Structure -in a functional sense. 2024

Paul Roberts reply :

I had a neat (and not uncommon) thing happen yesterday on one of my ponds. It was during a front (great overcast and rain) and the bass were actively chasing bluegills in the shallows.

I was fishing around a small island (not sunken), swimming a swimming tail worm all around the island. Interestingly, all mature bass were found at the island's corners. The straight shorelines in between gave up only dinks (as did everywhere else). Essentially these corners were all like little points shallow (2 feet) with drops on the sides.

Now the standard idea of structure is that bass "need" something to relate to like signposts for them to navigate by. But, telemetry studies have shown bass can navigate over open water, either by habit, when relating to pelagic prey, or after being released at tournament release sites. Bass do "need" structure in that structure, like cover, can provide security. But beyond this I think bass relate to structure, in large part, because it: produces/attracts food, and the topography of these areas provide a hunting advantage for bass.

The other spot I found mature bass at (not at the island) was the base of a wide shallow flat attached to shore (a point I suppose but wide and not at all "pointed" in shape -suffice to call it a flat). Big bass were aggressively chasing 'gills there. I could see the carnage from across the pond! What this spot offered was the weedy flat for production of food (yesterday it was damselflies emerging), and adequate depth and hard substrate at shoreline that offered breaks in the cover for the bass to operate in.

The hot-spots, those breaks on breaks, are precise locations where bass gain a special advantage over prey, and are more apt to commit to a lure mature bass aren't the stupid ones, being energetically reserved. Prey are not easy to catch; It's a real chess game out there. Structure makes the game easier, or even possible, for the bass.

From CJ:

Quote
one of my favorite structures is a "horseshoe" or a indentation in a ridge or ledge. Bass love to use this structure as an ambush spot for baitfish, especially in current.

BINGO!

Thoughts? Can you dissect your favorite spots in this light?

kms399 reply :

I have a spot where there is a very straight edge of lilly pads that drops off to 10 feet deep and is probably 80 yards long, at one end of the pad field the bottom switches and goes to hydrilla? or something similar and comes out farther into the lake creating a kind of L shape with a weed/bottom switch and a 10 foot hole in the corner, most of the bigger fish I have caught on this lake came from that corner, the whole lilly pad edge will produce but that little corner is almost always good for a nice fish or two.

Paul Roberts reply :

Big fish spots are often described as "having everything a bass needs in a small area". I think what this means in a functional sense is an area with lots of food that bass can catch prey off of and grow fat in.

All four of those island corners mentioned above gives up large bass every year -in fact every trip. This year I've caught the same large bass three times this year, over two months, in the exact same spot, by a small weed clump. She's old, and getting thinner every time I see her. Those 'gills are getting hard to catch I think. This may be the last year I see her.

What you are describing sounds like what anglers often look for as a "transitional area" -often a change in bottom make-up. Now, why would such an area hold bass? Because they need to be near some change? I don't think so. I think such a transition not only offers a diversity of substrate for food production but more importantly from we anglers perspective is that it offers a complexity of cover and depth, and breaks in that cover and depth, that together allow bass to surprise, corral, and capture prey.

Here's another spot I know, and it's subtle: A pond I fish has a sloping shoreline, starting at just inches deep and progressing out into 5 feet of water. But one stretch about 40 yards long has sedge and grass hummocks, and the water is about 18" deep right at the shore. Bass hunt here because they can corral 'gills against the bank. On the sloping shorelines, the gills can scoot too shallow for the bass to get in to. Young bass can be seen all along these sloping shorelines, in stand-offs with the 'gills. I've even seen these young bass almost strand themselves trying to get at the 'gills. And I've seen 'gills laying on their sides in an inch of water to keep out of reach. I've actually seen this many times in many ponds. Young bass are all over the place (after good hatch years) and only so many figure it out. Not that they are smarter, just that they were able to make use of good structural elements. Such areas hold mature bass year in and year out because they support bass into maturity.

This particular spot is good all summer (until it gets too hot) -the productive lures vary with the conditions and density of vegetation -often just pieces blown in by wind: worms, jigs, frogs, topwaters, etc... But, regardless, the bass are there because they can make a killing there.

paul. reply :

very good stuff paul. i really like the way you think and i've learned some new words and enriched my vocabulary by reading your posts. ;D ;D ;D i think when it comes to bassin', you really know your stuff.

