Alright Deep, Let's Talk Structure!

[Catt]

In the tread "Demystifying Structure" we identified structure and defined it along with breaklines. For the purpose of this discussion those are the definitions we will refer to.

Qoute from deep: Catt, you talk about deep water. Do you mean the deepest water (as in a feeder or main creek channel) in the area?

Deep water is relevent to the body of water you ate fishing!

In a pond deep water may only be 5-10' no feeder channels.

In a reservoir or natural lake there could be feeder channels.

For many anglers the "first breakline" is the bank, they start shallow and work outwards towards deep water.

For me the "first breakline" is the bottom any feeder channels, I start deep and work inwards towards shallow water.

[Dwight Hottle]

Catt I know you are talking from practical experience. How are you going to deal with lake Erie which has depths over 100 feet? Where are you going to start there? 

[deep]

Tell me if I understand this correctly.

 

In a (any) man-made reservoir, or section thereof, (with main and feeder creeks), you go over to the creek channel.

 

You follow a (the) breakline(s) that leads (lead) to the shallows, and keep doing that until you find fish.

 

How do you know which breakline to follow if there are more than one?

 

I'm sure there are a thousand and one factors to consider. If you could, why don't you pick a set of plausible factors, and tell us why you would choose the breakline you would?

[Team9nine]

Deep - and others:

 

My apologies for having to do this post in (6) sections, but file size limitations require it. Hopefully this all works, as it might answer a lot of questions. This is one of Buck's better articles from Fishing Facts magazine that he published concerning the basics of using reservoir structures to locate fish. 

 

Note/edit: Catt covered much of this in his "Demystifying Structure" thread. The article helps make it easier to understand what he was talking about since it has so many pictures/examples included. 

 

-T9

 

Buck_Res_Part_1.pdf

[Team9nine]

Article Part II

 

Buck_Res_Part_2.pdf

 

 

[Team9nine]

Article Part III

 

Buck_Res_Part_3.pdf

 

 

[Team9nine]

Article Part IV

 

Buck_Res_Part_4.pdf

[Team9nine]

Article Part V

 

Buck_Res_Part_5.pdf

[Team9nine]

Article Part VI

 

Buck_Res_Part_6.pdf

[A-Jay]

Team9nine ~ Thank you for taking the time to post that up ~

 

Those illustrations are telling.

 

Now if it would only appear that clearly on my graph - I'd be a Bass Catching Ninja ~

 

 

A-Jay

[Dwight Hottle]

I'd be a Bass Catching Ninja ~

 

 

A-Jay

 

 

You already are your just in self denial .

[Catt]

When y'all look at a topo map what do y'all see first, the shore line or the creek/river channels?

[Mr_Scrogg]

Channels

[deep]

The channels AND associated structures, the associated structures need to be in 30 FOW or less *.

 

I'll tell you why, in the highland reservoirs I fish, the channels are 50 feet or more deeper, unless you're talking about the very back of the creek. I don't want to catch a bass that was sitting in 50 FOW (decompression problems). Suspended over channels**, yeah that's fair game.

 

Like your hero, and mine too (they are different) both say, shallower structures are good only if they have a path to the sanctuary depths.

 

 

 

* Besides, channels run from one end of the reservoir to the other.

 

**hula poppers by the dam.

[slonezp]

Team9nine ~ Thank you for taking the time to post that up ~

 

Those illustrations are telling.

 

Now if it would only appear that clearly on my graph - I'd be a Bass Catching Ninja ~

 

 

A-Jay

Here's some more Buck Perry for you. This show may or may not have aired in your neck of the woods last year. The show wasn't good IMO because the "classroom" part was limited and the host spent too much time/attention filming his kid fishing. He also wouldn't take constructive criticism after he posted on a local fishing forum. Anyway, the info in the "classroom" videos is worth watching.   http://structurefishing.com/The_Classroom.html

[Paul Roberts]

Thanks for posting that old article, Brian.

