Guests - If You want access to member only forums on FM. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on Fishing Minnesota.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Spotting fish vs fishing structure

4 posts in this topic

When you go fishing, are you guys looking for fish on the finder and then fishing for them, or are you looking for potential fish holding structure? Can you even see walleyes if they are laying on the bottom, which they like to do. What about a color unit, will it show fish on the bottom? thnx

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

To answer your question... Both...

For walleye, I do tend to look for fish on the depthfinder before fishing for them. Ad with a good eletronics you can see fish. Other times the bite may be better in the weeds, and often times you are fishing the area and unable to graph them first.

Sorry to be so vauge.. but.. again, the answer is both!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Short answer, I fish structure. I can't count how many times I caught walleyes and never seen even one on the graph. But on the other hand there are days that you will see active fish up off the bottom a ways. But I will always fish a good piece of structure a while before leaving if I see no fish.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I feel differently. I don’t necessarily believe it is beneficial to rely too much on sonar fish echoes. One of the reasons planer boards and long-line trolling can be effective is because they take advantage of how the fish tend to get spooked by the passing of the boat. How often is boat traffic blamed for poor fishing, and rightly so? If they move to avoid the boat overhead, they will not show up on your sonar screen but it doesn’t mean they have moved out of range. Those that pursue trout go to great lengths to avoid detection by what they wear, observing the sun’s location, where they cast their shadow, even stepping lightly on the ground. Other fish can be just as spooky.

Also, the area viewed by the cone angle of the transducer is so small that you are asking a lot to fish only where you might see them. I suppose motoring around for a while in an area to scan it for fish may show they are there or at least they were a moment ago. And certainly there are those occasions where the fish will return or perhaps not move at all and I have even experienced increased success by starting my outboard but I believe that in most cases one is more likely tipping the scales in his favor applying a little stealth.

I fish the structure but it can help decide how to fish the structure if you can see where the fish are. As upnorth pointed out, you may discover they are suspended or hugging the bottom and this may alter your attack. It’s using the tools to your advantage.

Below is a quick reference chart for the area covered by the specific transducer cone angles. For example, if you are fishing in 10 feet of water and the cone angle on your transducer is 20 degrees, the area viewed across the bottom is 3.5 feet and decreasing as you go up. A fish would have to be located within 1/12,445th of an acre to be detected. Good luck with that. Not seeing fish doesn’t mean they are not there.

• 12 degrees - 0.21 or roughly 1/5 of depth

• 20 degrees - 0.35 or roughly 1/3 of depth

• 24 degrees - 0.42 or roughly 2/5 of depth

• 30 degrees - 0.53 or roughly 1/2 of depth

• 40 degrees - 0.72 or roughly 3/4 of depth

• 50 degrees - 0.93 or roughly 9/10 of depth

• 60 degrees - 1.15 x depth

• 70 degrees - 1.4 x depth

• 73 degrees - 1.48 x depth

• 80 degrees - 1.68 x depth

• 90 degrees - 2 x depth

• 100 degrees - 2.38 x depth

• 110 degrees - 2.85 x depth

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Posts

    • eyeguy 54
      fun for sure.  and the weather was so nice and I stayed so warm.....  LOL   hope to do it again before ice out.
    • bturck
      Enjoy your last weekend of the walleye/pike season.looking forward to your crappie reports........
    • AaronTC05
      I understand that the SonarChart data comes from user submitted data, but I wonder if that data is rife with errors.  Maybe the users set up their sonar wrong or something to contribute to the faulty data?  As your screen shots prove, they're highly inconsistent.  There is no 37 foot hole just south of the words Marion Lake nor along the western shorelines.  Based on my experience on the lake with my sonar in my boat, the Navionics data is more accurate than the Sonar Chart, so I'm not seeing the value in the $4.99 yearly subscription to the user submitted data. I guess I'll have to evaluate on a few different lakes and see, maybe it is just a problem with the data for Marion, I just expected that the user submitted data would be more accurate, not less accurate   On a side note, I noticed I could refresh my map update and that at least got rid of the data with the 51' depths, but it still looks like your screen shot on the right.  I'll keep checking for updates in hopes of better data come summer.    
    • brmurph
      I will be up there next week from Austin Texas.  Can anyone comment on the lake and how safe it is after the warm up?  I thought it would be very unsafe but I saw a truck on the ice plowing an ice rink this morning on one of the web cams.   Is there still plenty of ice and is the lake in pretty good shape now that is has turned cold again?  Maybe it is in better shape then before the cold?   I grew up in the area but that was 30 + years ago so any schooling on the ice would great.   Thanks for any comments.
    • Rick G
      Was out there Tue.... Ice was getting soft on top. Access was in ok shape. Don't think you will be getting a wheelhouse out unless it's a real small light one.  Had 16-20 inches of ice yet