Article on big bass behavior

[fishinwrench]

32 minutes ago, Fish24/7 said:

 thx, Quillback

If they put  transmitters in biggins at TR and BS and followed them after the spawn they'd  have another new book to write, and I'd buy that one.

One thing is for sure, each lake/river and it's fish population are unique.  Just because the bass in a Texas impoundment show distinct movement patterns you can't assume that the fish in other lakes/rivers do the same.  And alot of those tracking studies attempt to generalize.  

There is a long standing belief that if you catch a good fish from a certain spot and take him away then another good fish will take its place.  If bass are as "home range" as tracking studies try to indicate then how can that happen ?   By their theory a good sized fish ALREADY HAS its preferred area, so there shouldn't be any roaming hogs looking for new unoccupied places to sit and chill. 

I truly believe that incomplete science is worse than no science at all.  This tracking information does us more harm than good.

[Quillback]

1 hour ago, Fish24/7 said:

 thx, Quillback

If they put  transmitters in biggins at TR and BS and followed them after the spawn they'd  have another new book to write, and I'd buy that one.

Yep, I'd like to se it done locally and see what they find out.  I'm not so interested in what tournament released fish do, but would rather see if that "home range" that bigger bass inhabit is true in the lakes around here.

[Fish24/7]

Q, home range to a BS or TR biggin is just a deep undercut ledge on a bluff below the standing timber that's so tangled with fishing lines that no lures can reach it ...they sleep/rest way back under that ledge all day, when night comes they poke their heads out and get a mouth full to eat, then go back inside . 

 

[Old plug]

its been done but not down there. Think it is rediculous.  Lots of people now days are looking for all sots of answers because they    do not have real fishing in their bones . They just want to be told exactly when and where to catch a bass. Then they can relate to how good they are. 

[Quillback]

2 hours ago, Fish24/7 said:

Q, home range to a BS or TR biggin is just a deep undercut ledge on a bluff below the standing timber that's so tangled with fishing lines that no lures can reach it ...they sleep/rest way back under that ledge all day, when night comes they poke their heads out and get a mouth full to eat, then go back inside .

 

I know a few places like that   Probably some of my line down there.

[Iclass]

4 hours ago, fishinwrench said:

One thing is for sure, each lake/river and it's fish population are unique.  Just because the bass in a Texas impoundment show distinct movement patterns you can't assume that the fish in other lakes/rivers do the same.  And alot of those tracking studies attempt to generalize.  

There is a long standing belief that if you catch a good fish from a certain spot and take him away then another good fish will take its place.  If bass are as "home range" as tracking studies try to indicate then how can that happen ?   By their theory a good sized fish ALREADY HAS its preferred area, so there shouldn't be any roaming hogs looking for new unoccupied places to sit and chill. 

I truly believe that incomplete science is worse than no science at all.  This tracking information does us more harm than good.

If each lake/river is unique, you might assume each fish is unique as well. Some go back home, some adjust to new area. The only way to have complete science is to continue to study the incomplete. There have been many long standing beliefs debunked by incomplete science. Some guy named Chris debunked one a long time ago based on incomplete science, the Earth really wasn't flat. 

You could easily assume that a "roaming hog" has been misplaced by a younger more aggressive bass, there are many reasons a fish might leave it's preferred area. This is why generalizations are made.

I'm really hope your belief that incomplete science being worse than none is based  on studies like these.

[Old plug]

Iclass. Old Chris never debunked anything.the vikings and others had come to our shores long before he did. Only differance was the others left it as it was. Chris brought the europeans. That was not a good thing. And neither is knowing or believing we know everything there is to know about the fish. But it does provide a Good reason for requesting some silly thing like a Ear Mark to study the bowle movments of the bass. Just leave the fish be and enjoy the fishing

 

 

[Iclass]

44 minutes ago, Old plug said:

Iclass. Old Chris never debunked anything.the vikings and others had come to our shores long before he did. Only differance was the others left it as it was. Chris brought the europeans. That was not a good thing. And neither is knowing or believing we know everything there is to know about the fish. But it does provide a Good reason for requesting some silly thing like a Ear Mark to study the bowle movments of the bass. Just leave the fish be and enjoy the fishing

 

 

Most Europeans believed the world was flat...long standing belief...Chris changed their minds

Don't care to know everything about fish, but just to dismiss someone's hard work because it doesn't fit your mold of what you believe, isn't being too smart. It's ok if you don't want to learn about different behaviors of fish, but it's not your call to tell others what they should want to learn or not. If you fish, you're a scientist...it's called trial and error

[Sore Thumbs]

I thought it was great info. Interesting read IMO. 

[fishinwrench]

Astrology predated Chris.  If he didn't know the world was round before he sat sail then he was a moron.