 

Here's some more Buck Perry for you. This show may or may not have aired in your neck of the woods last year. The show wasn't good IMO because the "classroom" part was limited and the host spent too much time/attention filming his kid fishing. He also wouldn't take constructive criticism after he posted on a local fishing forum. Anyway, the info in the "classroom" videos is worth watching.   http://structurefishing.com/The_Classroom.html

Thanks for putting this up too, slonezp.

 

In lesson #4 the presenter passes on the old faulty info that fish (at least most warmwater species with ductless swim bladders) can make large depth in a short time period. This isn't the present consensus. They may move laterally and/or with a much lesser depth change than is depicted by the presenter in the video. This may happen seasonally, for some fish in some waters, but not in response to a cold front or on daily feeding movements. (Bass may change depths as much as 30ft to chase and strike prey, but must return quickly to their acclimation depth.)

[A-Jay]

 Every lake has structure and taking the time to learn it is often The Only way to get bit and definitely improves ones chances of getting on the better bass on that body of water.

 

       There are a few keys factors I like to know in advance of getting on the water that can often help out quite a bit.  Knowing where the fish may be based on seasonal pattern and having an idea what bait is “in season” as well as where it might be, is a quite beneficial.  Both of those are lay-ups in the spring but become progressively more challenging as the season progresses; and they change from year to year – this year was all out of whack.  Another factor that has helped is knowing the wind direction & speed from the past several days.  Predicting when fish may turn on is tough, but knowing the wind’s deal can often help out with the where part.

 

    I do take quite a bit of time & effort prospecting  deep structure as I do believe the fish hold by, travel through and suspend in & around it; especially during non- feeding periods which, let’s face it,  is a huge majority of the time.    I do not have much success catching fish on these waters deeper than say 40 ft or so, and even then that’s almost always a drop-shot.      So rather than going down after fish that seems to be “sleeping just over the thermocline”, I prefer to look for active fish in predictable areas / spots.

 

   One of my most productive approaches in bass fishing especially, as it relates to “Deep Structure” is to find The First deep water Break (coming from deep to shallower) that has the bait the bigger bass want.    I believe these key spots are often as far (or as shallow) as the bigger bass prefer to go.   Many of my best fish on these waters have come from these spots, both at night & during the day.   The size of the break often dictates how many fish are on it and how long they’ll stay there.  The duration of the bite seems to be totally unpredictable;  ranging from lasting a few minutes to on & off for a few days.  So being at the right place, at the right time, with the right bait, is a good thing – and really hard to do.    Clearly not a tactic for the impatient or during a “timed event” but it works for me.

 

I'm hoping to read more here about this subject.

 

A-Jay

[Team9nine]

Catt I know you are talking from practical experience. How are you going to deal with lake Erie which has depths over 100 feet? Where are you going to start there? 

 

Since this one hasn't been addressed yet, I'll throw out one thought. This also ties in with the discussion going on about northern/natural lakes. That thought is a structure fisherman treats all lakes the same. Erie is no different. Neither would a glacial northern lake be. Buck actually stated many times that northern natural lakes were quite simple really since they had limited structural features when compared to man-made reservoirs.

 

Anyway, back on Erie - same story. Identify the deepest water in the area you're fishing, then look for structure, breaks and breaklines in those areas. Ideally you want all 4 components in the same general/limited area. Keep in mind seasonal guidelines also. For example, during pre-spawn/spawn time, you'd expect the bulk of the fish to be located more shallow than say summer or possibly even fall. Where you find those 4 components together on a map is "fishing water." Where you find just one or two here and there is "trolling water." In other words, you spend a lot less time in trolling water vs. fishing water. But again, when you start to fish the areas you've identified, you first go shallow in your efforts to locate fish, then progressively move deeper as needed. The western basin of Erie, which I think most anglers tend to think of when you mention Erie, really only has about a 40' maximum depth (one or two slight exceptions), so that makes things even easier. What complicates things is its massive size. Reefs and breaklines can run for miles. Takes some getting used to, but once you expand your outlook and perspective in that regard, it still comes down to the same components you look for and fish on reservoirs. That is the beauty of the system. Not the only way to approach the problem, but one good way to.