Quote
Big fish spots are often described as "having everything a bass needs in a small area". I think what this means in a functional sense is an area with lots of food that bass can catch prey off of and grow fat in.

i agree with that totally, but i think there may be more to it than just the food factor. for what it's worth, here's my take on structure and key bassin' areas. many folks key on certain cover or structural elements in terms of being prime areas. this works and certainly there is nothing wrong with this approach. but i have always viewed the best "big fish areas" in a broader sense. i think at a minimum, all animals have 3 basic needs - food, reproduction, and security. bass are no exception. when you find an area where all 3 of these needs can be met within close proximity of each other, in my opinion you've found a bass goldmine. in the lake i fish the most as well as other lakes i have fished, bigger bass can be caught at a variety of locations depending on seasonal factors. yet there are a precious few select areas (roughly within 50 to 75 yards square) where big fish are consistently caught regardless of seasonal factors. why? because within these small areas, the fish can meet all their needs so they tend not to stray too far away. i view these areas almost like a "bass house" for lack of a better way of putting it. there is a bedroom (a cove or other good spawning area), a kitchen (a feeding area, usually a flat or a point they can move up on) and a living room (deeper water sanctuary, preferably with a structural element to it ). i think fishing areas like this and finding the "sweet spots" within them really increases an angler's odds of catching a giant fish.

i've heard all my life there are 3 factors to consider in evaluating real estate value - location, location, and location. obviously it's the same with bassin' real estate. find a good lookin' hump or ledge? great. is it close to a grassy or stumpy flat? even better. is there a point nearby? better still. you get the picture. the more key features that are crammed into an area, the better it is in my book. sometimes it's not so much about the structure itself, as much as what the structure is close to. some may disagree, but that's my $.02.

Low_Budget_Hooker reply :

Quote
Big fish spots are often described as "having everything a bass needs in a small area". I think what this means in a functional sense is an area with lots of food that bass can catch prey off of and grow fat in.

.....while expending as little energy as possible to obtain said fuel.

That's what makes these places the "hot spot", often the current will deliver the food to the fish. (if he/she owns that real estate)

Paul Roberts reply :

Thanks for the kind words, Paul.

I agree that there is more to a bass' life than just the food, and it's great if you can find it all crammed into a certain area. And there is more to structure than what I'm focusing on here, such as general food production, security (real or remembered), and travel routes to spawning or wintering areas, are part of a bass' life. I guess what you're suggesting is that having all those things close together in a small area is more apt to produce, or hold, a really big bass. That may be, I'll have to take your word for it as I'm not a trophy bass chaser. I'm focused on mature bass. In my neck of the woods that's mostly bass between 15 and 20 inches.

I think that one thing that allows a bass to reach maturity in the first place is access to food. I guess my thoughts were more on the aspects of structure (an all inclusive lay of the land), particular locations, that offer a hunting advantage.

What prompted this thread was CJ's comment in Catt's structure thread, and my fishing the other day in which I found mature bass concentrated on a few very specific locations. The structure could have been considered the island, I guess, but actually there are bass all over this pond as it is shallow and produces food over the majority of it. What was key to locating and catching these bass was the little clean points at the island corners and at the base of a flat that I believe gave the bass a hunting advantage over other nearby areas. Exactly what the advantage was at the little points I'm not entirely sure. The base of the flat I believe I understand, as described. On my next trip I'm going to spend some time wading around that island hopefully getting a better idea of what the draw, or advantage, was.

Here's my theory:

When engaged in fishing, we are trying to get bass to attempt to capture our lure. I believe there are certain places to put a lure that puts it in greater danger of being attacked and that these areas are inherent in the lay of the land and cover. I've seen this many many times over the years with many species.

So, while structure may attract bass, for all the above mentioned reasons, it's certain key elements that bass use to hunt off of. These may be static, or as in most things in nature, their utility to bass varies with conditions (light, current, vegetation, water levels, etc...). They can also occur as happenstance, bass simply watching for an opportunity that could appear by happenstance a cruising bluegill that makes a wrong turn. (It's also why bass hunt together in loose groups, flushing prey using one another as loosely coordinated allies.) But, if the locations bass hunt on are consistently advantageous, then I believe they will attract bass regularly, and offer a better than average ability to incite strikes. Heck, those island corners were VERY different in terms of bass use than the straight shoreline areas of those islands. This, btw, is how stream trout feed, and this is well documented. They sample foraging sites within a stream pool by rotating through the possible sites (dictated by current) and stay put when capture rate (drifting insects) is acceptable. There's no reason to believe bass can't figure out something similar in the course of their lives.

Low Budget hits a really good, related point that energetics (energy budgeting) plays a key role here in when and where a bass decides to make an attempt at capturing prey. In fact it explains, in part (there's other cool stuff too -another post someday), why such locations mentioned are needed.

A while back someone posted about the similarity between bass and cats. Sounds a little odd, maybe, but I've always noticed the similarity, and fish behavioral ecologists would probably agree too. You couldn't pick a better mammal to compare a bass (or other predatory fish) with. Cats (mature ones that is) are very energy conscious, being very stingy with there energy. Lions sleep or rest for 20 hours a day, hunt and eat for 4. All wild cats are this way to a large degree, including domestic cats. Pull a string for a kitten and it'll attack til it drops to sleep. But a mature cat is apt to act ticked off if you keep goading them. It's simply part of their nature as top level predators; They learn when to strike, or starve in the process.

