'Food' for thought or 'hey you bass, don't be so senstitive!'

[SENKOSAM]

In Paul's previous post, he related lure avoidance as the subject of a study done relating an inherited recognition of lures and fish aggressiveness. I'm not a believer. But I'm also not a biologist (other than the Bio 101 course I took in community college. )

What I propose is first defining a few terms and then giving examples of how they might apply to bass responses to our lures.

First, as anglers, we use stimuli - something that incites to action or exertion or quickens action, (feeling, thought - humans only) or provocation.

The three types of stimuli - positive, negative (or aversive) and neutral. We all desire the positive response - the bite.

An aversive stimulus is any negative stimulus to which an organism will learn to avoid it. For a fish, that probably includes anything from low oxygen levels or a sudden shadow or visualization of objects such as herons and humans. (Scuba divers have been video tapped getting very close to big bass and cormorants swimming underwater easily catch bass.)

Do bass ever see our lures as aversive stimuli or do they come around to simply ignoring them (a neutral response)? Meaning, does a bass sprint to the other side of the lake when confronted by something much smaller than itself even if the object hooked it multiple times? I think not. How many fish in a school see other fish hooked on the same lure over and over and still attack it? Not very bright if you ask me.

Scientists and anglers know that all forms of animal life have the ability to learn from experience (though maybe not all anglers, myself included . ) Part of that learning includes recognition.

To recognize is to identify as something previously seen, known;

-to identify from knowledge of appearance or characteristics;

-to perceive as existing or true (even if it's not)

Our ace in the hole is the simple fact that bass recognize an object as edible and vulnerable. Angler present lures that stimulate a basic recognition of an object as a type of prey (maybe stored in its genetic substance) or something unknown that intrigues it. (We will never know which).

I know the following term relates to computers, but it seems applicable to bass - pattern recognition.

Pattern recognition is the automated identification of shapes or forms (or patterns of speech).

A lure pattern is something I theorized in a previous post and includes all design characteristics that separate one lure from another. Now, back to the subject in the title - lure avoidance or neutral response indicating sensitivity from repeated exposure.

I don't believe fish avoid lures that they once ate with glee. That which was not dangerous before is not dangerous in the present. It doesn't mean the fish doesn't recognize the lure by shape, size, action and color, it just means that the fish is either no longer fooled into eating it or not interested in the least. Over time and exposure, something happened either to the fish, its environment or both.

Okay, so now you want bass to respond to the same lure class and design you previously caught it on. How? You change something in the lure pattern. You changed size, color, weight, action or presentation and all of a sudden the lure catches fish again (until it doesn't). Is it just coincidence? Who cares!! The bass now recognizes the object as intriguing or vulnerable or as food. It no longer recognizes the lure as a plastic or metal fake not worth looking at. You have acknowledged its natural selectivity and re-included your lure back into it. Of course, the higher a fish's aggression level, the less selective it is, but a lure that has been ignored recently, will still most likely be ignored. I believe it takes only one fish to turn a school on and one lure to turn it off after changing from one that works to one that doesn't

Food for thought. :

Frank

[senile1]

Correct me if I misunderstood you but in a nutshell your post states the following:

You believe once a bass is classically conditioned to ignore a lure, a change in the presentation of that lure will induce the bass to bite again. You don't believe bass are conditioned to fear or avoid a lure due to a perception of danger.

No one knows for sure why a fish avoids a lure but we can make educated guesses as you are doing with your theory of pattern recognition. You do state that the fish was no longer fooled into eating it. That means he must have learned through classical conditioning to avoid eating that presentation or "he learned to avoid a lure he once ate with glee." Then when you change the presentation, he is induced into biting again. Whether he ignores the lure due to negative stimuli (perception of danger) or neutral stimuli (simply ignores it due to lack of interest) is really irrelevant to me as an angler. He ignores the lure just the same until I change the presentation.