 

-T9

[Catt]

Y'all have fun

[Paul Roberts]

Catt I know you are talking from practical experience. How are you going to deal with lake Erie which has depths over 100 feet? Where are you going to start there? 

My take on this question is that you don't have to deal with depths of 100ft for bass. On many ultra-deep lakes you can simply exclude a whole lot of water -horizontally speaking. Dealing with sheer square mileage... well the way I did it on L Ontario without electronics was to find smallie habitat -broken rock mostly- along (albeit somewhat distant) shorelines. With modern electronics...it's a whole new world.

[RoLo]

I've done countless chart surveys throughout the years, but always begin with a search for shallow water.

Simply put, I begin at the "beginning" and the beginning is the ‘egg’. Without photosynthesis an egg cannot hatch

which underlines the necessity of shallow water. For this reason, my chart surveys all begin with a search

for spawning grounds (reproduction flats). This applies equally to the Atlantic Ocean where depths are measured

in fathoms, but 'shallow' and 'deep' are relative terms, so what may be 'deep' in freshwater may be 'shallow' in saltwater.

 

Most fishermen target primary points, but what is a point and why is it good?

Take a pencil, draw the outline of a lake, now draw the 6 ft depth line inside your shoreline.

Be sure your 6-ft contour line includes several primary points. Now study the lake you've just drawn

and you'll see that every point you formed created a shoal area. In fact, it's impossible to form a noteworthy point

or extended ridge without creating a shelf area. It's this increased shelf area that increases the value of a point,

and not the point per se.

 

Among the five Great Lakes, Lake Superior has the most sterile water and the greatest basin area.

In Lake Superior there are 50 to 100-mile stretches that have no viable pike populations. How could that be?

Simply because those stretches lack suitable breeding marshes (pike distribute eggs on dead vegetation).

Last year Lois and I vacationed at Lake Superior in quest of northern pike and had very good action.

Since it's relevant to this discussion, I should mention that I've never hired a fishing guide in my life,

which holds me accountable for our successes and failures. Had I begun the chart survey in deep water,

it could easily have spoiled our vacation.

 

Big pike are deep water fish, whereas largemouth bass fill the shallowest niche of all freshwater gamefish.

This only bolsters the importance of shallow water for largemouth bass, which spawn at a mean depth of 30 inches.

When pike fishing in Canada, you'll notice that when you venture too far back into a backwater slough,

you'll stumble into largemouth bass. A largemouth bass can live happily ever after without any deep water.

This is evidenced by innumerable double-digit bass yielded by Florida ponds with a maximum depth under 6 feet.

The lake zone between the shoreline and 8-foot depth line provides bedding flats, nursery grounds and the lion's share of aquatic vegetation and aquatic forage. On the other hand, bass living in a pit pond with no shelf area at all,

are bound to lean pickings and a low standard of living. When you begin chart analysis by isolating the broadest

food shelves, your search for hotspots will be confined to lake sections providing the best reproductive dynamics

and population density. Only now, would I feel justified in looking for drop-offs into deep water and indentations

(inside turns) in the contour lines. Needless to say, the best drop-offs are those with the most abrupt depth change

and those with the greatest magnitude (difference between crest and basin).

In short, I use a 'top-down' approach, and I'm sticking to it  

 

Roger

[Catt]

Well let't try this again!

Could y'all kindly show me where I stated I was fishing these deep water channels?

When I lay a topographical map on the table the first thing I see is where the creek/river channels are in relation to what I perceive to be spawning or feeding areas.

Bass must have a visible path of breaks and breaklines on a structure from deep water all the way to the shallows; which is where the bulk of the food is available to bass.

While some anglers are looking for "bank" shallow spawning/feeding areas, I'm looking for areas away from the bank. It has been my experience that these offshore bass are less affected by weather and human presence.

