Knowing Bass: The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish

[soflabasser]

On 9/1/2020 at 6:27 AM, CountryboyinDC said:

As for research done in an aquarium, I could hardly badmouth it without being a bit hypocritical.  I was never a wildlife biologist, but I made a living researching chemical and biomedical phenomenon.  And it is true that discerning thing such as the optimal pH at which gas exchange or even rudimentary neurological physiology/function is best done in the lab.

If it's true that his observations are from studies in an aquarium and he extrapolated "how they relate to fishing lures, and ultimately how they interact with anglers", then this book is pure moonshine.  And I don't mean that in a good way.

I agree. Studying bass in a aquarium teaches very little about how bass behave in the wild.

On 8/31/2020 at 11:05 AM, Catt said:

I don't put much stock in research done in an aquarium & a controlled environment.

 

Read Bill Murphy, Doug Hannon, Buck Perry, Tim Tucker, Larry Larsen, Al Lindner, & many others with on the water experience.

All those fishermen you mentioned are highly talented bass fishermen and gained their knowledge by fishing. Reading a book does not compare to real life experience.

On 8/31/2020 at 3:06 PM, Catt said:

To properly study wildlife it needs to be do in the wild.

Well said! 

On 9/2/2020 at 2:53 PM, TnRiver46 said:

Disclaimer: I haven’t read he book and I never will. 
 

The only books about fishing I have any interest in reading are ones where people just tell fish stories. Books about fish behavior or instructional books about catching fish are beyond useless (for me). 

The best teacher is real life experience. Reading a book about aquarium raised bass teaches very little about the behavior of bass in the wild.  I rather listen to people who dive and study bass in the wild than people who study bass in aquariums.

[Cgolf]

1 hour ago, Carolina Rig said:

Not at all.  You said we can’t learn anything in a lab that relates to the wild and that’s bogus and if you have this degree, you’re well aware of it.  Believe me, I understand the difference between lab work and field sampling.  But to imply that a correlation can’t be drawn between experiments conducted in a laboratory and what happens in the natural world is foolish, at best.

So doing a lab experiment on a pump flow rate, drug analysis in the lab is easy to control and change variables because what you are testing is not aware of its surroundings and won’t react to them. Even a bass with it’s insanely small brain will react differently to in a lab vs a lake or river. Being aware of its surroundings changes everything. The hook and look guys apparently have done some cool experiments in the field that I should really watch. 
 

I haven’t read the book but have heard he discounts scent getting more bites. I have observed the opposite in the field. This is with non believers tossing the baits with it on so confidence wasn’t a thing with them. 
 

I work testing products for the scientific field and have a BS in biology with an emphasis in environmental sciences. 

[Carolina Rig]

7 minutes ago, cgolf said:

So doing a lab experiment on a pump flow rate, drug analysis in the lab is easy to control and change variables because what you are testing is not aware of its surroundings and won’t react to them. Even a bass with it’s insanely small brain will react differently to in a lab vs a lake or river. Being aware of its surroundings changes everything. The hook and look guys apparently have done some cool experiments in the field that I should really watch. 
 

I haven’t read the book but have heard he discounts scent getting more bites. I have observed the opposite in the field. This is with non believers tossing the baits with it on so confidence wasn’t a thing with them. 
 

I work testing products for the scientific field and have a BS in biology with an emphasis in environmental sciences. 

I think you guys are under the impression that I disagree with you.  I’ve said plenty of times that it won’t be apples to apples because there are so many variables in nature.  However, you CAN learn things by conducting experiments in a laboratory environment, simply put.  I’m not saying you can learn how to immediately catch more and bigger bass by conducting controlled research; but to discount it wholesale is unwise.

[Dirtyeggroll]

4 hours ago, cgolf said:

I haven’t read the book but have heard he discounts scent getting more bites. I have observed the opposite in the field. This is with non believers tossing the baits with it on so confidence wasn’t a thing with them. 

Interesting comment. I suggest you read the book. I suspect you will learn something. Let me know if you have issues finding a copy and I will help you out.

 

5 hours ago, soflabasser said:

The best teacher is real life experience. Reading a book about aquarium raised bass teaches very little about the behavior of bass in the wild.  I rather listen to people who dive and study bass in the wild than people who study bass in aquariums.

Turns out that its ok to listen to what both have to say. They probably can inform each other a lot.

 

This thread has become a debate of laboratory science vs. field science, which is really a false dichotomy. 

[Sam]

On 9/16/2020 at 7:38 PM, CountryboyinDC said:

I agree, it isn't fair to put something down until you try it.  After seeing the Amazon prices, I only read the description and formed an opinion.  I will still say I agree with Catt: The things that anglers are most concerned with are best studied in the environment we are likely to fish for them.  Without going to far into the weeds, Berkley is studying what is feasible.  Studying fish in their usual habitat using a scientific approach is orders of magnitude more difficult and correspondingly expensive.  Think of the effort of Jane Goodall to study chimps, and then consider that all she came away with were observations (amazing ones to be sure) - she did no experiments!  Laboratory research has it's place, and if this book has made you a better angler, then the research wasn't a waste at all.  Me, any time I have these days isn't probably going to be spent looking for things to read.  I'm only getting a few minutes a day to read The Good Book; every other reading pursuit has been abandoned.

