Bassun

If you are fishing on the boat, why not just wear tennis shoes? I mean, unless you fall in all the time why the emphasis on quick dry shoes? If you have to get your feet wet during load / unload - you could always grab a pair of crocs to put on for that but otherwise, I don't follow the need. You can always get Sperry Maritime H20's or pay more and go Under Armor Kilchis if you really need water shoes. Speedo makes a watershoe too that fits all of your requirements. I think they call them watercross maybe?

I'm interested in the results myself. My gut doesn't like it in place of a standard 3 way...but my gut also eats McD's so it isn't always the best judge lol. Seems like if you are going to use a three way, you may be better off to have the swivel ability on all three leads...especially the bait lead. I've seen some similar but instead of the single ring they had a second barrel swivel attached there. They seemed to tangle up more for me than the old conventional 3 ways.

Small grubs and beetle spins. Adding in micro sized crankbaits and top waters is always fun and usually highly successful too. A Teeny Torpedo will catch teeny and pond best bass as well Rooster tails are solid options too. Any of that on ultralight spinning gear w/ 4lb line will be a ball! If you haven't fly fished, that is the PERFECT place to get your feet wet with it. Get a cheap combo in like 5/6 weight and some cheap fly poppers. Just practice casting without a lure on first to get the hang of it, lol.

I've been there. Used a variety of different bags / boxes / etc. Each have their own advantages, and getting something that works for YOUR situation is key. And that key is you are not going solo, you are taking a kid with you. Ergo, you need to take a LOT with you --- not just fishing gear both other kid essentials. SO - a bigger backpack is what you really need. And, let's be honest, if you hike to ponds to fish you probably hike other places too. Again, a backpack wins over other options. First option -- start looking at goodwills, etc. A hikers, framed backpack will be the most comfortable to wear (usually). But they may not work as well for carrying rods easily. (A little ingenuity with elastic straps can go a long way though) Problem is whether you would find a decent one at a goodwill. Depends on the area. Buying new can be really expensive...but if you do a lot of family hiking could be well worth the expense. If I were to buy NEW, this is what I would get. My last pack (just for hiking) was not framed and I regret it 100% of the time.) Second and what I would look for at a goodwill, etc., is a bat bag back pack. Ideally one with some external mesh or easy access compartment. Keep one "main" 3700 box there with the bulk of what you will actually use. Bat sleeves work fine for holding rods and if they don't sit or hold well, you may be able to cut a slit at the bottom to allow the rod handle to slide further in (depending on rod and bag design). Be wary if you have one piece rods...and don't forget they will be sticking out over your head as you walk. (I've made that mistake more times than I care to admit.) A bag like either of those will allow you plenty of room for a change of shoes, clothes etc in the bottom of the main bag. Usually have a pocket or two for easy access to drinks. And plenty of room for all the other incidentals you need for kid fishing success. And a few extra pounds in a decent pack is MUCH MUCH better than toting a tackle box around lol. Even after packing in all the extras, you still have more than enough room for fishing gear too. A fishing pack would obviously work, but at that point I refer back to the first option. Hard to find at a thrift store, and generally not as comfortable as a dedicated hikers pack - so you are back to buying new. Again, I'd look for a framed hikers pack and go from there. No matter what you use, grab some 3700's (and other smaller sized) plastic boxes. Again, a general use 3700 (any size obviously, I just use 3700 as its the common theme size) with the "main" things you use, with easy access, makes life grand. You can find tackle boxes that store 3700's (etc) in them. Those work out great if you want to both be able to be mobile and have a dedicated box. Just take out the boxes and put em in your pack.