Many fish are known to be stingy with energy around feeding. There is a large body of research pertaining to Optimal Foraging Theory how fish regulate energy in/energy out in their feeding. The two species most studied in this are bluegills and trout (introduced above). But bass have similar issues.

Now fish don't sleep for 20 hours a day. But they do learn when it's worth burning energy to attack. I've seen this, as an angler, with many species of fish and with bass too. Thus, my thinking on where and when bass have an advantage on prey. It's one reason, I believe, that lures are so often NOT hit. Bass in open water away from cover are apt to follow lures, only to discover something wrong with them. But place that lure in a vulnerable position, from the bass' perspective, and she's much more apt to make the attempt. Further, such locations obscure the details of the lure/presentation, making it more apt to fool a bass into making the mistake of trying to eat that piece of wood or plastic.

I call these locations ambush points and I'm not the only one who uses this term. Most probably I picked it up somewhere long ago, and although bass are technically not ambush predators (something Ralph Mann's gets all bristly about), it's a loosely apt description. Hey, if anyone can come up with a better term I'd love to have it, if anything to assuage Ralph, LOL.

Energy budgets explain, in large part, why older larger bass are tougher to catch than younger ones, and why lure size can matter to large bass. It also helps explain why ambush points are real places and circumstances. As angler's, we should recognize what is happening, and look for it.

That's my assertion anyway. Am I all wet? Do I think too much?? LOL Feedback?

Low_Budget_Hooker reply :

Quote
I call these locations ambush points and I'm not the only one who uses this term. Most probably I picked it up somewhere long ago, and although bass are technically not ambush predators (something Ralph Mann's gets all bristly about), it's a loosely apt description. Hey, if anyone can come up with a better term I'd love to have it, if anything to assuage Ralph, LOL.

Gotchya covered.......Opportunistic zones

Quote

Energy budgets explain, in large part, why older larger bass are tougher to catch than younger ones, and why lure size can matter to large bass. It also helps explain why ambush points are real places and circumstances.

Often proven in salt water where "tidal level & strength" are added variables in basically the same equation.

EX. The sand bar in the video below is not noticeable at high tide,...just looks like 3 piles of rocks in a triangle shape. But look at it NOW during outgoing tide.

The bar doesn't hold fish during the slack period,..it needs current.

Once it gets rolling, there are 5 or 6 "sweet spots" either in back eddies, behind the larger submerged rocks, etc. Very fundamental and great to be able to pattern.

Catt reply :

Once we have located prime structure by what ever name one must locate that portion of the said structure that holds bigger bass. In my post I have yet to add my favorite structure which is cheek intersections because you have humps, ridges, channels, flats all in a confined area.

While many people do not agree that bass are ambush predators they are in fact opportunistic predators and given an opportunity by ambush they will take it.

Paul Roberts reply :

Quote
Opportunistic zones

I like that. Or Opportunity zones.

Neat clip LBH. I did a fair amount of fly-fishing for stripers, and got to see tides in action. Neat because they are more intense than current changes in reservoirs, lakes and even streams most of the time. It pays to be multi-species and multi-water.

Quote
Once we have located prime structure by what ever name one must locate that portion of the said structure that holds bigger bass.

Yes, it would be interesting to know just how they are relating to such (deeper) sweet spots, ambush points, or opportunity zones, or...

Have you guys read or heard about John Hope's "funnel spots"? Sounds like they're right up the alley of this discussion.

Red reply :

this is kinda hard since i am bank fishing, but i will tell you about my favorite spot the best i can from fishing it hard from the bank.

to the left along the bank there is two big dead tree trunks in about 2-4 foot of water. the dead trees are probably about 15-20 feet from the shoreline. from those trees to shore it is shallow, like i said, maybe 2-4 feet. once you get to that second dead tree it drops to around 10-12 feet, then it stays around that all the way around to the right hand side shoreline. the bottom of the whole area is covered with "stuff"...rocks, wood, grass and just general crap. my best sized fish have come when i cast about 10-15 feet to the right of that second dead tree, and drag my jig/t-rig/crank/spinnerbait slowly up that drop off. i can usually score a dink if i throw between the dead trees and the shoreline or if i throw to the right hand side. but all my fish in this spot over 2lbs have come from dragging jig/worm up that drop off.

this pic shows the two dead trees behind me

my other favorite spot for summertime, bright sun, hot, muggy is another tank which has a concrete retaining wall running around it. walk along that wall and pitch a jig right on the wall and can usually nail one there. but below the surface along this wall is another wall, kinda forming a step. this step ends every so often, pitch to the very end of this underwater step is where the biggest fish in that tank have come from. one particular spot where the underwater step ends, i have pulled a 2+ lber out of that very same spot three trips in a row.

that is the best i can do without a graph!!

Cliff

Paul Roberts reply :

Cliff, really great observations, and fishing. I'll bet everyone has spots like these. If they don't, then they are probably are one of the confused newbs. Keep lookin', Keep castin'!

