Weather and water color: How can they be used to help you catch more fish?
More than any factor weather seems to be used as a scapegoat for poor fishing. Could you make your fishing better/more predictable based on weather by choosing a particular color water?
After reading this section what is it really about weather that can make fish movements nearly nil – Warm weather? Cold weather? Rising or falling water temps?
Of course as with all sections… What or how will this change the way you fish?
Well….Buck seems to be saying that fish in clearer waters will hold deeper and recover from cold fronts slower than fish in stained or dirty water. He also believes that they move less distance when they migrate than their brothers and sisters in dirty water. I'd fish stained water given a choice but I also feel like putrid, muddy, lakes like Ball Lake Indiana are too muddy.
I'd say Buck feels that cold fronts have the most negative effects. He relates this far more to changes in light conditions than the water temp. Buck's definition of a front is related to a passing storm front followed by clear skies, not just a drop in temp. The fish go deep after a cold front passes and stay inactive for a few days.
One of the changes I plan for this year is changing my tactics when I'm forced to fish a cold front. (I hate it when people force me to fish 😀 ) I'll be using more plastics, over deep structure along with a slower retrieve.
So… light penetration is primary with regard to water color and weather.
Less light = more movements
Less light = shallower movement
Less light = sustained movement
With this information could sanctuary depth be relatively shallow, lets say 20'?
Could structure with what we might not normally consider a "deep water sanctuary" still be good structure?
Could santuary depth be 20 feet and a scatter point be in 4 feet of water if light penetration due to water color/weather allowed?
In a dark water system, like say Thornapple, the deep water sanctuary could in fact only be 20 feet deep or even less. This could also explain why on a clear sky, hot, sunny day in July, muskymagnet was able to boat a 4-footer when all the shallower spots we fished didn't produce anything.
Spots that we might consider good structure that we cast to like the weededge and shallow areas, may be good for short periods of time during a daily movement, but on the "cold fronts" and post-frontal conditions, we might be better served setting our boat position on these spots and casting out to the deep water sanctuary and parallel to the weedlines on the deep edge in a fan cast pattern. This would put the lure, if fished at the proper depth, in the strike zone more often. But on the darker days or darker waters, the fish are likely and maybe more often past the scatter point and onto the spots that we consider structure.
So truly according to Buck Perry, the more light penetration, the longer the fish will remain in their sanctuary or possibly deeper. Also fish deeper in clear water and shallower in dark water and don't worry about temperature because fish are cold blooded anyway and all the temp change does is change their metabolism to some level, higher when warmer temps rise. A front should be measured by the amount of light, so fish classic spots during the pre-frontal times when the clouds are out and it is overcast and about to storm or during the storm, and look to deeper water during and just after the fronts which can be defined as days with the highest light penetration or go to a lake with stained/dark water to help offset the light penetration so you don't have to fish quite as deep.
Seems like you guys are quoting what buck recommends pretty accurately, and it makes sence to me….
However, I remember well a situation a couple seasons ago that every friggen weekend I fished in August was on the heels of a cold front/high pressure coming through.
I was fishing near current, breaks near deeper water, deeper water, and generally throwing stuff that ran deeper, slower, plastic, etc. Three Saturdays in a row with similar post front conditions.
My head, and I believe Buck's, said I was in the right place and doing the right things. However, 24 hours on the water produced one small fish…
I got frustrated and asked a more experienced muskie fisherman what I should be doing different and he said; "did you work the shallow thick weeds up on the flats?”
WTF, was my response… Of course I didn't… Why would I???
So why would you?
Why do muskies go to the thick weeds in shallow water on a bright sunny day? Is this an exception to the normal behavior of staying deep in the sanctuary?
Maybe they went shallower and found more shade in the weeds, I don't know but there does seem like there have been times when this stuff seems contradictory.
It also brings up the question of why then in the fall does it seem like on an overcast, really cold day, the best action is when the sun peeks through? Is it that an environmental change that prompts a movement from the fish or just a coincidence? Or are they doing something that is a trait more specific to muskies in general?
"Chasin50" said:
WTF, was my response… Of course I didn't… Why would I???
So why would you?
Why do muskies go to the thick weeds in shallow water on a bright sunny day? Is this an exception to the normal behavior of staying deep in the sanctuary?
Chad, you know that I just want to respond to this with questions, right?
So…
Why wouldn't you?
The fish are – deep, shallow or in between – right?
To completely ignore the shallow areas is a great example of thinking we know where the fish "should be" and not covering water correctly. Bad conditions require you to identify the BEST structure in the area and fish it completely. This is the primary reason I always wish for the worst possible conditions for a tournament. If you can read the structure, identify the santuary, migration route and scatter point you will find fish.
So basically find the sanctuary, migration route and scatter point and check all these areas and once you can locate the fish, you might find a pattern to locate fish on your other spots?
So it sounds like the real idea then is to make sure you don't neglect any part of this, but thoroughly fish the spots you identify that relate to the home sanctuary that will hold fish and check each break from there to the shore.
Is it time to discuss control, lure action and presentation yet?
This specific situation is one that has confused me the most as it relates to “Bucks word”.
Let me preface by saying a few things. This “tough stretch” I had a couple years ago happened to fall right after I had read Buck’s book for the first time. I had “the deep is the home of the fish” playing through my head. I didn’t totally ignore the shallow weeds, but I definitely favored trying to find/contact the deep sanctuary and the initial contact points vs. working shallow. It seems to me as though with all of that time spent working deeper, I would have found fish even if by chance or dumb luck.