You can always put one one, jump in the water and see how it works...then reload the cartridge with a new co2 canister. If you have doubt, well worth a canister. My sister in law cannot swim. To convince her that even my smallest jacket would hold anyone up (an old cheap meshy thing with hardly no floatsome) I put it on and jumped off a dock and dead sticked myself. Then I gave her a sports style jacket and she had 100% confidence in it. So I have two modes of wearing a jacket. If I'm with someone, or if I'm solo. With someone, I generally only wear a PFD when the big motor is on (boat rule, motor on - jackets on. Period.) For those days, I wear my inflatable. If I am solo, I wear a mesh fishing vest all day. I bump my arms on it and its annoying in that regard, but otherwise really comfortable. The inflatable seems to ride up and irritate my neck if I fish in it. My wife, however, hates the inflatables. She prefers the sports vests and swears they are more comfortable. We lost hers during a boat packing incident (aka it blew off the boat on the way home), but she doesn't fish in them so... I would NOT write off the mesh fishing vests as an option for all day. Go to BPS/Cabellas/etc. and try a few on. Then wear it a bit. Walk around, air fish, etc. Something comfortable while standing still doesn't cut it for fishing in it. Keep in mind how much your shoulders and arms move. Also consider the heat of the day. One other thing, if your boat does not have a ladder --- Get an emergency soft ladder and have it available when solo. Getting back into a boat is hard enough in open water. Doing so when cold, exhausted, injured, etc. is even worse. It's kind of like always using the kill switch... an ounce of prevention may just save your life.

For most presentations I direct tie. Carolina rigs always get a swivel, but no snap. If I'm fishing a three way, say for whisker kitties, etc. I use a three way swivel, but no snaps. However, my umbrellas all have swivel snaps on each lead. That said, I also use an improved clinch knot too often and would probably have better luck using snaps on cranks than tying a clinch lol. I have to think about it to even tie a Rapala knot instead lol.

I've tried a few others, but the 3/0 EWG Gammy is my favorite. I keep the tip buried 100% of the time unless nose hooked. But, I do skip these in the deepest darkest nastiest brushiest places I can find most of the time (and of course under everything that floats). I want as little chance of getting snagged as possible. If I really want to get deeper quicker I will go with a belly weighted hook, but that's rare. I found better luck swapping over to a Swimming Super Fluke if I go that route vs the Super Fluke. I will also swap over to the Swimming Fluke if I need to slow things down more, it may be as much mental as anything but if I feel I need to go slower the swimmer seems to work better. For that, I stay with a normal 3/0 EWG or sometimes even a 2/0. One year, I pegged a small bullet in front of a fluke and while the action was a little "off" it worked great. (Deeper drops, ledges and long points mostly). I never tried it with a swimmer, but that could work out nicely I suppose. For those who are worried about longevity, you can always fish new plastic with a normal 3/0 EWG, then once damaged save that bait for a nose hooked offering where suitable. Easy enough to save bad ones just for that. Worst case, you trim a little plastic and voila, you're back in business.

My view on this has shifted over the years. I have a live mount barracuda from 30 years ago. Only fish on any of my walls. And, it is a cherished possession. Over the years, I have moved a few times, and always make my wife carry it on her lap. Of which she complains and harasses me over, but always protects it. The point being, having a mount is a great reminder of an event. It's not, to me, about the fish itself. It's about everything that went into that trip. Replicas, let me re-phraise that, HIGH QUALITY replicas do the same thing. I personally will not keep a trophy fish today. If I land a record, I would probably risk transport but I'm not even 100% certain of that anymore. Take a quick moment to photo and measure, weigh it if you really want and let her go. The benefits are measured in memories...to be made. Sure you got a great memory from that 15lb'er. Maybe next month, a 12 year old will catch her and lock down a memory, maybe one of the few good memories, with someone special to them. To me, that is worth more than having a fish on my wall. I love taking the nieces and nephews out - watching them catch something is more fun to me than catching it myself. It's funny, my fishing buddy now is my nephew. I put him on the first fish he ever caught, a big ole carp. When he tells the story, it isn't about how hard the fish fought, or how he thought he was hung up, it's about me pacing around behind him being more excited than he was. The fish was nice, but being there and seeing how he lit up - how excited he was once he got it in --- that's what it's about. And putting a big fish back gives that opportunity to someone else.

I tend to agree with this, with the caveat of deep water fishing, and very warm water fishing. If its really hot, or they are really deep I try to not fiddle around with them much at all if I can get em in. I'll bring em in greener than I would most other times, just to get them back out and down more quickly. Also -- try to remember to wet your net before you scoop up a fish. I know, it will get wet when you go to scoop it (usually) but a good habit is to dip first to help cool and moisten the net. you know how hot black rubber gets in the hot sun... on the boat if we call for the net, first step is to dip it regardless of the conditions. Set's the habit for when it does matter.

