Help Me Understand This Structure....

[B@ssCrzy]

If the OP wants to post details of the spawning bay with the island or the opposite main lake point we can reply.

I doubt that there was a creek draining the spawning bay, it does provide deep water access into and out of the bay. The island looks to be connected to the inside secondary point, creating a saddle....

Tom

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here is the bay and the point across the lake....

[Todd2]

That's a great spawning bay. I fish KY lake several times every year in the spring and I always seem to catch bigger fish in the spawning bays that have deep water. After the post spawn, I'm not sure. Would that deeper water at the front of the bay hold fish year round?

[WRB]

It's been my experience that bass avoid water 1' or less for spawning, bluegill will use the 1' water.

This means the darker blue zones are too shallow for lakes that fluctuate 6' each year.

To look foe spawner's the 2'- 3' zone would be a better choice than 1'.

I would use the 10' - 20' depth zone when targeting pre spawn, then the 10' zones with flat areas for late pre spawn and post spawn.

Depending on wind direction the back side of the little island may hold a few spawner's, the 10' saddle is looking good to me.

I also have a preference for fish tail shape bays like across the lake adjacent to the main lake point. The10' flat on the point looks good for pre spawner's.

Summer, the main lake channel swings next to points look likely toehold bass. Catts 1' hump point area should be good anytime.

Tom

[RoLo]

To me at least, the hotspot on that inset is as obvious as a Bait Car.

Look at the north end of the chart where the 21 & 27 ft spot-soundings are displayed.

 

WHAT ABOUT IT?

 

1) It's adjacent to the 'Creek Channel'

        Given a choice, I'd prefer the river channel, but would happily settle for a creek channel which are often dynamite

2) It displays tight 'Compression'

        Compressed contour lines indicate a 'drop-off' (rapid depth change).

        The contour-line convergence is so tight here that it nearly forms a solid block (i.e. bluff).

3)  It abuts a broad 7-10 ft 'Shelf'

        That 7-10 ft shelf plays more into population density than the drop-off into deep water. 

        It's the foodshelf, spawning ground and nursery for both prey & predator alike.

 

        Any holding site with all these attributes is a rare find:

        (1) Adjacent to 'creek channel'

        (2) Steepest 'drop-off' in area

        (3) Adjacent to broad 'food-shelf' 

 

 

 

Side-Note

The circular contour line on the outcropping to the west is a bit deceiving. Rather than a distinct upwelling,

it's a reiteration of the 20 ft contour line to the east. Contour maps are processed electronically,

and a wavy bottom that rolls softly upward just 12 inches will scribe a secondary ring of reiterated depth.

On a high-definition chart (1-foot increments) a wavy bottom can form several benign rings of reiterated depth.

In other words, if we were looking at a chart with "2-ft" increments the 20 ft ring would not appear.

 

Unless the lake is crystal-clear, the chance of submergent vegetation in 20 feet of water is slim to nada. Nevertheless,

the offshore 20 ft flat is well positioned, and if it furthermore offered woody cover or rocky cover it'd be a powerful spot

during certain seasons. IMO though, the holding site I noted to the north is clearly a 'year-round' holding site.

 

Roger

[Nice_Bass]

 

 

Side-Note

The circular contour line on the outcropping to the west is a bit deceiving. Rather than a distinct upwelling

it's a reiteration of the 20 ft contour line. Contour maps are processed electronically and if the bottom

rolls softly upward just 12 inches, it'll scribe a secondary ring of reiterated depth.

On a high-definition chart (1-foot increments),  a wavy bottom can form several benign rings of reinterated depth.

In other words, if we were looking at a chart with "2-ft" increments the 20 ft ring would not appear.

 

Unless the lake is crystal-clear, the chance of submergent vegetation in 20 feet of water is slim to nada. Nevertheless,

the offshore 20 ft flat is well positioned, and if it furthermore offered woody cover or rocky cover It'd be a powerful spot

during certain seasons. IMO though, the holding site I noted to the north is clearly a 'year-round' holding site.

 

Roger

 

 

 

Great points are all in the last post, but especially important to note the highlighted in regards to reading maps correctly.  I completely agree, there is no hump out there, just gradual slow taper and most likely nothing I would fish all that hard.