[SENKOSAM]

I don't know if a bass avoids eating the same lure versus becoming less aggressive towards it. Maybe just coincidence but if,for example, I change the color of a soft plastic stick from bright in early spring to more subdued in late spring/ early summer (ie. bubblegum to green pumpkin), I get better results. Same worm, same size, same company.

If I downsize a bait, sometimes I find the smaller bait works better. Same design, just smaller.

If I work a crankbait fast but then slow it down with longer pauses, the bait may (and at times has) produce better. Same bait, different presentation.

A soft plastic may work better changing to a C-rig once fish start ignoring it worked weightless near surface or deadsticking a spinnerbait rather than using a steady retrieve. Same bait, different presentation.

I change jig trailers in summer from those I use in the spring. Same jig and color skirt but it works for me along with a different presentation.

One last example - changing from a floating minnow to a suspending minnow. Same shape, different action and possibly different presentation.

It's not a question of fish avoiding a lure as much as you renewing its interest in it. Why it does, well everyone has their own opinion, especially those who make changes in the same lure that results in more strikes. Giving up on a specific lure for the year or forever may not be the best idea.

Classic conditioning has nothing to do with why a fish stops biting a lure and then starts biting the same lure in its natural environment where there are few controls or constants. I wish it were otherwise. But classic conditioning does apply to anglers who avoid using lures for the wrong reasons.

Senile, I would bet you've had similar experiences.

[senile1]

So I misunderstood to a slight extent.  You are talking about the fact that in particular situations the slightest change to a presentation can turn on the bite.  I am talking about the possibility of a bass experiencing a lure so much that they are classically conditioned to ignore it because they associate it with pain, or a non-edible entity.  Some don't believe this happens, but I am in the camp that thinks it is very possible.  As we both said, none of us can be sure why a bass does what it does, but we do know that slight changes in presentation can provoke a strike. 

[J Francho]

What about what a bass experiences when its in a negative feeding mode, or completely inactive?  I mean, its one thing for it to get stuck by a poorly presented bait when its on a shad feeding rampage, but what about the 8 billion times a buzzbait was run over its head throughout the middle of a sunny day?  Does that fish then learn to ignore a buzzbait when normally it would go crazy for it?

[senile1]

Speaking in terms of an inactive fish not biting, the fish doesn't learn anything about the buzzbait that day except that the lure is moving too fast for it to care to chase it down. A slower presentation should be used.

In terms of learning to ignore buzzbaits in the near future, in my opinion, unless a particular fish bites the buzzbait enough times in a specific period of time it will never learn to associate a negative consequence to that particular lure. It's perception of that lure would be neutral. Of course, I can't provide any definitive proof of this.

I do believe I have seen instances of fish conditioning. I have walked down docks where I have seen carp gather near me and lift their mouths above the water expecting to receive food due to people pitching crumbs to them.

I've also read articles about fish conditioning though I don't have them all at my fingertips. Below is one which describes the conditioning of zebrafish to choose a specific color of zebrafish to group up with based on socialization even thought the group may be a different color than the test zebrafish.

Reference: Raymond E. Engeszer, Michael J. Ryan, and David M. Parichy. 2004. Learned Social Preference in Zebrafish, Current Biology. 14: 881-884.

However, I am not a marine biologist.  These are my opinions based on reading and experience.  I'm definitely open to evidence that contradicts what I believe.

[slonezp]

What about the fish that you catch, release, and recatch 5 minutes later? Did it not receive negative stimuli from being caught or does its instinct to eat and survive surpass everything?

[senile1]

What about the fish that you catch, release, and recatch 5 minutes later? Did it not receive negative stimuli from being caught or does its instinct to eat and survive surpass everything?

By definition, classical conditioning does not occur with one experience. It takes multiple experiences within a time period that will reinforce the negative perception created. 

[bassfisherjk]

WOW!