Don't overlook prescription glass wear if you have ANY vision impairments. A good quality glass, with custom fit frames makes a huge difference. I've used (and used for many years) cheap Wal-Mart / K-mart etc. polarized glasses. They work. But, they do not work nearly as well as a high quality glass. Is it worth the cost difference? Meh - probably not for 90% of us, lol. But, there is a difference. I have a pair of Costa's which work great! But, they don't fit as well as my prescription glasses, but work better for fishing because of the lens color. I didn't notice until on the water, and realized what the problem was. With the design of the Costa's not much I can do about it... but from the Opto - I can get anything swapped, adjusted, etc. If I had to wear only 1 pair of glasses today, they would be from the Doc. A light amber lens, high quality glass, with a green mirror - and they would be fit perfectly to my face. Would they be expensive, sure...but, they would be just about as good of an all use fishing sunglass as I could get, and they would last. My Costa's have been replaced once already...and they will never fit any better than they do basically out of the box. As an aside, my vision is still very good. Just a slight astigmatism which doesn't "need" corrected. But, the benefit of paying insurance was a discounted cost on frames and lens work. A short discussion with the doc and wife, and it made sense to get a pair cut for me. Because I had a "correctable" deviance, I qualified for the discounts vs buying custom sunglasses from the Opto at full cost. Huge savings (well, I pay for it ultimately with insurance out the ying-yang but...), and the best pair of sunglasses I've ever owned. I will be getting another pair made probably this year, geared 100% for fishing to replace my Costa's. So, that's an avenue to consider if you are going to spend more than $20 bucks on glasses.

I 100% agree, there are situations where smaller "is" the right choice, but generally speaking I feel the base population of trophy bass are going to key on a single meal, vs a bunch of smaller ones. Like all other things fishing, there is no "one" fit all solution, lol.

I think the point isn't that someone "cannot" catch a lunker fishing normally, it's that the percentages will be different than if they are targeting lunkers. Take Catt vs soflabasser --- if we assume both are equal fishermen, fishing equal water, equal time etc. Over the course of "X" amount of time Catt may catch n~fish. 60% may be keepers (but < lunker status), 35% dinks, and 5% lunkers (keeper size but also lunker status). Over that same period soflabasser may catch n~fish but the percentages may look like: 80% keepers, 5% dinks, and 15% lunkers. However, the total number of fish caught would likely be significantly tilted to Catt. His "normal" lures entice a wide range of fish, whereas Soflabassers entice a more select group of fish - in this case lunkers. Numbers are totally made up, and not of any formal study -- but the point is anyone can catch a lunker, but if you are targeting JUST lunkers, (all things being equal) you will have a higher percentage of lunkers. A legit case study could be Tom. We all know he is a trophy hunter in trophy waters, and probably caught more big bass than any one else on the forum. Certainly has shown his top end fish are second to none here. I would not be surprised if he has a log of some of his fishing and could really show the %'s hes seen targeting monsters. I'd wager his % of lunkers is much higher than the normal angler because of how he is approaching things. I suspect with most successful trophy hunters, lure size is on average larger than anyone else. Yes, a tiny grub may get gobbled up by a trophy - but, I am confident numbers would reveal that if you want a trophy, fishing big bigger baits in the places the hawgs are living will give you better %'s of bigger fish than fishing small baits in exactly the same place and time. It's not that you cannot catch a beast off a normal sized lure - you are just more likely to catch more big fish using bigger lures. Again, that's anecdotal as I don't have scientific numbers to back my theory - but history has shown the same occurs at the lower end of the spectrum where more anglers live. If you throw micro lures in bass water, you will catch bass of all sizes. But, not nearly as many keepers, percentage wise. If you move to what we consider "normal" sized lures, you move into the keeper range more often but the numbers generally drop. Which makes sense, generally of any given population of fish there are significantly more smaller fish in a body of water than larger. Transitively the same can be applied on the next scale of keeper vs lunker and normal sized lures vs large lures. Considering these numbers from a VADGIF study on my local lake: circa 2009 electro-fishing study. 67% of LMB over 8 inches were also over 12 inches (keeper in Va on most lakes). 38% of LMB over 8 inches were also over 15 inches. 1 LMB over 8 inches was also over 20 inches. 1 fish, not 1%. From this you can gleam that you are much more likely to catch something in the 12-15 inch range than a lunker. Fishing lures that fit the feeding habits of those 12-15 inch fish vs something larger should yield more in that range vs a very large bait. I will concede the numbers could be adjusted if they were testing ONLY where it would be most likely for lunkers to be... but the population of giants just doesn't out number the rest of the classes of the fish.

lol sorry... I did the same thing, but added a frog instead lol. It will just be our little secret.