[WRB]

What is important about the insignificant 20' depth high spot is it's location on the end of this point out near the middle of the main lake basin adjacent to the channel. The fact it's only 1' higher then the point ridge still provides bass a killing zone for baitfish and the surrounding deeper water provides sanctuary.

My gues is this spot is over looked by the locals and should be checked out for soil composition and any rocks or sticks that may be there.

This is classic swimbait structure were you retrieve the lure up and over while bottom bumping. This is also good jig water for casting and retrieving bottom bumping presentations.

Don't over look this type of structure when fishing deep structured lakes.

Tom

[Catt]

I guess I'm missing something cause I see a 20' hump on a 30' point. That a 10' rise which is more than enough to attract bass.

[Nice_Bass]

I guess I'm missing something cause I see a 20' hump on a 30' point. That a 10' rise which is more than enough to attract bass.

Put into scale with the size of that reservoir- it is a very long slow taper into deeper water- no doubt bass travel it, but it would not be a dominant feature.  At scale, we are talking a slow taper of from shoreline to end would be a couple hundred yards.  I do like where the old channel swung against the point al along the north side but the does not appear to be any hump. 

Editors note: I feel a bit uneasy disagree with you on reading structure, as you seem quite adapt and forming an opinion on it.  So not disagreeing on whether or not I would fish it, but more on the 2d-3d translation of what we are looking at.

[WRB]

This point doesn't slowly taper, it has steep breaks and transitions in steps. The first step is 7-10, the next is 21' with a 1' high spot or knob at end.

Rolo's comment that the high spot may not exist or would not exist on a 2' elevation map is true. However the knob mat be more pronounced due to harder soil and the softer adjacent soil may have eroded away with wave action during draw down or lake filling with water. You will never know unless you meter the area and fish it.

Regardless of what you call it, it's a good looking point with structure elements that are worth fishing.

Tom

[Nice_Bass]

This point doesn't slowly taper, it has steep breaks and transitions in steps. The first step is 7-10, the next is 21' with a 1' high spot or knob at end.

Rolo's comment that the high spot may not exist or would not exist on a 2' elevation map is true. However the knob mat be more pronounced due to harder soil and the softer adjacent soil may have eroded away with wave action during draw down or lake filling with water. You will never know unless you meter the area and fish it.

Regardless of what you call it, it's a good looking point with structure elements that are worth fishing.

Tom

I think we are arguing semantics here- however with scale it is a longer, slower taper than it appears with Sonar Charts data from land headed NNW to end of point.  It is a nice piece of structure from the channel cut from the north from what I believe is actually just softer soil.    While it has been a few years since I have been there, I have been over the top of it.

[DRH2O]

Some people look at structure from the bank outwards, ya should be looking from the channel towards the bank.

Y'all need to look at a 1 dimensional picture & convert it to a 3 dimensional picture in your brain.

 

If you take nothing else away from this thread, sear this little nugget into your brain.

[Todd2]

Ok, now that we got the what, let's do the how. Sit deep, cast up shallow? Vice versa? How would you approach it? Pull up and start working it or idle over looking for stuff?

[RoLo]

Some people look at structure from the bank outwards, ya should be looking from the channel towards the bank.

 

If you take nothing else away from this thread, sear this little nugget into your brain.

 

Adopting any angling premise as etched-in-stone is setting yourself up for disappointment. With regard to 'bottom contour analysis',

the first and foremost question to address: "Are we referring to a Natural Lake or Manmade Impoundment (reservoir)".

We don't know whether the Chicken or the Egg came first, but we do know that Natural Lakes came before Artificial Lakes.

In their native environment, a bass's biological characteristics are virtually carved in stone.

 

From Canada to Florida, largemouth bass residing in natural lakes invariably occupy the 'shallowest' niche of any freshwater species,

even shallower than adult chain pickerel. In lakes containing all the major freshwater gamefish, the depth range order

will generally be the following (deepest to shallowest):

=> Walleyes

=> Adult Pike

=> Smallmouth Bass

=> Muskellunge

=> Immature Pike

=> Chain Pickerel

=> Largemouth Bass.