Your second spot hits my idea of an ambush point (opportunity zone?) very well. The first likely does, somewhere, but without knowing particulars of the structure it would be a guess. Here's my guess, and it fits nicely into another similar ambush point (triggering point?):

I'm often a bank angler too. The shoreline, or more accurately, the lip of the shoreline (or, in your case, the drop-off) often draws a strike from following fish, because it looks like the lure is going to escape into the shallows, and the bass has to react or lose that meal. This happens a lot. It also happens at the water surface.

How many times have you seen or heard of someone say it took right at my feet! Or, ...right at the boat! There is often an ambush point under your rod tip, and it follows you around LOL. Recognize it, and be ready! A famous fly-fishing technique called the Leisenring Lift (after the late Jim Leisenring) is centered around this very thing.

Also, how many times have you heard a really good structure technician say, "I have to line up on that spot perfectly, to maximize my catch." This is likely because some angles make best use of "ambush points" while others miss 'em. Dave Fritz and Brian Waldman come to mind.

Team9nine reply :

Quote

Many fish are known to be stingy with energy around feeding. There is a large body of research pertaining to Optimal Foraging Theory how fish regulate energy in/energy out in their feeding. The two species most studied in this are bluegills and trout (introduced above). But bass have similar issues.

Feedback?

Oh, the tangent I could go off on ;D 8-) : 8-) ;DOptimal Foraging Theory (OFT) - Say no more!

Big Bass Aren't Lazy, They're Efficient

That leads us into our couch potato theory on bass and one of the biggest misconceptions that you'll frequently read. What the authors are really referring to in all this talk is what scientists call "Optimal Foraging Theory" or OFT. Unfortunately, most bass anglers and writers screw it all up. OFT does not mean 'eat the biggest thing you can find' and pass on the rest. Nor does it mean sit on your butt and wait for a big meal to swim into your mouth. It is balancing the energy output against the energy gained by consuming something.

A few of the core principles with OFT.

1-As the prey size increases relative to a given predator size, capture success decreases.

2-As prey size increases relative to a given predator size, handling time increases.

3-Finally, as prey size increases relative to predator size, profitability increases up to a point. After reaching an ideal point it decreases with further increase in prey size.

This is what a bass has to deal with in the environment in which it lives. Bigger isn't always better, as much time can be wasted trying to chase down and eat a prey item that is larger than optimal. This is why a big bass angler in California can get away with throwing a 10" trout lure while a big bass angler in Texas can't do so as easily. It doesn't preclude being able to throw giant things, it just states that you might not be as successful. And even California bass have their limit. I've been hanging out over at Rob Belloni's great website Calfishing reading through the forum archives. Tons of great info in there and Rob has a great sense of "down to earth" approaches and keeping things simple. Back on point, even Rob has stated that he keeps and throws a 16" bait at times but has yet to get bit on it. So even California giants have their limits.

As you read more about Optimal Foraging Theory you'll find that things in the big bass world make a whole lot more sense. And the science and research will support it. Another component of OFT states that as forage density increases, diet specialization starts occurring. Bass can afford to be more picky when more food is readily available to them. So a big bass doesn't have to take chances on a big bait when lots of acceptable sized food is available to him. Why try and chase down one giant shiner when you can easily consume 3 mid-sized crawdads with less effort (just an example).

Habitat makes a big difference and OFT can be used to explain feeding preferences among bass. There is a cool study that detailed this behavior with smallmouth bass and crayfish foraging. In this study, when crayfish were located on sand bottoms smallmouth bass ate all the smallest craws first. The larger the crawdad, the longer it took for the bass to eventually eat it because it would exhaust the population of smaller sized craws that were the easiest to consume (less handling time) first. However, on gravel/cobble bottoms, small crayfish were avoided and mid-sized crays were preferentially chosen because it took too long to try and root out and consume smaller craws that could hide and escape predation more easily in the spaces between the rocks. Larger craws couldn't hide as well and subsequently, smallmouth bass would target and eat them first.

OFT also covers "Patch Use." As I stated, a bass isn't lazy but it is efficient. OFT details and explains why some fish are home bodies and some have to roam more. A big bass wants to use as little energy as possible consuming prey. John Hope detailed in his book/studies Tracking Trophies how giant Texas bass would have a very predefined and definite hunting ground where it regularly searched for food. Big bass usually wouldn't cross over into other bass' territory. As long as all it's food and energy requirements can be met, there is no need for a bass to leave an area. Some times this can be a very small area. Other times a fish either eventually has to abandon it's home range area or increase it's search area for food to meet its dietary requirements.

Again, this was also documented well with smallmouth bass, too. The April 1997 issue of In-Fisherman has an article entitled "Homing On Big Smallmouth." It details the tracking research of Dr. Mark Ridgway and Barry Corbett, basically coming to the similar conclusion that smallmouth will stay in an area and hardly move if there is plenty of forage available to them. In less fertile areas, smallmouth have to find several different feeding areas and "make the rounds" as necessary in order to obtain enough suitable forage.