[J Francho]

Speaking in terms of an inactive fish not biting, the fish doesn't learn anything about the buzzbait that day except that the lure is moving too fast for it to care to chase it down. A slower presentation should be used.

In terms of learning to ignore buzzbaits in the near future, in my opinion, unless a particular fish bites the buzzbait enough times in a specific period of time it will never learn to associate a negative consequence to that particular lure. It's perception of that lure would be neutral. Of course, I can't provide any definitive proof of this.

By "the book," an inactive bass bites NO LURE, so therefore a slower presentation doesn't change things.

What I'm suggesting is that it doesn't take a a fish eating a lure to develop a negative response. In other words, once (several times over their heads) not a positive feeding response, always not a positive feeding response, irrespective of feeding mode (inactive to active).

It may explain all these, "I can't catch a whiff, on X bait, but can on Y all day," when you know it doesn't matter, they're almost identical. Consider that many of these guys are hitting small ponds, and beating the same 50 fish over their heads every day. I find that hitting my lunch break pond involves quite a bit of "evolution" in what I decide to throw.

[Tin]

...

[senile1]

It may explain all these, "I can't catch a whiff, on X bait, but can on Y all day," when you know it doesn't matter, they're almost identical. Consider that many of these guys are hitting small ponds, and beating the same 50 fish over their heads every day. I find that hitting my lunch break pond involves quite a bit of "evolution" in what I decide to throw.

I don't disagree with you. I have experienced this "evolution" on ponds as well though it seems to happen over a period of time for me.

Senkosam stated:

It's not a question of fish avoiding a lure as much as you renewing its interest in it. Why it does, well everyone has their own opinion, especially those who make changes in the same lure that results in more strikes. Giving up on a specific lure for the year or forever may not be the best idea.

Classic conditioning has nothing to do with why a fish stops biting a lure and then starts biting the same lure in its natural environment where there are few controls or constants. I wish it were otherwise. But classic conditioning does apply to anglers who avoid using lures for the wrong reasons.

I don't see that what you and I believe is that far off from one another except for the conditioning piece. While I may believe that conditioning occurs it doesn't mean I will stop using a lure. For one thing, there is no way to prove the reason a fish isn't biting a lure at a particular time. I can't prove that a fish is conditioned to a particular lure. My first assumptions when I am not getting bit is I am in the wrong place or I am using the wrong presentation (or as your refer to it, lure pattern). I have to assume something that I can control is causing me to not get bit. Otherwise, I have no recourse but to go home.

[Catt]

Here's my problem with this whole theory of bass becoming conditioned into not hitting lures. If the population of bass is small enough as it is in these ponds or the fishing pressure great enough wouldn't it stand to reason that after a certain period of time no bass would hit a single lure ever again?

[senile1]

Good point, Catt.  I think that if a bass "becomes conditioned" to a particular lure and you stop using that lure for a period of time, the bass "forgets" what it learned. 

It's not like I hang my fishing strategy on this idea of bass becoming conditioned.  I just believe any fish can become conditioned to certain stimuli as I have read studies that support this idea.  I can't prove when they have become conditioned as I stated in the post above.  It is always best to assume that something I can control (location or presentation) will eventually lead to a bite. 

[SENKOSAM]

What about the fish that you catch, release, and recatch 5 minutes later? Did it not receive negative stimuli from being caught or does its instinct to eat and survive surpass everything?

I don't think I've ever seen or heard that happen, even in a lab, but if so, IMO it would have to do with a very high activity level. An ultra-high or medium high activity (irritability) level reduces a bass's selectivity when it comes to lures or live prey. It's like someone turned the dial up and turned the fish into a feeding machine. Its short term memory seems to get shorter when it's in the mood and forgets it got caught on the same lure a week ago. How many prespawn males have you caught that have torn lips with multiple holes ? Same for crazy a** pickerel!

But one thing is very true what Senile said about conditioning. Fish can get excited and stay excited because of a learned response.

