Science vs Art?

Utah Fishing Reports & Discussion Utah Fishing General
1

:sunglasses:We have had a couple of interesting discussions lately on what makes fishermen more successful. I have long been intrigued with the age-old question of whether science or art (skill) is more important to personal success on the water.

There is no denying that plain old luck plays a big part in the success or lack thereof on most fishing trips. But anglers who consistently catch more fish and bigger fish aren’t that “lucky” all the time. There is usually more to it than that.

As we (kind of) established on the “ten percent” thread, it really helps to build up a knowledge database on the waters we fish and the species we target. That will help us better focus on where and how we fish at any given time of year…under any conditions of water temperatures, clarity, flow, depth, etc. It doesn’t guarantee success but it usually cuts down on the trial and error part.

As an old-timer, I have lived through the evolution of electronic and mechanical fishing aids. I have had the dubious pleasure of having tried most of the different “fish-finders”…from the old paper graphs to more modern side scanning sonars. I believe in them. They help find fish and eliminate fishing in fishless water. And the more sophisticated newer technologies even help in identifying species…if you know your venue and the species available.

GPS systems are another great tool in the anglers’ arsenal…especially on bigger waters. Being able to zero in on an otherwise featureless hotspot can save hours of fishless prospecting. You can spend the entire day fishing only proven places, rather than the old “chuck and chance it” routine.

**But I have to laugh whenever unknowing (stupid) folks start foaming at the mouth and knocking the use of electronics. They think that having a fish finder is akin to using dynamite (Dupont spinners). You know they are not real anglers themselves and that they have never tried to catch the fish they see on “TV”. **

Seeing fish on sonar is no guarantee that you can get them to bite. You can’t catch them if they are not there…but finding them is only the first step. And that is where the “art” comes in. You have to be able to interpret what you are seeing on the display screen and then formulate a plan that gets the fish to want to play too.

We all know fellow anglers who seemingly ALWAYS catch fish…no matter what the time of year or current weather conditions. And some of these guys don’t know how to use a cell phone…much less tune up a sonar and know how to read it.

**But increasingly there are more and more fisherfolk who hit the water in boats bristling with electronics, downriggers and every new innovation in tackle and lures available. They usually catch fish…and often more than they would without the upgrades…but not always. **

I’m sure there are a lot of opinions and pet theories on just what is really necessary and useful…and what is simply foo-foo. We know that when it comes to lures, rods, reels, lines and all that stuff that a lot of it is advertised and hyped more to catch fishermen than to catch fish.

Input?

2

I am also convinced that electronics has been a great step in adding to most peoples catch. I will use ice fishing as an example. Most of us in the old days would drop to the bottom and then come up a few inches. If no bites we came up more, then more. With electronics it is easy to see that the fish are cruising at 12 feet in a 25 foot water column saves a lot oftime searching. Does that mean I will catch them NOOOO!. Knowledge and of course luck will now come into play. The time we spent fishing for that species in the past and the knowledge we gained will be used again, we will vary that technique and add to our mental data base. I t doesnt hurt to fish with a guy that knows a whole lot more than you do either[sly] Especially if he has some special treated bait morsels and some really great jigs :laughing: BTW welcome back!!!

3

:sunglasses:Good to be back. Thanks.

4

TD I fully agree with the electronics being helpful but no guarantee of success. Like fishing, running the electronics takes practice and time to understand. As you get better the tool becomes more useful. The person who just turns on the finder and accepts factory settings will never get the value of that investment. You need to read your manuals as painful as that is it sure helps you take advantage of the features that are available to you. If you lost your manuals you can pull them up on line with a google search. Good direction of thought TD. Later J

5

Not to mention if the angler is in a small craft that does not have the ability to move around at 70 mph at the drop of a hat. I think I am living proof that you still need the art side. I have the electronics and can find them. I just do not have the techniques or knowledge to always get the bites.

6

Some electronics guarantee fish, like the ones with two charged rods that go in the water[;)].

7

I do think electronics help in narrowing the field however as I stated on the 10% post, I dont think anything will replace time spent on the water targeting your selected species. I also believe that a lot of what you learn applies to other species under certain circumstances. Keeping notes is helpful especially as one gets older. It will shorten the learning curve if you can fish with somebody that really knows the lake or stream and is successful at catching the target fish. There are a lot of toys out there, some are nice additions to the aresenal, some are as you mentioned great at catching fishermen. Even as a kid with a small budget I managed more than my share of fish by accident, by luck, by determination or just plain spending the time fishing.

8

:sunglasses:SHOCKING!!!

But even those won’t work if there are no fish in the water…or if they do not reach deep enough when the fish are beyond the effective range.

Nice try. Thanks for playing.

9

If you ask anyone I fish with I live and die by my electronics. But, some of my best days and biggest checks have come from situations when electronics are rendered useless. One of my best experiences fishing for walleye was pulling cranks in 6 ft of water that was so muddy you couldn’t see your hand under the surface. Never marked a fish for two days! But don’t tell that to the dozens of 20+ inch fish we caught…[fishon]

10

:sunglasses:Great example of being able to fall back on knowledge and experience when the “science” is not applicable.

I fish shallow water a lot too and sometimes the only use for the sonar is to help keep me in the right depth. Even with my “stealth mode” when float tube fishing it is rare that there will be any fish right in the narrow cone of the transducer so sonar is pretty much useless as a fish finder. But there are lots of times that the fish show a definite preference for a specific depth and you need to stay in the zone to catch them.

11

As you have already said, electronics and toys do help you find fish, but won’t by any means seal the deal. I agree with everything you wrote at the outset about the “art” has to take over once the marks are on the finder.