Most anglers start their day within casting distance (or two) of the bank looking for that early morning, I'm offshore looking for that same early morning bite.

[J Francho]

I suspect Dwight may do something similar, though Erie actually has interesting structure. For Ontario, the south shore in particular, I literally ignore the first 30' of contours, and focus on what is there from 30 to about 100'. Treat that 30' line like you would the shoreline, when visually locating fish. That doesn't mean I fish those depths, but that's where I try to focus my chart studies. Those structures are what affect bait movement, and predator location. It's not something you'll ever see staring at the graph - they're too big, miles big in some cases. I use the GPS to get within a few acres of where I want to fish, and the graph shows me fish, and/or bait. The fish might be in 15' or 45', but that zone I described above is what gets me to the general spot.

[RoLo]

This thread began as a question to Catt posed by ‘Deep’, but was somehow hijacked by Buck Perry..LOL.

Indeed, Buck Perry revolutionized the sport of fishing, but that was about 50 years ago.

Nothing that happened 50 years ago stopped the wheels of progress. If it were me, I'd want Catt

to answer the question directed to him. Tom, unlike Buck Perry, has the benefit of radio-tracking results

that eluded early pioneers (save Homer Circle), not to mention 3D down & side-imaging sonar,

a wealth of data provided by pro tournament results and last but not least, Tom's own experience.

 

Northern pike make an excellent training camp for contour fishing, because they have a more diverse lifestyle

than largemouth bass. Many anglers scorn northern pike because they’re only familiar with the hammer-handles

that pave every weedy bay. As a pike ages however, it requires more dissolved oxygen and will move offshore

often beyond the deepest weedline. By the time a pike becomes a gator over 40" long, it can rightfully be classed as

a coldwater fish. Big pike are not uncommonly caught by offshore netters targeting salmon, which is another

coldwater fish. Remarkably, the flesh of pike ending up in salmon nets is often pink, just like the flesh of the salmon

they eat. This is proof positive that trophy pike feed on high-fat pelagic prey fish.

 

Therein lies the stumbling block, the Bait Car you might say. The trophy pike hunter who begins his hydrographic survey pouring over deep contour lines may be headed for trouble. The overwhelming majority of deep water is totally void

of pike and bass, so rather than roaming vast areas of barren deepwater, it’s much quicker to enter through

the front door. In the case of northern pike, you need to begin the chart survey by searching for backwater marshlands

(spawning grounds). Pike do not build a nest, but are free-spawners that broadcast their eggs. As a result, the life

of every pike begins in a shallow marshy slough. In Lake Superior for example, suitable spawning marshes are often more than 100 miles apart. Unlike largemouth bass which are essentially residential fish, northern pike are known

to make long spawning runs up 20 miles. All the same, this still leaves plenty of 50 to 100-mile stretches

that are virtually void of pike.

 

Enormity never intimidates a contour fisherman, in fact, therein lies his strength. When we take contour analysis

to the Atlantic Ocean we learn the exact same lesson but on a larger scale. When I lived in New Jersey,

I regularly fished a food shelf that was 100 miles wide, a food shelf better known as the Continental Shelf.

Littoral species, bottom species and pelagic species alike, all proliferate on our continental shelf, and Russian trawlers used to cross the ocean to fish America’s continental shelf. Where along the vast coastal shelf would the angler find

the greatest concentrations of fish. Well, we're done with our shallow water search, so now we need to shift

our attention to deep water. It goes without saying, the steepest drop-offs into the deepest water are most attractive

to all forms of aquatic life, in both freshwater and saltwater. For my own edification, I like to call fast slopes

'compression points', and their importance is well known to every saltwater & freshwater captain. The steepest drop-offs in the Atlantic ocean suddenly plunge many fathoms, these are among the grandest super structures on planet earth, and each has earned its own personal name such as the Hudson Canyon, Baltimore Canyon, Wilmington Canyon, etc.

 

Roger

[Mr_Scrogg]

My head hurts