 

As a result, Chart Analysis for largemouth bass in their native environment should always begin with Shoreline Configuration.

The search for estuarine embayments and wind-sheltered reproductive bedding flats lie at the backbone of population dynamics.

(Doug Hannon's "Northwest Phenomenon" is merely a subset of shoreline configuration).

 

Roger

[RoLo]

Ok, now that we got the what, let's do the how. Sit deep, cast up shallow? Vice versa? How would you approach it? Pull up and start working it or idle over looking for stuff?

 

Todd, you came out of the gate like a whirlwind and I truly admired your enthusiasm.

Whether you know it or not, you named 2 out of the initial 3 prerequisites (Species & Waterbody).

Now I'm equally surprised that you feel that the Locational factor has been resolved and you're ready to embark on Presentation.

Frankly, only the surface of bottom-contour analysis has been scratched, and it's far more important than lure delivery. 

 

Roger

[WRB]

All we know about this lake is it's a man made reservoir,it has a dam, possibly located in Indiana.

The bass could be northern strain LMB or Smallmouth both, a typical bass lake for this region.

My guess is the prey fish are; bluegill, crappie, perch and minnows with crawfish added.

I would class this as a hill land reservoir.

If this lake has pelagic baitfish, fish that live away from shore, then deep structure becomes more predominate.

The OP hasn't shared information regarding scale, the size of this lake or what baitfish are available.

I have ruled out shad due to how far north this lake may be located??

If bass anglers believe bass are shoreline fish, they are missing a big population of bass in man made impoundments.

If this lake was located where threadfin shad or herring are predominate, the point we are discussing becomes good structure.

Tom

[Todd2]

Frankly, only the surface of bottom-contour analysis has been scratched, and it's far more important than lure delivery.

Roger

Thanks Roger for the compliment..what more do you see on this structure?

[RoLo]

All we know about this lake is it's a man made reservoir,it has a dam, possibly located in Indiana.

The bass could be northern strain LMB or Smallmouth both, a typical bass lake for this region.

My guess is the prey fish are; bluegill, crappie, perch and minnows with crawfish added.

I would class this as a hill land reservoir.

If this lake has pelagic baitfish, fish that live away from shore, then deep structure becomes more predominate.

The OP hasn't shared information regarding scale, the size of this lake or what baitfish are available.

I have ruled out shad due to how far north this lake may be located??

If bass anglers believe bass are shoreline fish, they are missing a big population of bass in man made impoundments.

If this lake was located where threadfin shad or herring are predominate, the point we are discussing becomes good structure.

Tom

 

WRB, the statement in blue applies chiefly to bass taken out of their natural environs and forced to adapt to non-indigenous conditions.

If we returned a California Florida-strain bass back to its roots in Florida, it's a solid bet that it'll gravitate back to lush vegetation in shallow water.

 

Professional anglers beat the banks simply because bass beat the banks. every chance they get.

Bass cut a living wherever the necessities of life are most easily accessible. A high-percentage of bass live and die without ever seeing a shoreline,

because depth and cover are the controlling elements, not distance from shore. If ideal conditions are provided 2 miles offshore,

bass will be found 2 miles offshore. If ideal conditions are satisifed 2 yards off the shoreline, bass will be found 2 yards off the shoreline.

An angler should only pay attention to food-shelves, drop-offs and cover, while totally ignoring his boat's distance from shore, which is inconsequential.

 

Roger

[Fish Murderer 71]

and after all that, now I feel like an idiot when it comes to my knowledge of reading topos...

[WRB]

Roger,

Bass lakes in the heart land of professional bassdom are 99% man made, Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, etc.

This region has native northern strain LMB population that were not transplanted and evolved in reserviors after the rivers were dammed over 60 years ago

Not dissagreeing with yor hypothosis, bass behavior in deep structured lakes differs from low land natural lakes.

Tom

[Catt]

I know I'm just a dumb Cajun but this is what I've gathered from what the OP said or off the maps.

Man made reservoir

Elevation: 810'

Y'all keep talking about the taper of the point from the bank out to the hump. I'm interested in the drop from the hump down to the river/creek channel.