So the next time you read an article about bass and their feeding habits, keep all this information in the back of your mind. And if the author starts talking about Big Macs, sirloin steaks and thinking like a big ole' lazy bass, you better run fast!

-T9

CJ reply :

Lots of great info here.

When it comes to identifying productive structure, it is important to tune into the structure. Learn as much about it in every way. My mapping system puts me close, my sonar explains a lot but, it's my lure that really tells me what is down there. I dissect a spot by zig-zaging on and off it and watching my sonar. I may see baitfish or even what I may believe is bass and some cover. However, it's my lure that tells me what I really want to know.

Brian_Reeves reply :

Usually, when looking at structure (visable or submerged) I try to identify two or more things that would attract bass. Once I really define the structure as best as I can, I begin to work it accordingly. My favorites are ledges, creek channels, and points. The most consistant bigger bass producer for me is main lake points leading sharply into deep water, close to timber, boulders, and grass in mid to late summertime.

Anytime I can find two or three things in an area, I think it's worth fishing. Grass with a composition change, timber with a depth change, rocks on a muddy bottem, etc. Those areas provide cover for bass, forage, current breaks, and depth changes. Structure is the first thing to look for when looking for bass, even if you aren't doing it intentionally.

Paul Roberts reply :

OK, I have a question for you deeper water guys -CJ, Brian, others...

Concerning proper "angles on structure", might the idea of an "ambush point" as I describe above, be at work in some way?

Or are deeper bass simply less spooky (and competitive) and all that's required is getting a lure close?

What's happening down there, surrounding presentation angles?

roadwarrior reply :

There are many aspects to consider,

but the two that standout to me are

ambush points and baitfish attraction.

To the extent that a predator "maintains

position" on a current break, for instance,

the angle at which a bait or lure is presented

comes into play. However, I think the vast

majority of the time "general structure"

attracts predators that are actively hunting.

In these situations, having the bait in "close

proximity" is all that is important.

8-)

Team9nine reply :

Quote

To the extent that a predator "maintains

position" on a current break, for instance,

the angle at which a bait or lure is presented

comes into play. However, I think the vast

majority of the time "general structure"

attracts predators that are actively hunting.

In these situations, having the bait in "close

proximity" is all that is important.

Paul, obviously our "guesses" are all theory based on what and how we catch them, but I think RW's comments above are a good starting point. In a current situation like a river or a TVA type impoundment where they generate water, angles are very important. From a general structure point of view on a non-current lake, then I think you have a few scenarios at play.

One is RW's thought about there to feed and just being in close proximity. That works for groups of feeding bass or bass that are what I would call above baseline as to feeding stimulus or mentality. These are the easiest of the situations. Bass, whether individuals or small packs moving up on top of structure or along edges looking to feed can often be triggered just by getting a bait near them.

But there are a lot of possible specialized scenarios. One is pressure/conditioning. Bass get used to seeing baits worked from the same direction all the time on certain lakes. One in particular near me comes to mind. Throw shallow and work deep only works on the "easy" days. Most times if you throw deep(er) and work up the break, making more contact and creating more disturbance, you'll catch bass going right behind other anglers.

Another is individual bass sitting on individual pieces of cover. A single large stump on the edge of a point as an example. If that fish is neutral or inactive, he is probably sitting in a very specific spot in relation to that stump, facing a certain angle or direction. He may or may not see your bait the first time through. If you're moving along you could easily pass right over with the wrong cast and never know that fish existed. If you know that stump is down there though, you can take your time and slowly move around that stump throwing from different angles and trying to figure out exactly which one will trigger the bite.

That "trigger the bite" deal is the whole key, especially for groups of bass. You really need to play with everything from bait types to angles to retrieve styles trying to figure out how to get a bass to react. So many times if you get one bass to bite, that triggers the group and they all start looking. Their baseline attitude goes up quickly. Then it is a matter of speed and efficiency, because often you'll start pulling those other fish away from the structure/cover as you keep hooking bass. Others actually follow or compete, making short dashes looking for the next meal to target. When I post those pics on my site of doubles (or make mention of that), that is a perfect example of this. One bit, another one moved with and tried to outcompete the other for the same bait - both get hooked 8-) There are probably more down there with them. They're not going to go back down though and sit all perfect in relation to a cover object. At that point they're looking to feed and just getting close as in RW's comment then applies.

The deal for me is always taking the time to thoroughly graph and understand an area the first time I come across it. I want to know where the bottom changes are, where the cover objects are, which side has the sharpest drop, how flat and at what depth is the feeding shelf, etc. Once you have that compete mental picture, you can then not only formulate an initial approach based on how you think is best to fish the location, but you can also visualize alternatives if that first approach doesn't work.