I understand traffic is not so bad these days here in our nation's capital.  I wouldn't know.   I have been working from my corner lot since March.  That I could get used to, but coronavirus also has us managing 7 hours a day of virtual class with my 2nd grader.  I'm ready to sit in traffic again.

Love your last sentence!!!!! ?  We have to put ourselves into the "scientific bubble" which Dr. Jones is a member.

 

The "scientific bubble" mandates that all experiments and tests are in a controlled environment to have merit and support the thesis so that the writer can get published and keep their career. 

 

On the other hand, we have us bass guys who actually hit the water under different conditions for each trip and we use our intuition and experience to form our opinions on how to fish for that day or even that hour.

 

The book is filled with many, many informative discussions of bass behavior that you will learn from it and then put what you learn into active use when on the water.

 

As Michael Corleone said "keep your friends close and your enemies closer" applies to our bass fishing and Dr. Jones' book is an excellent read on the behavior of bass and what Dr. Jones found in a controlled environment. Like what he penned about scents blew me away. And the double secret scent formula Dr. Jones sent to me which I use for my plastics is gross, but it works.

 

And I think Dr. Jones is CATT's favorite person, other than Coach Orgeron. 

[frogflogger]

The book was a good read for me. I have many books on bass fishing and enjoy most of them.
Dr. Jones is a scientist and I respect his research and findings. I read nothing in the book that said this was the way to become a great fisherman. But the trials on shapes (pg 177-178) confirm what we have learned from the beetle to today's  ned rig as to preferences in shape. The trials showing rattles are more effective in soft baits than crankbaits

agree with what I've learned over the last 70 yrs.

Would I pay $100 for the book? Of course not - I bought it when it came out for $17 which is about my upper limit

but I have enjoyed the book which is the reason I buy books on fishing.

[Cgolf]

3 hours ago, Dirtyeggroll said:

Interesting comment. I suggest you read the book. I suspect you will learn something. Let me know if you have issues finding a copy and I will help you out.

 

Turns out that its ok to listen to what both have to say. They probably can inform each other a lot.

 

This thread has become a debate of laboratory science vs. field science, which is really a false dichotomy. 

I still want to read the book someday and have been interested for a long time. Wish they would do a reprint. Could be people are misquoting the scent thing. 
 

My point with the bass in a lab thing is if you put me someone who lives in the country in any big city my reactions are going to be way different than someone that lives in a big city. Same thing as moving a pond bass to a lake, it will be overwhelmed for awhile. 

 

Not saying something can't be learned, but I have broken so many myths over the years fishing clear water, line shyness, rattles, etc, that I feel bass are all unique individual creatures like us;) Also could be a lot to do with light penetration with the rattles. I have seen color preferences change flat water vs choppy water so who knows. Saying all that I want to replace my terrova with a cable steer because I think it is too loud and I don't catch fish because of it, even though I have many videos that show me hooking up right after I turned the motor. 

 

I will say growing up near a clear water lake and fishing one yearly as our vacation lake, I love clear water, I find it easy to fish. I do know it is intimidating to some, but I prefer it over dirty water lakes like we have locally which I find more difficult to find fish.

[Team9nine]

And on the entertaining subject of Berkley, science and bass, a timely story by that bunch that fits the thread subject:

 

Berkley science

[billmac]

I've never heard of this book, but to me the best scientific approach to fishing is from the early days of In-Fisherman.

[soflabasser]

On 8/31/2020 at 10:49 PM, Catt said:

The more human influence the less accurate the results.

 

How does the bass eat?

Does the researcher feed them?

Do the bass have to compete for food?

 

Are other predators present?

 

What about vegetation or structure?

 

Is the aquarium affected by weather?

Is the aquarium affected by barometric change?

 

Shall I continue?

Aquarium bass are pet bass. That is why it is best to study bass in the wild.

20 hours ago, Catt said:

Reference the study @WRB was talking about, it took yeas to do. There's a lot of research done by Clarence Bowling of Texas Parks & Wildlife. Ken Cook's 13-year career as fisheries biologist for the Oklahoma Department of Wildlife and Conservation. Texas's ShareLunker program has done research since 1986.

Texas Sharelunker program is well known for its success, I would listen to what they have to say.  

On 8/31/2020 at 11:51 PM, WRB said:

 1974 DFG biologist Mike Lembeck conducted a monumental bass tracking study on San Diego county lakes observing over 200 bass over a 3 year period. The bass ranged from  1 1/4 to 14 lbs. Mike made over 800 observations and proved bass are very individualistic.

6 decades of bass proves Mike Lembeck observations to be true.

Tom

I agree with Mr. Lembeck's findings.

[Dirtyeggroll]

2 hours ago, soflabasser said:

Aquarium bass are pet bass. That is why it is best to study bass in the wild.

Texas Sharelunker program is well known for its success, I would listen to what they have to say.  

I agree with Mr. Lembeck's findings.

Have you read the book?

[Catt]

It's gonna be a while till I get back in the fishing mood ?

[GoneFishingLTN]

On 9/18/2020 at 11:18 AM, billmac said:

I've never heard of this book, but to me the best scientific approach to fishing is from the early days of In-Fisherman.

the early in-fisherman magazines or?

[Sam]

See New Book - Old Book post about another study of bass in the wild.

 

Great read.

[billmac]

2 hours ago, GoneFishingLTN said:

the early in-fisherman magazines or?

I don't think I quite understand the question.

[Sissyfishing]

Fishing is supposed to be a sport,

r & r fun enjoyable an art not science fun not work