If I remember right, Buck does recommend always checking the shallows near good structure first, then the good structure and contact points as you move deeper. In these three days specifically, I did not start shallow. I pretty much went to the contact points. I think I was fishing “good” areas that had produced on other occasions.
I thought given the high pressure, bright sun, cooler temps, that the fish should be deep. It just didn’t make sense for me to dedicate a whole lot of time to the shallows. It went against the basic principles.
In this situation, I could see that there may be a small percentage of the fish in the weeds in the shallows, but not the majority. According to Bucks philosophy, 8 out of 10 should have been in the deep sanctuary… Perhaps they were, and I just simply couldn’t effectively get a lure in front of them the way I was fishing??? I did not try to get something 15-35 feet down. May have been a good time for the Bondy bait…
I can see where some of “the book” might seem to contradict things you hear, read and maybe even experience on the water. However, you must remember that he is specifically addressing bass and notes many times how other fish might be a little different.
Buck:
Spoonplugging includes knowledge of fish, its habits, and its reactions to stimuli. It also involves presentation of lures in the correct manner. By controlling our lures to take advantage of the knowledge of fish habits, we will locate the fish and make them strike.
The process of applying Buck's teachings to all fish is that you can't neglect "knowing" about the fish itself. This is where you’ll need to interpret what you’ve learned into formulating your “own” ideas/game plan without ignoring what you’ve learned by reading “the book”. Muskies, unlike bass, do not exhibit a single type of preferred feeding behavior. As I see it, bass are hunters and though they will use ambush type situations I wouldn’t consider them an ambush predator.
This book is the single best reference for making someone a good angler, in my opinion. However, you still need to do the work and apply the knowledge – there are no shortcuts.
"Chasin50" said:
I didn’t totally ignore the shallow weeds, but I definitely favored trying to find/contact the deep sanctuary and the initial contact points vs. working shallow. It seems to me as though with all of that time spent working deeper, I would have found fish even if by chance or dumb luck.
What is it, specifically, about these fish in deep water that would even make Buck want to ignore them in a coldfront situation?
"Will Schultz" said:
I can see where some of “the book” might seem to contradict things you hear, read and maybe even experience on the water. However, you must remember that he is specifically addressing bass and notes many times how other fish might be a little different.
Buck:
Spoonplugging includes knowledge of fish, its habits, and its reactions to stimuli. It also involves presentation of lures in the correct manner. By controlling our lures to take advantage of the knowledge of fish habits, we will locate the fish and make them strike.The process of applying Buck's teachings to all fish is that you can't neglect "knowing" about the fish itself. This is where you’ll need to interpret what you’ve learned into formulating your “own” ideas/game plan without ignoring what you’ve learned by reading “the book”. Muskies, unlike bass, do not exhibit a single type of preferred feeding behavior. As I see it, bass are hunters and though they will use ambush type situations I wouldn’t consider them an ambush predator.
This book is the single best reference for making someone a good angler, in my opinion. However, you still need to do the work and apply the knowledge – there are no shortcuts.
I hear ya… So lets talk about this stupid fish… Why would a muskie be in 3' of water on a flat on a bright sunny day in clear water the day after a cold front?
"MuskyTom" said:
Is it because they would have a lower metabolism in the colder water and eat less often and move less? Like who deer will sometimes only make a major movement once in the real cold weather, where in the warmer weather, they usually have at least two major movements from sanctuary to feeding ground.
My thinking is, the increased light penetration should drive the muskie to the deep water sanctuary, which is also more stable and should not have been affected as far as temperature. So the fishes metaboliism should not change.
I don't think i know the answer to Will's question… Is it because the muskie would be most impacted by the energy(light) that follows a cold front, and it would seek the deepest, most stable water in the area? I.E., not able to present a lure effectively at the depth it resides?
Back to the beginning…
Make sure when we're talking cold front that we're not talking about temperature change. We're also not just talking about a sunny day in the middle of summer but one of those "not a cloud" days.
The sanctuary fish that move to deep water under cold front conditions are going to act like fish during the cold water period – right?
Why are they going to deep water? If they are going deep to escape the high light conditions, could they also utilize a shallow water low light situation?
It is important to remember that fish can't read… they haven't read this book. The information contained will make you a better angler but you might have to think outside the pages once in a while.
"Will Schultz" said:
What is it, specifically, about these fish in deep water that would even make Buck want to ignore them in a coldfront situation?
So, even buck wouldn't want to go after ol'toothy, because it will be hunkered down in a low light sanctuary, shallow, or deep.
Are there other reasons?
2007 Bassmaster Classic last weekend…
Day 2 – KVD comes from down in the pack by having a great day powerfishing and puts himself in the lead.
Day 3 – With the hope that Day 3 will be cloudy again KVD goes to his spot and catches an average bag of fish. It wasn't the low light situation he hoped for, he didn't adapt and lost the Classic. How did the two anglers that passed him catch bigger bags? One caught his fish deep and the other caught his "big fish" shallow flippin a grass mat.
Hmmm……….
"Chasin50" said:
[quote="Will Schultz"]
What is it, specifically, about these fish in deep water that would even make Buck want to ignore them in a coldfront situation?
So, even buck wouldn't want to go after ol'toothy, because it will be hunkered down in a low light sanctuary, shallow, or deep.
Are there other reasons?
Doesn't matter what kind of fish when they go beyond (deeper) than their sanctuary during a cold front they're inactive, plus it is nearly impossible to fish them effectively. Fish that seek a shallow low light situation might also be inactive but you can fish them more effectively.
52
33