Sonars takin the fun out the hunt?

[brushhoggin]

I understand it's hugely convenient to be able to see under the boat and all around you in order to identify an area that could hold bass by observing your underwater surroundings, but the other day i saw a fisherman on tv fishing a drop shot sorta deep, watching his lure and the fish around it. He could even see the fish's approach. I know this isn't cheating, but do any of you think that takes the fun out of a real hunt for bass? yeah yeah, i know, if you could put me on bass all day, catch em all day, because of your high quality electronics, would i not go....yes i would. but i roll without the electronics. (partly cause i cant afford them right now) And if i fish all my points, cuts, and backwaters in search of bass and finally get on em, the excitement (i imagine) is more intense when i get bit because of the element of surprise and rush provided by a successful hunt. is this an eye of the beholder thing? would you deer hunters get more fulfillment out of deer hunting if you knew without a doubt you were taking some meat home because you had a deer-dar?

[OHIO]

I think it's more of a luxury. You don't need it, but at times it would be nice.

The only times I fish out of a boat (not a lot), I never use electronics. It would be nice, but I agree with you that it's more satisfying to catch fish without them.

Since I fish from the bank most of the time it's not really possible to use electronics, so I don't feel I need them to catch fish even when in a boat.

A lot of boat fisherman beat the bank anyways, so the electronics are not in use all the time.

Like you said, it's in the eye of the beholder though much like everything else in fishing.

[SausageFingers23]

Im not a hunter.  I LOVE the "surprise" factor when fishing.  Though Im always impressed by the pros who find their spots with electronics, use jigs/cranks to refine them, then catch 'em.  Read Ike's blog on Bassmaster.  Its awesome.  Electronics are only part of the fish catching equation.

[IlliniMatt21]

I don't think that it takes the fun out of the hunt at all. Anyone can troll around with their side or down imaging and mark fish all day long. It takes a real fishermen to present the correct bait to those fish and get them in the boat. Of course, sometimes you'll stumble on fish that will hit anything you throw at them, but luck is just another part of fishing, with or without electronics.

Look at it this way... Just about every pro that fished last year's Bassmaster Classic had some form of side and down imaging, but there were obviously those that caught a lot of fish and those that caught none. There's a reason that KVD demolished just about everyone else in that tournament, and it's not because he had better electronics. He knew what the fish were doing, what they were biting and what presentation they wanted. My point is, there's a lot more to catching fish than simply knowing where the fish are or might be.

[CAdeltaLipRipper]

I think it's one of the most important things in a fishermans arsenal.Graphs aren't exactly the easiest thing in the world to read.It's a very helpful, great skill to learn and i hope i get really good at it some day. Some people like them some don't. Slight disadvantage for the fish, especially with SI and DI, but i like advantages  ;D

[ww2farmer]

uhhhhhhhh............no, learn to use electronics, or get beat or out fished by those that do. I think catching fish is fun, and any thing that helps me catch more is a welcome addition.

[Bass_Fanatic]

uhhhhhhhh............no, learn to use electronics, or get beat or out fished by those that do. I think catching fish is fun, and any thing that helps me catch more is a welcome addition.

uhhhhhhhh.......I dont think the OP is too worried about "getting beat".  Sounds like he is out just to have fun.  I use sonar (not with SI or DS, because I cant afford em) but if you rather catch fish without em' go right ahead.  Who cares what I do or anyone else does, just do what u like to do and have fun doing it. 

I would like a deer-dar though if ya got one! ;D

[Tuckman]

IMO It doesn't take the fun out of the hunt, It is part of the hunt.

Personally, I fish with my eyes glued to a graph all day. I would feel naked without it. It not always about seeing fish as much as it is about staying on structure. It optimizes your time on the water by keeping you in key areas.

[jeb2]

I guess we can all pick a spot where technology might take the "fun" out of fishing. Maybe the guys with bamboo poles and cork bobbers really know where it's at, but I'll take my modern rods and reels, thanks just the same. Or maybe a leaky old wooden boat would add that special ambiance some are seeking, the bailing bucket close at hand.

Good electronics are just another step along the path, IMO.

I took one of my nephews out fishing last summer. He was really excited. He was checking out the electronics big time. I'd point out when we had fish below the boat. He was very disappointed that being able to see fish did not automatically equal catching fish. There's a lot more to it than just finding them.

[senile1]

Fish a lake of 5,000 to 10,000 acres or more with no electronics and no previous knowledge of the lake and you are going to get skunked a lot. Much of the water won't be holding active fish. You have to be able to locate structures that hold fish and the trial and error of doing it without electronics can lead to many fishless hours in the beginning. On the other hand, if you fish a 200 acre lake you can cover much of it quickly and locate the fish by trial and error without electronics. If you fish a large lake and an old-timer has shown you the migration paths and fish holding structure you may do well without electronics. Otherwise, you will be lost. I would say it's the reverse of the OP's statement. On a huge lake, failing to use electronics takes the fun of catching fish consistently out of the equation.

[MFBAB]

It not always about seeing fish as much as it is about staying on structure.

There it is.

[brushhoggin]

like i said, i am all about identifying structure and developing a deep pattern with electronics, but when they use em to watch a bass watch your lure, seems kinda lame. the area i fish is 33,000 acres and the only reference i have is an old ariel map of the place before it was flooded. there is a little lowrance on the boat that came with it but I still think its decorative, its only good for reading water depth and temp.

[Sam]

Electronics do a number of things for you.