Example: I took my son to a trout farm in Eldred, NY to fish and see how trout were raised for stocking. The breeder tanks held all size fish crowded together and when the caretaker came over with pellets, the fish became excited and then fed in a frenzy. (Maybe that's one reason trout anglers don't see hatchery fish as a challenge.)

The sunfish I had as a kid would rise to the surface when it saw me nearby, knowing that fish flakes were going to be sprinkled. But if I was able to recapture that fish after flushing it down the toilet after feeding it, you think it would stop eating my fish food? Probably not.

I don't see that what you and I believe is that far off from one another except for the conditioning piece. While I may believe that conditioning occurs it doesn't mean I will stop using a lure. For one thing, there is no way to prove the reason a fish isn't biting a lure at a particular time. I can't prove that a fish is conditioned to a particular lure. My first assumptions when I am not getting bit is I am in the wrong place or I am using the wrong presentation (or as your refer to it, lure pattern). I have to assume something that I can control is causing me to not get bit. Otherwise, I have no recourse but to go home.

I totally agree! To stop using a lure because I believe bass just aren't feeding on lures they might have been caught on or been exposed to, assumes a lot!  We can never know how near an inactive bass (one not actively chasing bait or prey) is to being turned on and beginning to show signs it is gearing up to feed. We throw the dice and see what happens. But there might be something to the old angler wisdom of working an area slower and repeatedly. 

Doug Hannon's, Al Lindner and Glen Lau's underwater videos are amazing as learning tools - the tape doesn't tell fish tales!  ;D

[J Francho]

I don't think I've ever seen or heard that happen

Bed fish. 

[slonezp]

I don't think I've ever seen or heard that happen

Bed fish.

No, not bed fish. I have personaly had it happen once with a bass, and once with a steelhead. Not really inconceiveable when you think about it. If a fish is feeding agressively that's all it's thinking about. How many times have you guys caught fish with shad or crayfish sticking out their gullet? or hook a fish, it gets off and hooks itself again?

There is no doubt in my mind that fish can be conditioned. I've had oscars in a tank and tank fish develop personalities. As far as "wild" fish are concerned i believe it to be different. There is so much stimuli in a lake enviroment a fish has to be on guard constantly. I believe they to be more selective. Any of you have a "lucky" lure or 2 of the same identical lures, but one seems to catch more than the other? Why does one catch more than the other? There is just something special about the lure that causes a reaction. How many times have you been fishing with a partner, you dial in on a pattern and you outfish or get outfished 3-1 using the same bait. Just something about the rig/retrieve.

Correct me if I'm wrong but IMO the original post is based on the idea that fish feel pain when mouth hooked.

A fish has one purpose in its life, and that is to survive. That means eating when it's hungry, attacking when it's threatened, and reproducing. We as fishermen have to figure out how to trigger that response.

[Catt]

I think the problem arises with the interpretation of the data; a person will interpret the data with a bias towards their own beliefs.

On more than one occasion I've personally caught the same bass 3 days in a row off the same cover with the same lure. Day 1 & 2 of the trip I didn't catch him but on day 3, 4, & 5 - I caught him, on day 6, 7, & 8 nothing.

So did the bass become conditioned or simply turn-off (become inactive)?

[J Francho]

Good stuff slonezp.

Correct me if I'm wrong but IMO the original post is based on the idea that fish feel pain when mouth hooked.

Maybe that, and that they didn't end up with a full belly.

[J Francho]

So did the bass become “conditioned” or simply “turn-off” (become inactive)?

Good question.  I've always wondered not whether they were conditioned, but how long they were conditioned.  On northern lakes, most bass have 2-3 months of ice over to forget about all the lures they saw.  I wonder if this is a massive northern "reset."

[Jigfishn10]

So did the bass become conditioned or simply turn-off (become inactive)?

Good question. I've always wondered not whether they were conditioned, but how long they were conditioned. On northern lakes, most bass have 2-3 months of ice over to forget about all the lures they saw. I wonder if this is a massive northern "reset."

