Demystifying Structure

[TorqueConverter]

Cover:  obstacle in the lake. (Brushpiles, docks, stumps, weeds..)

Structure: actual contour of the lake. ( creek beds, points, dropoffs...)

 

This.  People calling trees "structure" makes me pull my hair out. 

[deep]

Let's see if I can help add to the discussion.

 

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

 

Also, let's discuss fishing a break line on a structure. Say a ledge running on a point. Do we parallel it, fish over and across it, pick a piece of cover on it and fish that? All of the above?

[aavery2]

Fish the part of the break line that is in contact with the deepest water in the area, if the break line does not come in direct contact with the deepest water in the area, find a part of it that has breaks that lead to the deepest local water and fish them.

 

Catt's conversation is based from what I can tell on Buck Perry's terminology, if you familiarize yourself with his(Buck Perry) definitions it helps to keep everyone talking apples to apples.

[Catt]

Older translations have come under revisionism, which is the revision of an accepted, usually long-standing definition.

Revisionism is an aspect of cultural dissemination of misinformation!

[deep]

Thank you. I was hoping some of the members newer to fishing structure would take this forward.

 

The problem I see is the stage the thread is at now, there's precious little to add. Maybe some questions then? Seemingly basic questions can generate new viewpoints.

 

Perry's book is gold.

 

I don't use some of the terminologies. For example, when I say "transition", I always mean transition of bass seasons, from winter to pre-spawn etc. Sharp (relative of course) changes in some parameter relevant to the reservoir bottom are called breaks in my book. Depth breaks, or bottom composition/ O2/ temperature changes, they are all breaklines to me (always related to hard/ soft structure, never cover*).

 

I also don't agree with his deep to shallow migration theory unless we're talking about seasonal movement. That's another matter of course.

 

* A weed-edge/ vegetations type change points my way to a break. But weeds don't stop growing without a reason. Maybe there's little sunlight penetrating that depth, or different species of vegetation prefer different substrates.

[RoLo]

(Inserted as per Catt's request):

 

When Bill Dance was asked, "Which is more important, Structure or Cover?", Bill replied 'structure'.

This in no way diminishes the importance of cover, but it underscores the hierarchy of 'structure'

 

For every holding site pinpointed on my charts, there are often 2 or more satellite waypoints. Only ONE waypoint however

will be founded on bottom contour (structure), a fixed location I call a 'static waypoint' for my own edification.

In sharp contrast, plant density, weedline configurations and even plant species are in constant transition.

For instance, our favorite weed pocket or weed finger from last year, may be a little different, extremely different

or completely absent this year (Mother Nature doing her job). Changeable waypoints based on plant mergers, dense tufts,

weed alleys and weed points I refer to as 'dynamic waypoints'. Although the structural nucleus remains

essentially fixed, the dynamic waypoints tend to waltz around the static waypoints.

 

Here's the nice thing about differentiating between the two (between static & dynamic waypoints).

If your DNR (fish & game commission) kills the vegetation down to the ground, or if your lake undergoes

a severe and prolonged drawdown, you are still in business. All your static waypoints (structure numbers)

will serve as jump-off points for establishing your new dynamic waypoints (cover numbers).

 

Roger

[aavery2]

What's amazing to me is how well some of the older fisherman were able to find subtle break lines understand and visualize the structure, and find isolated brakes without the use of modern electronics.   I have heard stories that Rick Clunn was among some of the best at this.

[Team9nine]

Let's see if I can help add to the discussion.

 

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

 

Also, let's discuss fishing a break line on a structure. Say a ledge running on a point. Do we parallel it, fish over and across it, pick a piece of cover on it and fish that? All of the above?

 

Not Catt, so I don't want to speak for him, but Perry had clear definitions of "deep water" (water greater than 8'-10'), as well as stating in his basic guideline that the "deep, or deepest water in the area being fished" was what he considered the 'home or 'sanctuary' depth. He also stated that ideally, this would always be at least 20' deep, though he also realized that those depths aren't always an option on some waters (or sections of waters), and made clear how to address/fish such situations and what to expect in the way of fish behavior.

 

Thank you. I was hoping some of the members newer to fishing structure would take this forward.

 

The problem I see is the stage the thread is at now, there's precious little to add. Maybe some questions then? Seemingly basic questions can generate new viewpoints.

 

Perry's book is gold.

 

I don't use some of the terminologies. For example, when I say "transition", I always mean transition of bass seasons, from winter to pre-spawn etc. Sharp (relative of course) changes in some parameter relevant to the reservoir bottom are called breaks in my book. Depth breaks, or bottom composition/ O2/ temperature changes, they are all breaklines to me (always related to hard/ soft structure, never cover*).