As individuals, bass have certain personalities on any given day based on all the existing weather/water/forage conditions. Some days paralleling the break doesn't get it done, when banging the bottom perpendicular until you fly clear of the break into open water does. SOme days your bait never hits the bottom before it gets intercepted, other days you'll never get bit unless you literally hit the specific "break on the break". That to me is the fun part of deep water fishing.

-T9

Paul Roberts reply :

Thanks Brian. Excellent as usual.

You've hit feeding and competition, and introduced conditioning, activity level, and the vagaries of triggering.

I think ambush points are more important when things aren't easy. Keith Jones mentions that there is no such thing as a reaction bite. That bass' reactions to lures are a calculated feeding response think OFT. Bass are not making rash decisions, but calculated ones but one that results in the bass commiting or not. An ambush point, as I understand it, is centered on triggering a fish to commit, and these CAN be structural in nature. But not always required, especially when things are easy feeding bass in high competition, say.

Quote
Throw shallow and work deep only works on the "easy" days. Most times if you throw deep(er) and work up the break, making more contact and creating more disturbance, you'll catch bass going right behind other anglers.

Hmmmm... I'm wondering if when throwing up the bank the lure isn't, at times, perceived as escaping into the safety of the shallowsas in Cliff's hotspot. As a bank angler, I've been aware that the shallow lip of a drop can be an effective ambush point a time and place not to be asleep at the switch.

Quote
However, I think the vast
majority of the time "general structure"

attracts predators that are actively hunting.

In these situations, having the bait in "close

proximity" is all that is important.

Yes. Feeding bass are the ones we want. They are 90% of the bass we catch. (Sound familiar Brian? LOL). Can we trigger more fish to commit, using ambush points? Not if we can't see them I suppose.

Which brings to mind a day of smallmouth fishing a couple weeks back. Smallies, and some big ones, were cruising just off the shoreline of one of my ponds. Much of the time they stayed just off the weed edge, and well above bottom. Throw these cruisers (huntng they were) a lure so that their paths met in open water and they would shy away. Not surprising lures often look silly in the clear open water that ain't no preyfish. All the bass I caught were taken blind casting at or inside the weed edge, (See my thread Surprise in the Slop in the My Fishing Tournament or Outing section). The two exceptions were one 15 on a flick-shake (at the surface a la Leisenring!) and one other 19 fish in particular that stands out.

She was close to the weed edge, and at a very ragged section at the edge of a stair step depth change. I spotted her and cast beyond, and as my lure approached she spied it, moved closer, then started to turn away (another rejection). But my lure by that time had reached the ragged stair step and I let the jig swim into that step. She immediately changed her attitude, bolted into that little corral, and took the jig confidently. I believe the jig suddenly had moved into a vulnerable and catchable location, one she knew well a place where she knows from experience she can catch prey. Chasing bluegills out in the open, under high visibility conditions, is an exercise in futility. Put one close enough, corralled, and it's dinner.

I thought that was pretty nifty, but realize the frustrating truth. Such catches mostly occur in happenstance, since we just can't control the circumstances. I wonder how many catches such events account for, beyond the reckless competitive feeders?

I've done enough sight fishing to know how many bass see, and bypass, our lures. The lure has to do something special, and I think ambush points, or whatever we should call them, play a role in at least some of our catches.

As to making good use of such things in deep water, I suppose if you can't see the structure and cover, and the fish's response, it would be awfully difficult to tell. I read something not too long ago by Dave Fritz, using this term, but he didn't elaborate. Just what is an ambush point to Dave?

Paul Roberts reply :

From my original post:

Quote
What was key to locating and catching these bass was the little clean points at the island corners and at the base of a flat that I believe gave the bass a hunting advantage over other nearby areas. Exactly what the advantage was at the little points I'm not entirely sure. The base of the flat I believe I understand, as described. On my next trip I'm going to spend some time wading around that island hopefully getting a better idea of what the draw, or advantage, was.

I went back and checked out the little points on the island corners that had attracted aggressive mature bass during that front. Here's a photo of one of them probably the most attractive of the four.

Not much to see is there! And I think that's the draw. It's a clean opening in the cover, with adequate depth at the shore, giving the bass a crack at bluegills and small bass under low visibility conditions.

On the day I took this pic, it was bright and sunny and those little openings were devoid of mature bass. The small bass were happily cruising and chasing dragonflies, damselflies, and tiny bluegills. But the larger bass I believe were holed up in the dense vegetation. I caught and spotted several up to 16 in the cover, but couldn't find anything larger. Tucked down beneath I suppose.

Team9nine reply :

Quote
Keith Jones mentions that there is no such thing as a reaction bite. That bass' reactions to lures are a calculated feeding response think OFT. Bass are not making rash decisions, but calculated ones but one that results in the bass commiting or not.

I've always teetered on the fence on this one until recently. After reading the study I put on my site a few days back, I'm leaning more and more toward the side of believing in being able to trigger a bite - literally. An unconditioned "bite" response 100% of the time is some pretty strong evidence. I could easily imagine a crankbait or some other lure getting zipped by a basses face at just the right angle or pressure to trigger this response. 8-) Has opened my eyes and my thought process a little bit - got me thinking...