Or is it because the "book" on the northern strain is that they are much more aggressiive than, say, a Florida strain because the northern strain has a smaller feeding window during the year?

I do believe they become conditioned to a certain degree when you present a lure the same way until, like Senkosam stated, you change the presentation up. JMHO

[J Francho]

Maybe. I know that's the "book." I wish my fish studied that book more often, though.

[senile1]

Maybe. I know that's the "book." I wish my fish studied that book more often, though.

The literacy rate among bass is a travesty.  

[Catt]

I think conditioning is plausible to a degree depending on many factors such as the size of the body of water, size of the bass population, availability of food, amount of pressure applied and so forth.

Conditioning can be overridden by the instinct of the bass to survive, if the opportunity presents itself a hungry bass is going to feed even if cautiously.

[SENKOSAM]

There is no doubt in my mind that fish can be conditioned. I've had oscars in a tank and tank fish develop personalities. As far as "wild" fish are concerned i believe it to be different. There is so much stimuli in a lake environment a fish has to be on guard constantly. I believe they to be more selective.

Most definitely bass can be conditioned to do tricks in a laboratory. "Learning is acquiring new or modifying existing knowledge, behavior, skills, values, or preferences and may involve synthesizing different types of information." A lake or river environment doesn't allow fish the time or opportunity to be conditioned to one specific lure or lure class. A fish my see the lure once in its lifetime and maybe get hooked, but a year down the road forget it ever saw the lure.

Here's an idea (or two) to think about (opinions welcome). The complexity of a bass's brain as compared to a dolphin's or parrot's brain is ..well.. a no brainer! : But when you think of all the fish you've caught in all their different stages of life, can't you see a few analogies to higher forms of animal life behavior?

For example, juvenile bass are much more aggressive on average than an older bass. Young puppies show the same aggression and hyperactivity. Both have one thing in common - play.

Play has been approached by several theorists as the first form of learning. Children play to experiment with the world, learn the rules, and learn to interact. Play is pivotal for children's development, since they make meaning of their world.

Young fish seem to do the same.

All young push the limits of their limited abilities - bass are no different. They attack something they don't realize they can't consume. Anyone catch a 6" bass on an 8" lure? They may attack to eat, but many attack because the moving object is there and they feel safe to just capture it, maybe testing themselves and the lure they've never experienced. Young bass are apt to chase a lure and attack it several times on one cast, older, lazier bass not so, especially those with large pot bellies!

Older bass may also testobjects they've never seen if the object (lure) gets their attention, holds it and become irresistible at least for the moment. Maybe an hour later nothing you do with the lure will get even a whiff.

I compare a bass's intelligence (stored knowledge) and learning ability (based on its limited capacity to store data and to reason) to that of an eight month old infant. I believe a bass's mentality in the wild can't evolve much further. In this light, a two year old bass is similar to an infant when it comes to moving objects. For instance, a baby's mobile gets different infant reactions in a day's time - joy, excitement, irritation, the urge to touch it, yank it, mouth it. The toy may also be completely ignored (depending how wet his/her diaper, hunger pains and crankiness). But if the mobile falls down and even bruises an infant's head, he most likely will not be afraid of it the next day and back to observing and being fascinated.

Bass go through different stages in their lives and in one day's time. Youthful exuberance has been touched on. An older bass's vulnerability to strike a lure depends on the stage it's in; the length of those stages vary daily. In any order, the stages are: sedate and lazy; mildly interested in new objects that come within its space; more irritable and maybe more apt to test/ mouth the object) after giving it its undivided attention;  very irritable and hyperactive - it will eat your sneaker!

Fish and animals in general, first need to feel safe and in charge of their immediate space. If a lure's presentation and action doesn't turn an active stage into a sedate stage, you have a window to catch it.

Sometimes that window is nailed shut, just like it's mouth!