 

I also don't agree with his deep to shallow migration theory unless we're talking about seasonal movement. That's another matter of course.

 

* A weed-edge/ vegetations type change points my way to a break. But weeds don't stop growing without a reason. Maybe there's little sunlight penetrating that depth, or different species of vegetation prefer different substrates.

 

I'm pretty old school in this regard, and stick to the original terminology as best as possible. The problem becomes, if we all can't agree upon, or all choose to use our own definition of any of these terms, or our own terms completely, there is likely no way we will ever come to agreement on things because we're not starting and arguing the merits based on the same words and definitions. It also makes it tremendously confusing for any newer anglers, or anglers unfamiliar with structure theory, to figure out what is right or wrong when everyone has their own terms and definitions.

 

On the deep-to-shallow migration theory, that is a bit oversold in my book. He later tweaked that concept slightly, and the basic guideline that has been in place now for the past 20-25 years addresses this supposed happening. He wrote about this extensively in a 1986 article entitled, "What I Did Not Say About Structure Fishing."

 

Oops - on the ledge running on a point...I'd need to have a clearer picture of exactly what you are envisioning to be able to give a definite answer. The basic procedures are always, troll the shallows, then cast the shallows. Then troll the deep water, then cast the deep water, at least to properly fish a particular structure thoroughly, and assuming the waters (and regs) are conducive to doing so. You always interpret from the deepest water, but begin fishing in the shallowest.

 

-T9

[Catt]

We can sit around bruising egos over difinitions or we can glean from what's before us.

Deep water is relevant to the body of water you are fishing!

Question: are bass predators?

Yes we believe they are!

When a predator is hungry it hunts! It does not have to "migrate" but it does move from its home to an area with a sufficient food source. How far does it move? As far as necessary to find a sufficient food source.

[deep]

 

 

Oops - on the ledge running on a point...I'd need to have a clearer picture of exactly what you are envisioning to be able to give a definite answer. The basic procedures are always, troll the shallows, then cast the shallows. Then troll the deep water, then cast the deep water, at least to properly fish a particular structure thoroughly, and assuming the waters (and regs) are conducive to doing so. You always interpret from the deepest water, but begin fishing in the shallowest.

 

-T9

 

Thank you. Now we might have something going.

 

That was just an example; and as you pointed out, there are a bunch of factors that'll influence the correct answer. I do not know the correct answer myself, since I don't catch that many big fish (small ones don't count) to pattern it. I do know some of the factors it depends on, so I know what to start with (for the particular break I'm thinking of).

[deep]

Also, please refresh my memory a little. Perry has like eight or nine books, right? I think I read only two.

 

Anyway, **You always interpret from the deepest water, but begin fishing in the shallowest.**

 

The first part I understand, but tell us why we must start fishing from the shallowest.

[Team9nine]

Perry's main book was "Spoonplugging: Your Guide to Lunker Catches", often referred to as the Green book. He also had a smaller booklet called "Spoonplugging for freshwater bass and all game fish" which preceded the Green book. Then there was the 9-part home study series that came after the Green book, and went into a lot more detail on specifics. Then there are a ton of old articles he wrote while Education Editor for Fishing Facts (~105 or so, I believe).

 

As for fishing shallow first, Buck basically created a process anglers should follow to quickly figure out where the fish are and how you can catch them. In many cases, especially in instances of a body of water being fairly new to you or that you haven't fished much, you start shallow for several reasons.

 

1. First, it gives you a defined process to quickly eliminate water layers systematically to determine where fish are active (or not). Start shallow and work deeper until you start catching fish, instead of just assuming or haphazardly jumping around trying different depths.
2. Also, shallower fish tend to be a bit more active, usually there to feed. Being more active, you can usually get by with a little less perfect presentation - they'll frequently move to the bait instead of you having to put it right on its nose.
3. You also get a chance to get a feel for the lake, seeing cover options like weed growth and weedlines, checking bottom hardness, determining water clarity, finding possible structures, etc., all things that might help point you in the right direction when trying to catch fish on a lake. Doing so also helps you learn a lake. Buck always stated he never wanted to come off a lake not knowing more about it than when he first arrived. This process helps in that regard.
4. Additionally, you tend to have better lure control shallow. The deeper you go, usually the more accurate your presentation has to be. Anyone can drop a jig into a bush in 4' of water, but put that same bush on a breakline in 25' of water, and how many people can now drop that jig into the bush? The fish still tend to use the bush (a "break") the same way regardless of depth.