Quote
As to making good use of such things in deep water, I suppose if you can't see the structure and cover, and the fish's response, it would be awfully difficult to tell. I read something not too long ago by Dave Fritz, using this term, but he didn't elaborate. Just what is an ambush point to Dave?

Can't really answer this one. I've seen David in seminars and have a lot of his material filed away in my library. If I had to guess based on what I know of him I'd say isolated cover objects like a single stump or rock, etc. are what he is referring to. That said, in cases like this, an "ambush point" is a pretty vague thing and can mean lots of different things depending on the intent and understanding of the user. Not quite as specific as say "cover" and "structure". I try not to over interpret some of the stuff I read, opting instead to put my spin on what I think something means based on my understanding of the subject. May not be right or wrong, but it will at least make sense to me ;D

BTW, nice looking water above...

-T9

Paul Roberts reply :

Brian,

I figured someone would react to the reaction bites comment. I'm on the fence too.

The stimulation of hair cells causing a biting response requires a localized and appropriate stimulation. This isn't likely, very often, in fishing situations. The chances of tickling a bass in the cheek (not "hitting" either) without alarming it first, are pretty slim.

I've been aware of and attempted to use this cheek and jaw tickling on difficult sighted females in spring, and believe it's actually worked on a couple occasions, but it's difficult to do without putting them off. They hate to be touched by the line I suppose anywhere but those haircells LOL. (BTW did you know that carp (an ostariophysid) can hear line in the water? I believe they can -appears to be a 6th sense).

As far as how reaction bites fall into why bass bite, my money is on the circumstances surrounding OFT. Since we humans aren't up against intense selective pressures, I expect we'd be the last to recognize such things.

But, I too am on the fence on how apparent "reaction bites" fit in.

As a trout and steelhead angler I used to consider "reaction strikes" a part of my bag of tricks. I found that I could elicit a strike from a sighted steelhead by swinging a fly directly ahead of its snout. It had to be very close, and make a sharp swing in that small area. It really worked and if you could weasel yourself into proper position you could amaze the crowd gathered around some of these pools.

But, the most interesting experience of this type of thing happened in one of those pay to fish trout pools at a sportsman' show (is that an oxymoron or what!). Anyway, I was young and curious and paid my buck, and was handed a short glass rod with a short length of braided nylon was tied, to which was tied a hook. The bait was small square chunk of black vinyl no kidding.

I burnt my buck watching paniced trout race by my bait. They actually had a whirlpool going. As I was walking out I saw a very little boy not watching his bait and pulling his bait across the water's surface, and I saw a trout take a quick pass at it. I paid another buck!

I let my crude bait sink then accelerated it in front of the throngs of on-coming trout, and one rushed and grabbed it. I dropped the rod and he spit it. I did it again, and again. This time my fish was inadvertently hooked and I was quickly ushered out my fish popped into a bag for me to take lucky me. However, that, I believe, was a reaction bite.

Reaction bite could be one way to explain the effectiveness of burnin' a lipless crankbait -literally retrieving as fast as your reel can go. Bass CAN catch it. But it doesn't work all, or most, of the time. So I do wonder, is that really some deep-rooted physiological response, or a contextual behavior, and still under the constraints of OFT?

The idea that you can throw a bait on top of a bass' head I just don't buy. Every time I've done that, they spook. But I've had many bass hit the moment a lure touched down on a cast but it didn't land on their heads, they saw it in the air and intercepted it at the splashdown. I bet those times are also when burnin' would work: Aggressive, likely even competitive, bass. Not just any bass, at any time, responding to something it just can't help.

It's affected the way I look at fish reactions to water temperature as well. I've noticed that in warmer water often a faster retrieve is required to get a chase. I can understand why a fish might not be willing to chase in cold water, but why would they require speed in warm? It sure appears reactionary. In fact, I once caught a bass on a bare hook once, on a bet -by burning it in hot water -albeit a 9incher. No mature bass is likely to succumb to that.

Anyway, why are we talking about this? Oh yes, ambush points...physical things that affect why bass bite, and energetics are part of the formula.

Quote
I try not to over interpret some of the stuff I read, opting instead to put my spin on what I think something means based on my understanding of the subject. May not be right or wrong, but it will at least make sense to me Grin

I'm OK pushing the envelope -helps me decipher what questions to ask. I'll just continue to bang around inside my little capsule here, and radio in every now and then.

Quote
BTW, nice looking water above...

Yeah, that little tiny piece of it sure can be special.

roadwarrior reply :

Well Paul,

I can attest to the fact that I've caught numerous bass, big and small, by "hitting them on the head". One of my favorite stories was when I first started using a baitcaster, throwing a Senko in thick grass. The moment the bait hit the water the bass struck! I put on a Bill Dance hookset that would stick a gator, deep! The only problem was, I hadn't clicked the reel over. My guide's eyes bugged out as he stared at my big ball of cotton candy. This is the worst backlash I have ever had and required more than a little surgery, a total re-do!