A couple more points on the subject.

  1. I think there is also an “art” to interpreting what your finder is saying. Some guys just run around looking for their finder to go off like a slot machine that hits the jackpot. (and yes sometimes it does and you do hit it big) However, many folks don’t look at subtle things on their finder like substrates and water temps that can give you a clue about what to expect over the whole lake. Figuring out the subtleties allow you to hit more consistent “jackpots” all over the lake. I read about you doing this all the time in your reports. Another case in point; There was something I had been noticing on my finder while fishing a popular Utah reservoir that many of you have been reporting is “terrible” right now. It helped me some on the first couple of trips I noticed it, but I thought it could mean better fishing later on. Well, move forward 3 weeks, and me and a buddy have been tearing it up at this “slow” lake for the past few trips, as I thought we might. (I do wish all my predictions went that way[:/])

  2. It cracks me up when guys get on here (especially at ice season) and pontificate that you **have **to get the $500 triple deluxe vexilar, etc,etc with all the bells and whistles if you are **really **going to catch fish. if you have the old junky stuff you might as well forget about it. Funny how my junky old fishmark seems to keep helping me bring in catches you’d never think were possible if you listened to some guys.[crazy] If you learn to use what you DO have, you can still be just as successful.

Good thread.

12

Great write-up, Pat.

I’ve always found these two factors (like you), to determine fishing success: (same ideas, different wordage)

  1. Location (Gotta find 'em if you’re gonna catch 'em- this is science/technology/ or whatever you want to call it)

and

  1. Presentation (This is where the ‘art’ of fishing comes in. Make it look as natural as possible and it’s game on)
13

**Yes, this is a interesting thread worth coming out of lurk mode. :sunglasses:

**
**I remember back in Art school, one instructor taught about figure drawing to “Never use outlines. There are never lines around the body.” And yet, making lines is what a pencil does! (I’ve NEVER been very good at following rules that make no sense…) Art is just a representation or interpretation of reality - it isn’t reality per se. Later on I learned that some of the best Artists intentionally broke all the supposed “rules” and created works that have stood the test of time.
**
**
**
However, just because something is “creative” and innovative doesn’t mean that it’s any good - or effective. A worm under a bobber fishing at the Great Salt Lake comes to mind. [:p]
**
**
**Back before (over)organized education, skills of many kinds could only be gained as an apprentice working under the guidance of a master. Yes, there are some firm principles that must be learned in fishing - and without that it’s just an endeavor in ignorance and pure luck. Those that are extremely gifted enough to learn solely on their own by experience are rare. (I sure am not!)
**
**
**
**My experience is that most folks are more “mechanically” minded, and that’s easier to teach. But there are some intuitive folks that have seemingly uncanny abilities. Neither will do well all the time.
**
**
**
In my mind, fishing is indeed a Science AND an Art. My success rate has increased DRAMATICALLY over the years by striving to learn all I can. But if fishing was all science, anyone willing to put in the time and effort could figure it out. (And I could contend that, deep down, many would find fishing boring.) Fish aren’t governed by the laws of hard sciences any more that people are. They will do whatever they do for whatever reason that seemingly only they know.
**
**
**At times when I’m not catching by using all I think I know, my son will do something totally different and catch fish. So, it really does pay off to “think outside the box” and be creative. Live and learn.
**
**
**
**Personally, the pros and cons sonar and GPS are off point of science vs art - they are just tools for either approach. Dif’rent strokes for dif’rent folk. I think that’s pretty cool that this “sport” engenders so much of the human experience. But the variety and seeming contradictions DOES make it hard to know what to buy in the store sometimes! :laughing:
**

Here’s another big public thanks to the folk of all types willing to share info and experience!
**
**

14

I thought about this for a couple minutes. I could write a book on what you have just said. A simple anecdote comes to mind. I fish Willard a lot as most people know. I have a good canoe and access to a fully equipped Lund boat. I usually catch more fish out of the canoe, then the boat even though the canoe is severely more limited then a 20,000 dollar boat. I find it comical and amusing that my canoe is such fun. The fish finder alone on the boat cost more then my canoe… Yet the canoe with it’s electric motor, 50 dollar fish finder, and hand held gps has caught countless more fish and bigger fish on a fairly regular basis. The canoe is quiet, slow, and on a regular basis gets kicked off lakes because of a bit of wind and whitecapping waves. The boat in Sharp contrast is noisy, smelly, and rough riding on a moderate chop. It trolls steadily at any speed with a 6 horse kicker and ignores wind that forces smaller craft running for cover.

    Yet I keep coming back to the canoe. I could buy my self a tricked out flat bottom boat for duck hunting. One that can do 35 miles an hour and can run in nothing but mud. I don't. The experience is appreciated more with a little effort. Technology is great. GPS is wonderful for finding your way home on a foggy day at he lake. But it does not catch fish. All the aides technology can provide are just that. They are just aides. I come from an old school family. Things are done the hard way sometimes just because it's the right way. All the technology in the world can help you be a better fisherman. But to many variables cam also confuse and dilute the problem and even detract from the experience. 

 Da Vinci was without a doubt a prime example of the blend of art and science. More to the side note Tube dude, we all seek that primal need of seeking and catching fish, being able to use technology is great and again is an aide. Fulfilling that role is individual and the experience varies with only cost being the final variable on science. 

 I like unplugging some times. I am happiest wih a full belly surrounded by friends and family, chatting about the accomplishments of the day. And sometimes those same friends and family sit around and watch a blue-ray dvd on my  60 inch LED tv with 7.1 surround sound....  I still think science is great, but fishing is an art.
15

:sunglasses:Well said.

I synthesize with those sentiments.