop again. Check strap and safety chain to boat Check chains to the trailer One last walk around to make sure everything is put up / tied down. It's gotten to be such a habit I do the same thing everytime with out even thinking. On occasion I'll double check the safety chains etc. The more I think about it, I tend to spin the prop almost every time I walk past it, lol. I have no idea why though...

For me, mostly planned. On occasion I'll stop on the way home or get a "wild hare" but most of the time I plan out my trips and try to take someone with me. Even at my local lake I still do map study before most trips and plan out where I expect to be - especially if I am going solo. If alone I always try to let my wife know where I expect to be fishing at just in case...

For smallies, it's hard for me to go away from them Tiny Torpedos if the top water bite is really on. But, I'll also use a broken back rapala and leave it on top for about 30 seconds and get great topwater action too. Sometimes cranking it a few turns then letting it floatback up gets it hammered when it surfaces. (Redeyes seem to really love this action too)

I'd try a Strike King Mini King Spinnerbait in Blue/Black, and change out the blade for a slightly larger colorado blade.

This is in creeks and rivers - in lakes I have much less success with the broken back rapala for some reason, but small cranks pick up. If it's really clear I think line becomes a huge part of the equation and a 4-6lb clear floro can really make the difference over my standard 10lb green Ande. J7-J9 Rapala in Silver and Black 4" Ribbon tail worm in Tequila Sunrise by Riverside (what few I have left) - fished on the drop or swam. I've used some roboworms in a similar color but not nearly as effective. 2 1/2 - 3" Tubes in Browns / Pumpkinseed (Especially effective in the River) Bonus -- If I am fishing shallow rapids with the sun shining I have great success using any small (less then 3") minnow bait in chrome. I had a ribbed Yo-Zuri knock off that worked great.

You bring up a good point. I am in a rural setting along the New River. I suspect you are right in that has certainly changed how I share information vs someone in a cityscape.

She comes with me some, but for her shopping > fishing by far lol.

I may use that dog in the pen example next time I'm trying to explain positioning of fish. That's a great visual that most people should be able to relate to. Interestingly enough, my dog (much like bass) seems to hide from me when ever I look for him in the pen, lol.

A warm day in Late spring in Va. Wading waste deep in a nicely flowing smallmouth creek, miles away from everyone but you and the buddy who happens to be lucky enough to be there with you. You hear no boats, you hear no cars, all you do hear is the sound of the water cascading over the rocks and filling into that big pool. You've got your silver and black J-7 Rapala on, and make the perfect cast just near that overhanging root. You hear, "Nice cast" from the guy standing about 15 feet behind you. You twitch it once like its a topwater bait, and that's all it takes to send that 20" class bronzeback into primeval mode as it smashes your Rapala. You crank once, feel the fish and set the hook with a serious aggression. "Fish On!" That --- that is my favorite fishing situation.

Yeah, you're right, lol. I do have a great wife, and I probably should make sure I don't burn this bridge! Course, I have to admit that it was many years before I saw the light, and started the fishopping (see what I did there lol) experience. Maybe she just feels bad for all the years of shopping I had to endure...

Yeah, I'm not saying that everyone does share their honey holes - we all know that doesn't happen. My point was that maybe if people did share a little more with newer anglers we would see even more people take up the hobby. I mean really, what's it going to hurt to put a new angler on more productive water? I know a lot of people try to keep things secret on a lake, but let's be honest. Unless it's a tiny private lake that no one else has access to -- then someone else has fished your spot. And chances are there are plenty of other "honey holes" around the lake which others are trying to keep as their secret -- which you've fished. Besides, most of the veteran anglers are not looking for people to tell them where exactly to fish on a lake {if they really want to know, they will just hire a guide and voila} - they may be asking for where the fish are in terms of spawn, or maybe local info on what type of bite is on -- but most vets I know are looking for information to build a pattern from, not a specific point off the edge of a flat on the bend of the old river channel. A few mins with a map and you'll find that anyway. But having a heads up on the water temps, clarity, level etc etc gives you a much better chance of starting out in the right places vs pulling up to the ramp and beginning from there. For a vet, that should get them started. But what if you've only been fishing a few months? Chances are the same info in the hands of a novice would give them little advantage as they probably haven't been studying patterns for years or have much experience to draw from. That's when saying, "Hey man -- yesterday we were catching a ton of fish in cove "X" doing "this". They may not still be there today, but they should be close, just look for the shad ..." or whatever. Setting them up for success, but giving them enough room to learn along the way. I don't know, maybe I'm crazy... maybe I share too much. I do, however, agree that if someone is hurting the fishery by removing lunkers or damaging / littering the area that I won't share again. But, I've yet to have that happen to me personally (but I know it absolutely does happen). Generally if someone asks me about how or what I have no problem sharing.