 

Of course, if you are very familiar with a lake or some of its specific structure situations already, you can go straight to fishing the known contact points, breaks and breaklines appropriately without going through the whole process if you choose to. Consider it a shortcut for the hard work you already put in, if you will. Doesn't always work out, but saves time if it does. The simple fact is every fishing day is different. Some days you might whack them on top of a point fishing a topwater, and others days you won't catch any unless you're dragging a football jig deeper on the same point. Having a process you use every time out to quickly establish depth can be a nice benefit to anglers.

 

 

-T9

[Catt]

What we had here was a discussion identifing defining structure, & breaklines.

This discussion spawned several others all in these time frame. Two were Matt Fly's Know Thy Shad, two were mine All Lakes Have It & my favorite structure. There's one by Raul but its title fails me. Next came discussions on fishing grass.

Yo have a portion of a thought process, you need to find the rest.

[RoLo]

1940s to 1960s

I was fortunate to grow up in an era when you could learn from the angling pioneers in ‘real time’.

As a kid, I remember discovering a goldmine called “Lucas on Bass Fishing” authored by Jason Lucas.

Jason’s insight was far ahead of his time, and most of what he professed during the 40s and 50s,

still holds true today. I was still trying to digest Jason’s book, when I found a diamond-in-the-rough

called “Spoonplugging” written by Elwood “Buck” Perry. More than the father of structure fishing,

Buck Perry repeatedly demonstrated the critical importance of depth control and speed control

by trolling his own self-devised “Spoonplugs” that run at predefined depths.

When you inspect a Spoonplug in your hand, it kind of debunks the ‘match the hatch’ theory,

because Buck centered his focus on 'precise delivery' (depth - speed - action).

 

 

1960s to Date

Fish are cold-blooded, instinct-driven creatures that lack the power to reason.

Humans are warm-blooded creatures with the power to reason, but our instincts are seriously underdeveloped.

When man pits intelligence against instinct, the odds are high that he’ll end-up outsmarting himself.

In the final analysis, no man has ever solved all the mysteries of our sport, and even the greatest mentors

who contributed the most, had their fair share of misconceptions.

 

During the late 60s, I well recall when Al and Ron Lindner began writing highly technical articles

for “Fishing Facts” magazine. Their in-depth, scientific approach was not every fishermen's cup-of-tea,

but the Lindner brothers catapulted Fishing Facts magazine to new heights. Then in 1975, Al & Ron Lindner

launched their own “In-Fisherman” magazine. To this day, I still have the red & white publications

they called “Study Reports”, where each study report was an encyclopedia equal in scope

to a yard-high stack of garden-variety magazines. The In-Fisherman staff went headlong into radio tracking,

which disclosed many unexpected results. Telemetry studies reinforced some tenets and degraded

some tenets proposed by James Henshall, Jason Lucas, Elwood Perry and Homer Circle.

As it happened, Uncle Homer was the only pioneer who lived long enough to witness radio-tracking findings.

 

To be sure, largemouth bass move from lounging quarters to feeding grounds, but only move as far

as necessary, and always welcome the opportunity to bundle both events at the same location.

As a result, radio-tracking studies have shown that daily movements, on balance, are shorter than

previously believed. As in all facets of fishing though, there are always exceptions that prove the rule.

 

The biggest telemetric surprise was learning that largemouth bass strongly resist depth change,

that their movements tend to be horizontal. In most radio-tracking studies, there is one or more renegades

that will undergo a long, inexplicable migration, sometimes crossing the entire lake. Even during these

extended migrations though, the movement was essentially lateral with no significant depth change.

This is likely due to the bass's swim bladder, which makes a bass work harder when changing water depth.

In any case, wide changes in depth are mostly a seasonal event that take place over time.

 

According to diving excursions conducted by In-Fisherman, the greatest depth changes were normally seen

during a cold-front, but the movement tended to be vertical rather than horizontal (not what most anglers visualize).

During warm, stable weather periods, bass tend to rise gradually in the water column, higher along

standing timber or higher in a weedbed. Inversely, bass tend to move down to the bottom during a cold-front.

Although bass depth is changed, water depth may remain the same (again, not what most anglers visualize).

Needless to say, bass in deep water are not as susceptible to cold-fronts occurring in the troposphere,

and may even be unaware of its presence. During cold-fronts, the In-Fisherman staff additionally noticed that

some bass assume a very reclusive position, with their nose on the bottom and their tail angling upward.

