"jasonvkop" said:
I still believe there are feeding windows in musky fishing because I have had numerous days where I will be seeing tons of fish throughout the day but none of them will hit. Then in a thirty minute to an hour period the fish will start hitting instead of following.
Were they initially following when they weren’t aggressive from sanctuary areas but then migrated to shallow areas where they were now active and feeding? If a change in light level caused the migration more fish should now be shallow and therefore you would be more likely to contact an aggressive fish.
"jasonvkop" said:
Talk about your feeding windows!! lol
From Muskyhunter.com – "We fished from 9 a.m. until 8:15 p.m. without catching a fish that day, but then caught seven from 8:15 to 9:45."
Typical low light migration… well maybe not typical with 7 fish but still a migration triggered by low light.
"robhj" said:
I agree. Saric also mentioned in his MH article that he caught 37% (90 fish) of his 50 inchers around MR/MS and this was significant given the fact that it may represent only an hour each fishing day.
Keep in mind that MR/MS usually corresponds to sunrise/sunset so we’re back to changing light levels causing fish to move to more accessible areas.
That said I have seen some evidence of other lunar influences but not enough that it trumps changing daily light changes or weather/water changes.
———————-
So…
Is this new found terminology, “feeding window”, just putting a different name on what Buck called a “migration”?
Knowing Buck’s teachings are we better off because we should be able to capitalize on daily migrations and not be reliant on “feeding windows”? Wouldn’t that make us consistent in our fishing?
"Will Schultz" said:
[quote="jasonvkop"]I still believe there are feeding windows in musky fishing because I have had numerous days where I will be seeing tons of fish throughout the day but none of them will hit. Then in a thirty minute to an hour period the fish will start hitting instead of following.
Were they initially following when they weren’t aggressive from sanctuary areas but then migrated to shallow areas where they were now active and feeding? If a change in light level caused the migration more fish should now be shallow and therefore you would be more likely to contact an aggressive fish.
Not really sure. I was fishing the same areas the entire day but only got them to strike during that sunset period. Was throwing a dawg/superD the enitre time because the other people in the boat were throwing different things (cranks, jerks, suzy) and were not having near as many fish looking at their baits. Probably was just one of those days at murray where 30+ fish show themselves but arent really in the mood to eat; curious but not inerested.
"Will Schultz" said:
Knowing Buck’s teachings are we better off because we should be able to capitalize on daily migrations and not be reliant on “feeding windows”? Wouldn’t that make us consistent in our fishing?
We should be better off and it should make us more consistent but that doesn't mean it does. I think most of us still have trouble finding these migration routes and knowing when the fish are moving on them. We might know the theory of Buck's teachings but putting them to practice is another thing all together.
I dont know if anyone had read or heard about this article in a past musky hunter, but i was reading it and it was all about open water musky fishing. This guide had been guiding for over 30 years and now almost exclusively fishes open water and had dramatically increased the amount of fish in his boat every year. I know it depends on the lakes etc.. based on structure and everything else, but I found it interesting with all the talk of so many different ways to fish for muskies throughout the day.
Another recent article i was reading talked about locating fish and how if many of them are showing themselves, the author talked about so many different presentations that were used in triggering fish that wouldnt eat earlier when located.. Although this does with spending a lot of time and really working over an area to find something to trigger a strike.
"swanezy" said:
I dont know if anyone had read or heard about this article in a past musky hunter, but i was reading it and it was all about open water musky fishing. This guide had been guiding for over 30 years and now almost exclusively fishes open water and had dramatically increased the amount of fish in his boat every year. I know it depends on the lakes etc.. based on structure and everything else, but I found it interesting with all the talk of so many different ways to fish for muskies throughout the day.
Ahhhh! Sounds like Tom Gelb. I don't think it's wise to compare Tom's way of fishing with Buck's theories. They are going to completely contradict eachother.
Are you sure it says he INCREASED the number of fish in his boat? I thought he said his numbers decreased, but when he does catch one… holy ****! Didn't he catch 2 40-50 lbers in 2 years? Unfortunately one died…
"swanezy" said:
I dont know if anyone had read or heard about this article in a past musky hunter, but i was reading it and it was all about open water musky fishing.
Must be Paul… he knows suspendos. I'm certain he would tell you that even with suspendos 90% of the fish are in 10% of the water.
"swanezy" said:
Another recent article i was reading talked about locating fish and how if many of them are showing themselves, the author talked about so many different presentations that were used in triggering fish that wouldnt eat earlier when located..
Depth and speed control.
It's all in Buck's book! I think it is so funny that it takes "pro's" years to figure out the stuff that they could have learned by reading Buck's book before ever casting a lure…
The MH article that Saric wrote seems to contradict the importance of daily light/weather changes as keys to increased fish movement since he stated most of his 50" fish were caught between 12-5 & on sunny days. I guess if he was on the right structure and finding the sanctuaries and triggering fish to bite he would be increasing his chances of getting bit instead of waiting for these daily migtrations. He didn't list all the variables associated with his catches in this article so it is but it was a very interesting read. Although he did address the type of lures associated with his catches, it would have been great to see what depth he was fishing.
"Will Schultz" said:
I should probably get my hands on these articles to be able to comment and relate them to spoonplugging. Funny… I assumed that if MHM was going to print a suspended fish article it would be from Paul Klein.
Just read a nice suspending muskies article by him from fishinfo.com. Really liked how he gave different strategies based on the forage of the lake.
"Jim tenHaaf" said:
Hope this isn't too far off topic, but we all know that wind can play a key role in triggering muskies. Could this be because of the waves caused by the wind, thus making light reflect differently off the waters' surface? So ultimately, light is again the factor?
The "light" bulb just went on didn't it? I don't think triggering would be the right term though. Causing fish to become active or causing them to migrate would be more appropriate.
Wind has two factors though, wave action creates low light but wind can also create feeding opportunities when creating current.
"swanezy" said:
im not sure who wrote the article, ill check it and see who it was and exactly what he said about putting fish in his boat etc..
If we are talking about the same article, I skimmed it again last night. It is Tom Gelb and I think the article is "Big Fish Zone". He says he used to spend all his time in the shallows, and thought that suspended fish were a fluke. Then he really started hitting them harder in the 80's (?), and spending 50% of his time over deeper water. Now, he spends 95% of his time over deep water looking for the suspending fish. But his skunk factor went way up. He said his average is one fish for every 5 times he's out. But when he gets one, it's that fish of a lifetime for the average muskie angler.
"Will Schultz" said:
Wind has two factors though, wave action creates low light but wind can also create feeding opportunities when creating current.
Don't forget the 3rd factor— Making it a bi**h for boat control when you're trying to throw a bucktail into that little nook in the weedbed!!! [smilie=biggrin.gif]
Ok, I've read the Saric article on the 143 50's that were caught by him and his clients/friends. I don't like how he manipulated the data to push readers toward specific conclusions. What he never mentions are the hours on the water specific to each weather, moon, wind or other period. If most of his fishing was spent between 12-5 on sunny days then of course most of the big fish would be caught on those days. If he avoided coldfront/East wind days then of course the catch numbers would be low. I'm also dissapointed that he excludes moon transit… likely because he doesn't want to contradict the Bucher tables.
W/o hours related to each period the information isn't very helpful.
I still need to read the Gelb article but after reading Saric's I'm not that excited…
52
35