Academy whopper plopper sale for 9.99 is still on. AND the promo code CC201820PCT still works for 20% extra off. Literally just placed an order with it. Color selections are dwindling, but...

Probably going to ruffle some feathers and this is directed at no one in particular --- but consider your crankbait box and the comments above about how much better the "best" perform. How they just work so much better than anything else. Now look at your crankbait box. Note how they all look about the same, but have subtle differences. I'll give you that a major producer can replicate design more consistently than a cheap knock off... but is that necessarily always bad? Now look again, I bet you have a variety of cranks, of which many look similar, but are not exactly the same. Why do you want that? Based on the above, wouldn't we all want exactly the same - best performing crank? Nothing close to something that works great can work at all. Sure you may want a few colors and maybe a few different designs, but definitely all need to be within a very small window of performance. And you definitely don't want to be throwing something that no one else is...ever. Oh, I bet it's because of the much better tackle components. Higher end companies definitely and always put the best hooks and rings on lures. We would never change that, would we? Especially when the lures are tuned with that specific gear on them to perform at their top design potential. Oh, you change out your hooks? You swapped out the split rings? Why does that one (insert whichever lure) have all of its paint knocked off, but the other three duplicates by the same company look pristine? Wait, it's your lucky lure? You catch more off that specific Foxy Lady 6a Bomber than the other 3 Foxy Lady 6a Bombers you have? How can that be? They surely are 100% identical and must perform exactly the same. Glad you never have to ever tune anything out of the box either! Yeah, I'm being a bit snarky about it... but come on. Think back to some of the older lures that performed great! Pick your poison there, whichever super hit you want, consistency out of the box from one to the next was not 100%. But they still worked great! My point is that yes, there are advantages to some of the top high end (or even mid-level) lures, but don't be a snoot and refuse to throw something because it isn't a big name brand. Knock offs may not give you 100% consistency, but the same is said of any lure company... that's what makes that one bomber your favorite. Something about it is just a little different and seems to work better. maybe it IS the one that works perfectly, and the others are off...or it's off and that just happens to be the magic itself. Don't be confused. Lure companies are focused on selling lures, not catching fish. If they thought a pink square with a single circle hook on the top would outsell everything else, you can bet there would be a ton of those on the market. It's a business, they are in it to make money, not to watch Joe catch a dink. Would they prefer lures work perfectly? Of course. Why wouldn't they? I'm not saying they are the anti-fish, but, they are a business first and have to be. If not, they will be bankrupt, or at best sold --- to some other company, who will make a knockoff of their great lure and sell it to the masses using their big name, and massive production facilities. Oh wait... does that make it a knock off? Just like the other knock offs? Good thing we never have that happen, I couldn't imagine if my (insert favorite mass producer of lures) bought out (insert smaller lure company that makes great lures) and resold them as the same name, only they don't work as well as the original...or worse, worked better totally ruining my angst against knock offs. My whole point is don't be a lure snob. Don't think that just because its a high dollar lure that it will always out perform the cheaper ones. It may. It may not. I concede that consistency is better with higher quality name brand baits...and if that is the ONLY reason you don't want to try Lure Xy, then ok - that's fair. If it's just because its not a Livingston, or doesn't have that Pro endorsement in the name, etc. then you are being a victim to marketing. I know the last poll I took of caught bass said they did not like cheap lure bodies, so they only hit lures that cost $15+. And yes - I am a bit of a hypocrite - I don't "only" fish the cheap stuff. I have my favorites like everyone else. If I'm fishing a creek or river, there's a 90% chance I will have one of about 3 lures on. Usually a broken-back Rapala. And occasionally I will splurge and buy something that is way too expensive. But to be candid...I can't honestly say that the most expensive lures I own are really any better than the cheaper models on a day to day basis. I can say, with 100% confidence, that while I have multiples of those Rapala's - they do NOT all work the same. *edit -- Sorry, that came across much harsher than I intended it, so don't take personal offense.