 

Roger

[MFBAB]

Do any of y'all seriously think that if they had SI and 1' contour maps on the boats in Buck's day, that he'd have ever invented the Spoonplug?  He made those things to drag around and map out the lake.  It's already done for us today.  Basically every pro out there and a lot of serious recreational fishermen have 2 large units at the console these days, 1 for mapping and 1 for sonar/DI/SI-and then another 1 or 2 units on the bow that are synched up with the others.  Perry just had his Spoonplugs to map out the lake bottom.  He had a few pre-lake contour maps but there wasn't any such thing as GPS then so they weren't much good. 

The point is, he had to do it the hard way, and Spoonplugging (the green book and the additional materials) was revolutionary material at the time, and for most who read it today IT STILL IS!!  I just read it the first time maybe 10 years ago, and it changed my life as far as fishing goes.  I think you need to at least read it to really be able to participate in the conversation when it comes to the structure topic, it's pretty much the 101 course; and I don't mean that in a demeaning or basic way, I mean it to say that it lays out the language and organizes the framework for us to move forward from and build on.

Was it perfect? Nah.  But it's still far ahead of what the majority of the fishermen you meet at the lake know today.  They mostly just know how to copy or imitate what they see other guys doing, try to get on a bent pole pattern.  Only a handful know (or even want to know) the why's - like why are the fish at the depth they are at? Why are they doing this or that?  They just want to know what bait so and so is throwing-like that means anything.  Have you ever tried to read a fishing report in the paper and then go do what it says to do and actually catch fish? It doesn't happen often.  You have to learn to read the current conditions and make the percentage decisions on your own. 

Today, we have this huge head start over what Buck had.  Today, A guy can map out, study and waypoint an entire lake from his computer at home before he ever even launches a boat at a given lake for the first time.  Human beings amass knowledge over time, from generation to generation.  Almost all of the answers are out there when it comes to fishing these days, fortunately for the fish though, most of us don't read the books and learn from the past.  As comedian Chris Rock famously said: "Hide your money in your books!"

I say, read Perry, read Lucas, Murphy, Hannon, read all of the classics on bass fishing, there are many good book lists discussed here.  Also, spend some time with the search function here, they don't call it bass resource for nothing.  Then, spend time fishing and testing what you've learned, and not just bass fishing.  The idea is to always ask questions and always go in with the attitude of trying to prove something you read wrong (test it), not right. Sort of like the Scientific Method.  That is how you learn.  None of this stuff applies universally, every lake is a little different, but trends will emerge the more experience you get.  Structure, water clarity, weather, seasonal trends, how to select baits based on these factors and more, this is the knowledge you are seeking.   

Also, read that manual that came with your Humminbird or Lowrance REAL good too!!

If you study all of those famous books, and famous threads here, and famous magazine articles, and watch all of the tourneys and fishing shows, and mix that in with all of your own personal experience (which should be logged in detail after all of your trips), and then put all of that knowledge up against what that sonar and your baits are telling you on the water today, you still get skunked a lot of days :):) J/K, the picture starts coming together faster and faster the more good sources of info you put together, and the more questions you ask. 

Half the time, when I set out to find the answer to one fishing question, I almost always find the answer to a couple of other ones in the process.  The learning curve today is so drastically reduced from what it was even 15-20 years ago.  The answers are really all out there, but you still have to put in the time.  The advantage today is that it's really hard to get off on a lot of dead-end tangents if you're doing your homework.  You don't have to learn too much from trial and error nowadays if you've got google and like to read books. 

Here's a good article on structure: http://rbbassfishing.net/bass-fishing-tips/bass-science-whats-the-point/

Hope this helps someone.  The article originally had some great diagrams that don't seem to be included in this link, so here they are:

 

[Catt]

That man gets it.

[Team9nine]

12 hours ago, MFBAB said:

 Here's a good article on structure: http://rbbassfishing.net/bass-fishing-tips/bass-science-whats-the-point/

Hope this helps someone.  The article originally had some great diagrams that don't seem to be included in this link, so here they are:

 

 

My old friend RZ, he'll be tickled you shared the article. Too many triangles, lines and arrows for me to follow , but Rich has always been one step beyond...

-T9

[Nitrofreak]

Thanks to all who have contributed to this thread, I went back and re-read this for what I hope is a much clearer picture, at least I feel like I have a much better understanding.

If I am starting to understand then may I ask a question or two? I would like to use the saddle in the above picture, when we hear about the occasions of fish coming shallow to feed and returning deep, is it most likely that areas like these saddles may be used as reference?

They may or may not be directly in the saddle itself, that they may position themselves on the point or on the ledge or elsewhere, but where they position themselves has more to do with time of year? does anything seem to determine where they will most likely position after coming shallow to feed or, because each body of water is different we need to explore all the options?    

