Fishing Hotspots Maps

[JKarbo214]

Anybody use them? How accurate are they? Have they helped you catch fish? Any feedback would be appreciated. Thanks!

[FD.]

If you are talking about the paper maps, I use them all the time, as a reference. They were produced with input from local guides with good information at that time. The actual spots are not as important as the other information that comes with it. For example.. hot spot # 3 on the map says "during the spring throw a dark worm in and around the buggy whips". Now that spot itself may not produce fish but, those particular buggy whips are in 4' of water and a hard bottom. What did you learn?

Look for buggy whips in 4' of water and throw a dark worm in the spring.

If you will take a few hours and break out the information like the example above, you will have a book on that lake for all the seasons with a game plan to start with every time you go to the lake.

FD

[Long Mike]

I use both the FHS and Navionics mapping software. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. FHS is terrible for locating structure, but good for identifying creek and stream beds. It's also good for navigation. The Navionics maps are great for identifying structure, but the mapping leaves a lot to be desired in shallower water. It's often non-existent and very sporadic. Long story short, I use the maps to put me in a general area and then use my electronics to locate the good stuff. Then I mark a way-point on the maps.

[RoLo]

I use both the FHS and Navionics mapping software. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. FHS is terrible for locating structure, but good for identifying creek and stream beds. It's also good for navigation. The Navionics maps are great for identifying structure, but the mapping leaves a lot to be desired in shallower water. It's often non-existent and very sporadic. Long story short, I use the maps to put me in a general area and then use my electronics to locate the good stuff. Then I mark a way-point on the maps.

I concur

On one hand, I much prefer Garmin hardware to Lowrance hardware (I own both and they're like night and day).

On the other hand, since the last couple of software upgrades, I much prefer Navionics software

to Garmin software. To get the best of both worlds, I use Navionics cartography to establish my waypoints,

then enter the coordinates into my Garmin unit, which is totally PC interactive.

To keep an uncluttered slate and facilitate waypoint recall, I always delete everything in the Garmin unit,

then load only the waypoints for the lake de jour (the whole process takes about 60 seconds).

Roger

[FD.]

I concur

I much prefer Garmin hardware to Lowrance hardware (like night and day). On the other hand,

since the last couple of software upgrades, I much prefer Navionics software to Garmin software.

To get the best of both worlds, I use Navionics cartography to establish my waypoints,

then enter the coordinates into my Garmin unit, which is totally PC interactive.

To keep an uncluttered slate and to facilitate waypoint recall, I always delete everything in the Garmin unit,

then load only the waypoints for the lake de jour (the whole process takes less than 60 seconds).

Roger

Thanks to your instruction Roger, I do the same thing.

[RoLo]

Thanks to your instruction Roger, I do the same thing.

That's great to hear, Lee

I considered listing the differences between the two units, but that would be a major project.

Roger

[3dees]

I have used them a lot before the mapping software, and still like to use them at home before I head to a lake. I have found many "hot spots" not on the map, but thats ok. the marked spots are pounded by everyone else. I use a waterproof marker to write info on the maps. looks like a mess but it has more info than any mapping software.