I have had a bunch of different glasses, from cheap to prescription. While being polarized seems like it would be a simple yes / no or on / off type of thing - it unfortunately isn't. Adding mirrors to the equation adds another level of complexity. It also adds another layer of light dilution / image degradation. The color of the lens has an impact on how well the reflections are quelled by the polarization process as well as how the actual light transference works. I, for example, prefer an orange / yellow lens for most things, second to amber/copper. Unfortunately, polarized yellow does not have the same properties as polarized grey does. 1:1 polarizing yellow sucks compared to polarizing grey tints. Suck's so bad that I returned a pair of prescription yellows and got standard grey...same tech, same glass, same prescription, same everything except tint color --- and the difference was night and day. I wear those grey's daily as driving glasses and on the water if it's a bright day and I wont be fishing in a lot of shade or doing much sight fishing. If I am going to be doing more under trees, in shade, or sight fishing etc, then I wear my copper costas. I know, I haven't spoken to mirrors yet but I'm getting there, lol. I personally like a lighter lens. I don't want UVA/UVB but even lightly tinted lenses protect you from that. If you add a mirror you are always making the lens a shade darker. Maybe not much, but it is something to consider if you ONLY have one pair to wear. I love my grey's for 90% of what I do with them, but if I am trying to see under trees in full sun, they are just too dark. Because of that, I usually just wear the costa's when I fish. Before the "Copper" Costa's I used exclusively amber colors for fishing (for the same reasons), regardless of the brand. If I were an open water fisherman, like saltwater for example - I would probably add blue mirrors, and probably have them over a grey tint. But, I end up in a lot of different light conditions, cloudy, shade, early, late --- all those hurt grey, imo. I want to have as much light as I can get, while still having good polarization so I go amber/copper with no mirror. The reflection of the specific wavelengths does add a little contrast. Reflecting green away from green, blue from blue, and any other color you choose to mirror with. The thing to consider is those colors reflected away, change what you see. The tint absorbs colors, the mirror reflects them --- so together you get different results. Having said all of that --- 99% of people wont care. Buy what you like the look of, and accept that whatever color shift you get is what it is. After a few minutes you wont really notice it unless you have two pairs side by side and swap them back and forth --- then the difference is rather noticeable. Just a blue vs green tint over amber makes a big difference side by side. Here is a list of what the impact of colored mirrors actually has --- but until I can really see them side by side, I go mirrorless, but I know of bunch of people who love their green mirrors on small freshwater and blue on open water. Blue mirror - shifts colors towards yellow Red Mirror - shifts colors towards blue/purple Green mirror - shifts colors towards rose/pink Gold mirror - shifts colors towards green Yellow mirror - shifts colors towards blue/green Teal mirror - shifts colors towards magenta Silver mirror - tends to darken without much shift in color Amber/Copper tint tends to shift the perceived color range towards green and reds IIRC --- I know I like that better than what the greys do overall. And I seem to remember something about reds helping with depth perception, but one would have to look into that. But, you can see the green mirror will shift slightly towards the reds, which is what the amber color lenses do, so you probably will get a little more contrast with the green mirror. However, if I am looking at a cheap pair of glasses, I personally would avoid mirrors. While a good mirror coating with help protect the lens from scratches, etc. a cheap layer will scratch more easily as I understand it. Also, consider the impact of the tint vs the mirror. Grey and amber tints usually blocks like 10-15% of light transmission, tint 2%. (roughly of course) So the tint you choose is much more important than the mirror, and unless they are side by side you will probably never notice the difference. If you like a little darker, maybe a bit more contrast - add the mirror. If you like a little more light for seeing in low light, into shadows etc, skip the mirror. If you don't know / don't care - pick the look you like and rock on!

MJMJ - not to toss useless info, but there are a TON and I mean a TON of videos out there on youtube about all things fishing. Sure, it won't beat the hands on tutorial you can get from a person, but, the info abounds on all subjects. Boat maintenance, electronics, gear - it's all out there. The good thing is that much of the info on YT nowdays is actually pretty decent. There are a lot of options for serious detail and discussion if you take a gander.

Not to de-rail - but it's funny that somehow I had NEVER heard the dogwood timer for spawning until I was here. And I had never made that connection of my own accord. Now, especially this year, I am seeing it all over lol. Just one of those odd tips that make life a little easier and seems to be pretty spot on.

lol, missed my opportunity for that one liner Montanaro. I wouldn't be surprised to hear of local tournaments having scandalous baiting. They seem to do everything else, why not that...