[Catt]

While those pictures are nice they show no cover, cover will form breaklines, bass will follow breaklines.

[Nitrofreak]

So basically it's picking out plausible structure like the one pictured and exploring it to it's maximum.

Looking at the picture it shows a weed line, could that not be considered a breakline if the weeds were dense enough or am I thinking too much?

Or is a weed line simply determined by a round about depth knowing that grass has a hard time growing past the 15 foot mark?

[Catt]

Breaklines are defined on page one

[MFBAB]

23 hours ago, Team9nine said:

 

My old friend RZ, he'll be tickled you shared the article. Too many triangles, lines and arrows for me to follow , but Rich has always been one step beyond...

-T9

Ha ha, I don't know him personally, but I understand what you;re saying

I like that article and the pictures because he labels all of the spots well.  I thought it would add a good visual to some of the terminology for people. 

[Nitrofreak]

Obviously I don't understand as much as I thought I might LOL, I swear I did read the whole thing again and I thought it made sense, ok if I am not being too annoying I wish to make sense of what I am looking at in the picture, maybe I am projecting my questions in the wrong way, maybe I am not getting it at all, I have points just like these on the waters I fish, in fact, this one in particular in the picture is almost a mirror image of one on my home lake.

During the summer months on high pressure days (bright sunny days) correct me if I am wrong about that terminology, I can find them up shallow in and around the patches of grass and around various stumps on the point (my home lake has very little grass due to the over abundance of carp that was introduced) so understanding structure is even more important to me, during the day after the morning bite has deteriorated they will move into the saddle or I will find them out on the deeper point, much like the one pictured, I guess I am trying to make sense of why they would locate themselves in such an area.

[MFBAB]

For the sake of consistency, Here are some of Buck Perry's definitions:

BREAK — Where structure is no longer uniform due to dips, or a quick drop in depth, rocks, stumps, bushes, sunken objects, etc.

BREAKLINE — A line on the bottom where there is a definite increase or decrease in depth, either sudden or gradual ­such as the edge of a channel, hole, or gully; the "wall" of a weedline, brushline; where two bodies of water meet which differ in temperature, color, or movement (current).

BRUSH LINE — The edge of a line of brush.

CLEAN BOTTOM — Bottoms free of debris, muck, moss, etc.

CONTACT POINT — The position on structure where contact is first made by fish on their migration from deep water.

DEEP WATER — Water that has a depth greater than eight to ten feet.

DIRTY BOTTOM — Bottoms covered with debris, muck, moss, etc.

DROP-OFF — The place on structure where there is a sudden or rapid drop into the deepest water, such as a hole or channel.

FINGER — A projection or extrusion, in a lake bottom forma­tion (structure).

HARD BOTTOM — Bottoms with a firm condition, usually associated with sand, clay, rocks, gravel, etc.

HOME — The deep water areas where fish spend most of their time.

MIGRATION — Movement of fish from one section of water to another. Normally used when speaking of a depth change.

MIGRATION ROUTE — The path fish take as they move from deep water to shallow water, or vice versa.

MOVEMENT — Closely associated with migration, but also meaning when fish become active (opposite of dormant).

OPEN WATER — Water free from vegetation growth, and away from shoreline.

POINT — An extrusion in the shoreline that extends into and under the water.

PRESENTATION — The way lures and bait are presented or displayed, to the fish.

SCATTERPOINT — The depth, on the bottom, where fish start to separate and scatter and are no longer grouped together.

SHALLOW WATER — Water less than eight to ten feet in depth.

SHARPER BREAK — A more rapid increase or decrease in depth than the surrounding area; steeper, more acute (see "breakline").

SOFT BOTTOM — Bottoms covered with soft silt, mud, muck, marl, etc.

STRUCTURE — The bottom of the lake with some unusual features that distinguish it from the surrounding bottom  area.

WATER COLOR — The degree of clarity.

WEEDLINE — The edge of a line of weeds.

[MFBAB]

17 hours ago, Nitrofreak said:

So basically it's picking out plausible structure like the one pictured and exploring it to it's maximum.

Looking at the picture it shows a weed line, could that not be considered a breakline if the weeds were dense enough or am I thinking too much?

Or is a weed line simply determined by a round about depth knowing that grass has a hard time growing past the 15 foot mark?

Here ya go:

BREAKLINE — A line on the bottom where there is a definite increase or decrease in depth, either sudden or gradual ­such as the edge of a channel, hole, or gully; the "wall" of a weedline, brushline; where two bodies of water meet which differ in temperature, color, or movement (current).

You're basically right, grass will tend to thin out at a given depth based on water clarity and light penetration.