8-)

Paul Roberts reply :

RW, I've heard about anglers doing that, but it's never worked for me -Then again I avoid it at all costs (I'd add the "horror" smiley, but don't see it). (I'm not talking about the backlash thing, although I could be LOL).

Are these sighted fish you've done this with, or just had bass take at splashdown?

roadwarrior reply :

Usually totally unexpected, on splashdown, but on occasion this happens with very shallow fish attacking minnows or bluegill. When they are "working" a spot, sometimes they will smack anything that "gets in their face!"

8-)

Paul Roberts reply :

I see -that makes sense.

I guess the question was: Can non-feeding (neutral/negative) bass be stimulate to strike out of some sort of reflex? I always assumed targeting a "reaction bite" was a tactic used by some when bass aren't biting well. Sort of forcing them to bite.

So, is a burned rattlebait forcing bass to strike against their better judgement? Or is it energetically worthwhile somehow: High competition, fish at peak metabolic efficiency, water temps too high (I'm reachin' now)?

Anyway, no answers expected, just mullin' it over.

HesterIsGod reply :

This year I have been searching more and more for opportunity zones (I like that term). At one of the local ponds I fish there is this one little amazing spot. I call it, my bonanza spot. It is where this tiny little creek runs into the pond. A seawall runs into the creek as it enters and creates an area of slack water that is bass RICH. There is a small brush pile on the other side but it is very shallow and only bluegill can be found within it.

Plenty of very small minnows hold in the creek, especially in the fall, but they never school and are often consumed by bluegill and occasionaly bass. The bluegill are generally safe inside the shallow brush pile, until they decide to feed on the bountiful amount of small minnows, washed up worms, numerous insects, etc...

It is really a beautiful thing to see. The bluegill aggressively swims into the shallow and narrow creek and eats a careless minnow. However, the bluegill basically traps himself when he does this. Most of the time the gill gets back to the brushpile unharmed. But sometimes the trapped gill finds himself trapped in the stomach of a large bass. All this is going on less than an inch of water, with quite a bit of splashing and choas. I catch at least one bass everytime I fish it.

I have probably caught about 20 bass at this spot in the past few months, which doesn't sound like much, but the pond is only about an acre big. So, 100 bass per acre is pretty normal and if Ive caught 20 bass from this spot. Thats 20% of the ponds bass!

I also believe this spot is "prime" realestate and that bass are constantly competing for this spot. So when I catch one, another one quickly steps in reckognizing the opportunity for food and dissolved oxygen (from the creek) and throw a little bit of caution to the wind.

Its like if ten guys were living in a trailer park and a mansion is offered to them, they will take it almost every time even if two of there buddies were murdered there.

I always look for these bonanza spots now and would take one of those over five regular ambush spots.

Paul Roberts reply :

Hester, sounds like you've read that spot perfectly.

Many anglers wouldn't recognize such a spot, others might know they can catch bass there sometimes, but not why. You've got a chunk of the story, and a key to many if not most of the mature bass in that little pond. Very8-)

Many of my small waters have a few key locations that give up the majority of mature bass. Some we recognize just looking at 'em, others are not as apparent. Regardless, most we have to probe with lures, and observe, to find the proper approach.

I'll describe another one, one that involves current probably the most obvious type. It's a navigation canal full of smallmouth and walleyes. There is a pond attached by a short (30 foot) narrow channel that is lined with rip-rap to prevent erosion. The rip-rap and additional habitat (the pond) make it a good spot with more food than other places: silversides, spottails, darters, perch, and sunfish are there. Bass and walleyes are there too.

This place always holds fish, but can become a real hot-spot when water is moved through the canal via the lock system (used to brings boats through the elevation changes across the length of the canal). In most places you would only notice the subtle water change by seeing the flow speed or direction change occasionally as locks are opened and closed. But, at that narrow rip-rap lined channel the added volume of water is squeezed through into the pond where it backs up, then is squeezed back out into the canal, creating a pretty good current.

This oscillating current is fascinating to fish and illustrated perfectly how current affects the upper end of the food chain. It's the downcurrent end of the short channel that fishes well, as prey fish get pulled out through the channel and many get sucked into the vortexes (negative pressure areas) created along the rip-rip edge. Smallies and walleye's line up here to feed. What's neat is the oscillations continue back and forth and you just switch ends of the channel to stay on the opportunity/strike zones.

Over time I've found a lot of opportunity/ambush spots. Keep your eyes peeled, and realize, when you catch a mature bass, there was something going on there, and it may be repeatable.

12631

Structure -in a functional sense. 2024

related General Bass Fishing Forum topic

previous topic

next topic

most viewed General Bass Fishing Forum topic