I am not a big bass master. I don't have a single DD bass to my name. I'm not sure if you are asking the how to do, or the how to handle the approach. Having said that, I won't try to offer opinions on what to do to catch them beyond the basic of the mantra, "The night time is the right time." A few of you will probably remember that from Mr Sandler. But the mindset is different. I have fished for locally "big" fish vs just any bass...we just don't have many of those big dual numbers that pop up. I look at it much like musky fishing with the old adage of them being a "Fish of 10,000 casts." If you are willing to do the legwork (as Tom was referring to the location etc), then have the patience to work the right spot with the right lures -- your time will come. Your battle will likely be more often with yourself, and your own patience, vs mama B wearing that DD moniker. If you have the patience, and do the pre-fishing work, your time will come. But hey, just look at my profile pic vs Tom's... one of us knows big fish - I know who I'd be asking for technique...

I think some are getting caught up with a plan vs a pattern. To me, a plan is just that --- where and what you plan to fish (based on XYZ). You fish that plan to hopefully establish a pattern. Say you plan on fishing Cove X because you think fish will be there, you have docks, laydowns, ledges, etc. You may start by fishing whatever you think they are on, but check out other targets along the way. If you notice they are ALL being caught on the docs, but none are hanging out on the ledges, your plan lead to the start of a pattern. If I'm just fun fishing, I often spend way too long in one area and "junk fish" everything. "That log just looks too good to pass up!". If I'm fishing for money (which, I don't do anymore to be candid), I'll start skipping what has been unproductive, and focus on the pattern of where they have been and how they were caught to increase catch rates. Then I will try to fish other places which have the same or similar features. I do, however, feel that lures and colors are in fact part of the pattern. If you notice they are hitting white spinnerbaits, but not black -- why would you throw black? If they are hitting jigs on the fall, but not bounced on the bottom, why would you spend time bouncing them? I think everything you can duplicate falls into the pattern. Lure type, size, color, retrieve, as well as location is part of the pattern IMO. I think we all fish to find a pattern, if we are fishing to be successful - whether we acknowledge it as pattern fishing or not (probably as much semantics as anything). Sometimes we get lucky and the pattern happens to be what we like to do - or what we got lucky and stumbled onto --- sometimes its taken a lot of trial and error to find it. Fishing topwater, late evening, near those docks where you catch them every summer is a pattern. When you catch them there, that is the right pattern.

I'll give a +1 to that. The amount of information you can find here is astounding. Opinions may differ, approaches may be diametric, but there is a TON of info. Heck, sometimes too much, and I want to try it all...

Lol, my wife fishes. Mid summer - mid day - and only if its hot and sunny. The hotter, and sunnier the better. Then she get's bored because she's not catching enough fish. I can't seem to figure out why I do better when I go first thing in the morning...

If I was looking for another fly set up, I would definitely consider that. If it's even decent, that sounds like a good deal! (edit - posted too soon) That could be a great starter for someone who doesn't have anything yet. A little heavy for gills, which I think are great starter fish on the fly, but if you want to try for bass, or anything bigger than gills, that sounds like a great starter! Being set up already is nice.

I'm with Tom. A: Get some sunglasses. Polarized with 100% UV protection. They can be cheap, they can be expensive... it doesn't matter just get something. Long term, it's well worth it. You only get one set of eyes, once you screw them up ur done. I've taken a few shots over the years that hit my glasses. Maybe I would have lost an eye, maybe not... I'd much rather NOT find out. As for seeing fish, if it's clear - you can see them if you are not spooking them (usually seeing the spooked ones is easier), and are looking for the right things. BUT, often if you can clearly see them, even if they don't spook off, they are more than aware of you and much tighter lipped (minus spawning). Seeing a stationary bass (or any fish) can be hard unless they are in the middle or top of the water column and off structure. It's amazing what you see if you snorkle somewhere you have fished. I've looked over a spot from the deck, and saw 1 single bluegill. But after slipping in the water, found a slew of bass and gills hiding in shadows and cover. Sometimes its the angle, and they are just protected from your line of site...sometimes its just how good their camo is. Trout and Smallmouth, to me, are some of the best at hiding in rocks. If they don't move, you almost cannot see them. I think the real question is do you "catch" fish you see? To that, I say sometimes. But more often, I'm picked up by a fish that I didn't see until just before the strike...at best.