[RoLo]

Roger,

Bass lakes in the heart land of professional bassdom are 99% man made, Texas, Arkansas, Alabama, etc.

This region has native northern strain LMB population that were not transplanted and evolved in reserviors after the rivers were dammed over 60 years ago

Not dissagreeing with yor hypothosis, bass behavior in deep structured lakes differs from low land natural lakes.

Tom

 

Yes, but in spite of the vast majority of artificial lakes, we don't have to look very hard to find pro anglers skirting the bank.

 

The inset above is clearly an artificial lake, and on that basis I pinpointed my favorite trial site.

A steep drop-off into 30 ft of water that bridges the creek channel with a 7 to 10 food-shelf.

Whether we call it a Shelf, Ledge, Point or Flat has absolutely no influence on its function as a holding site.

In any case, I don't want to mislead readers into believing that this single example can be used for chart analysis

on both natural lakes and artificial lakes. It's this faulty notion that has stigmatized 'bank-beating'.

Bass need not know or care where the shoreline might be, it may be close to their lair or it may be far away.

To help appreciate the vast difference between natural lakes & artificial lakes, my favorite trophy water

is a natural lake with a basin depth of 9 ft. If you fish deeper than 6 ft on this lake, you're entry fee becomes charity. 

 

(BTW: In addition to golden shiners, Florida supports statewide, year-round populations of threadfin shad & gizzard shad)

 

Roger

[jhoffman]

Indiana isnt far enough north to exclude all shad. Doubt it has threadfins but it might very well have shad. I know of lakes here in pa that have shad, namely gizzard shad.

[Deleted account]

Yes, but in spite of the vast majority of artificial lakes, we don't have to look very hard to find pro anglers skirting the bank.

 

The inset above is clearly an artificial lake, and on that basis I pinpointed my favorite trial site.

A steep drop-off into 30 ft of water that bridges the creek channel with a 7 to 10 food-shelf.

Whether we call it a Shelf, Ledge, Point or Flat has absolutely no influence on its function as a holding site.

In any case, I don't want to mislead readers into believing that this single example can be used for chart analysis

on both natural lakes and artificial lakes. It's this faulty notion that has stigmatized 'bank-beating'.

Bass don't know nor care where the shoreline might be, it may be close to their lair or it may be far away.

To help appreciate the vast difference between natural lakes & artificial lakes, my favorite trophy water

is a natural lake with a basin depth of 9 ft. If you fish deeper than 6 ft on this lake, you're entry fee becomes charity. 

 

(BTW: In addition to golden shiners, Florida supports statewide, year-round populations of threadfin shad & gizzard shad)

 

Roger

I don't know what bass "know or care about". But I'm pretty sure that any aquatic creature which faces a habitat boundary, which potentially holds dangers and/or forage will have evolved a way of detecting and using this boundary, or it would be a fossil. 

[B@ssCrzy]

The lake in question has a healthy population of bluegill, crappie, and gizzard shad. Not sure about threadfin shad.

[WRB]

I believe we are talking about helping he OP to understand this structure.

This first thing to look at is how the bass use this point or any point. What is above the water helps us to understand what is below the water, the terrain doesn't change. You should visualize the structure without water and try to figure out how bass and baitfish or crayfish would be located.

The first thing you look for is a river or creek channel and any structure like points or humps intersect the channel.

If you go back to the beginning of this thread there is common structure features discussed; the 10' flats adjacent to steep breaks into the channel, the end of the point that breaks into the channel and the funnel zone or saddle area. You can apply these structure features to most deep structure lakes.

The first question to solve is how deep are the active feeding bass, this fact determines where the bass should be located on this structure. This isn't a large area to fish and shouldn't take long to learn what's going on.

Deep is relative to the region, where I fish the lakes are over 100' deep, so this lake looks shallow to me. I know from experience that 20' is deep water east of the Rocky Mountains and south of the Mason-Dixon Line.

During the summer the thermocline will affect how deep bass will locate,another factor to consider.

Type of baitfish are important, no pelagic fish, no reason for the bass to move out into deep structure, other than seeking comfortable water temps and sanctuary.

Good luck and hope we helped more than confuse you.

Tom