1.  Show you your position on the water.

2.  Show you where you have been via tracking.

3.  Give you the opportunity to mark a spot for the future.

4.  Let you see what is under the boat.

5.  Give you an idea if there are fish under the boat.

6.  Help you navigate the boat around structure.

It is only as good as you are using it. 

[WRB]

Carl Lowrance made his 1st fish finder back in 1959 and changed bass fishing forever.

I can remember my first trip to Lake of The Woods in Ontario Canada back in 1973. I shipped my tackle to my father in law so he could take it up from Minnesota, we were flying in from California. My father in law called when he opened the box and found my X15 paper graph and told me fish finders are illegal in Canada.

Times change and most anglers accept the fact that fish finders, sonars units, are only an aid to locate under water objects like the bottom contour or structure, cover and fish. Catching bass and reading sonar takes a practiced set of skills, the combination is an advantage when fishing deep  structured lakes.

Tom

[WRB]

like i said, i am all about identifying structure and developing a deep pattern with electronics, but when they use em to watch a bass watch your lure, seems kinda lame. the area i fish is 33,000 acres and the only reference i have is an old ariel map of the place before it was flooded. there is a little lowrance on the boat that came with it but I still think its decorative, its only good for reading water depth and temp.

I fished with a flasher type fish finder in the front of my boat for 40 years because it gives you real time feed back what is under the transducer cone and you can see fish movements and your lure, if it is within the signal zone. The brightness of the colored lines indicate to strength of the signal and you can tell the bottom materials and size or depth of suspended fish.

The disadvantage is there isn't a recorded history displayed on the screen, it's all real time information that you are missing.

Tom

PS; think of the sonar/flasher display as a narrow beam flash light illuminating a small area in the dark. The light beam is a few inches in diameter at the flashlight and get wider the further it is away from you. Sonar works the same; small diameter at the transducer and gets about 3' larger in diameter for ever 5' away or depth; 20 foot depth; your signal diameter is about 12' diameter. Everything displayed on the sonar screen has already happened, like looking at your side view mirror what you see is behind you. Sonar display is like a flasher; the real time signals are on the right edge of the display. The display doesn't show you a fish moving up to your lure, the fish has already done that.

[Hot Rod]

I don't believe current technology takes the fun out of searching for/finding fish.  It is still a plenty of challenge to locate bass (not just fish) especially on larger deep lakes/reservoirs and then put those fish in the boat.

I do fear the day that technology gets so advanced it does take the fun and skill out of fishing.  I don't know if we'll get there in my life time but I could see it happening eventually.

[Catt]

I see lots of anglers in $50,000 bass boats that have all the bells & whistles and yet they still can't weigh a decent stringer.

#1 key to consistently catching bass is between your ears not between the folds of your wallet.

[Fish Chris]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

[Catt]

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

Nah 

[SPEEDBEAD.]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

How do you find your spots?  Map reading, experience, etc?

The reason I ask is....well, look at the fish you have caught.  I have a hard time believing you are "lucky" and stumble upon the fish you catch.  There is something you see beforehand or while on the water that cues you to the likely presence of big fish.

What is it and how can the rest of us utilize it?

[WRB]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

Did you dumb arcoss that avatar smallie?

[brushhoggin]

I see lots of anglers in $50,000 bass boats that have all the bells & whistles and yet they still can't weigh a decent stringer.

#1 key to consistently catching bass is between your ears not between the folds of your wallet.

sound advice as usual

[J Francho]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

No, but you might learn something new.  You bring to the table a stubborn unwillingness to change or try anything new because what you did worked so well.  I think if you add a few things, you'll slowly figure out the why's of your success.

[Intrepid]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

How do you find your spots? Map reading, experience, etc?

The reason I ask is....well, look at the fish you have caught. I have a hard time believing you are "lucky" and stumble upon the fish you catch. There is something you see beforehand or while on the water that cues you to the likely presence of big fish.

What is it and how can the rest of us utilize it?

sight fishing 

[senile1]

I almost never use electronics. In fact, all I have is a little portable graph.... which I sometimes use for Sturgeon fishing.

Actually, I do believe a good graph can help, but I'm so clueless with using one, it would only serve as a distraction for myself.

Do you guys think if I started using more electronics (and learned how to use them better), I might finally start catching some big ones ?

Fish

No, but you might learn something new. You bring to the table a stubborn unwillingness to change or try anything new because what you did worked so well. I think if you add a few things, you'll slowly figure out the why's of your success.

I mean no disrespect to you, Chris, as you have proven you are one hell of a trophy angler and your big fish skills are well beyond mine. I ask this rhetorical question only to make a point about the average angler. Hypothetically, do you think you can stick 14 - 19 lb'ers on a regular basis in a 50,000 acre lake without electronics and without expert knowledge of that lake? I would think you would be very inconsistent under those circumstances. Granted, you could make a number of trips to learn the lake and talk to other anglers to gain knowledge and maybe then you might become consistent. In my experience, it takes a great deal of time and effort to learn a really large lake and electronics allow us to decrease this time by quite a bit. Missouri has Lake of the Ozarks (55,000 acres), Truman Lake (55,000 acres), Table Rock Lake (43,000 acres), Stockton Lake (25,000 acres), Mark Twain Lake (18,000 acres), etc. (And these are nothing compared to some of the huge lakes in other states.) I would not attempt to fish any of these lakes without either electronics, or expert knowledge gained from some source or my own time on the lake. But that's just my opinion.