Lateral line

[Deadeye]

they just have to react to their environment to survive.
Exactly, bo.
The more you learn about that environment and how fish (not just bass) use the tools they possess to survive in it, the more accomplished and successful you become.
most of us don't have neither the time or inclination to try and wade through it all.
And THAT is what started this a few years ago.  It can be pretty difficult and confusing stuff to get your head around (if you can find it) and THAT is where the fishermen/scientists among us dropped the ball (by not acting as that "bridge" that I was talking about). 

A couple of those scientist names quoted on this thread still have the mistaken view about the penetration of color in turbid water being exactly the same as what happens in oceanic water.  Testing and observation about that was carried out in 1967 by the Navy Submarine and Diving section in Long Island Sound.

THEIR exercise and conclusions were confirmed by scientists 27 years later (in 1994) (and the scientist involved - John Kirk- only discovered it by accident whilst researching something else.  He noted and published it as incidental to his project at the time without realising its significance to the military and to the recreational fishing industry).

So that info (which would have been so useful in understanding a bass's environment and putting everybody so far ahead of where they currently are) has been in existence for 54 years yet the incorrect stuff is STILL being quoted and believed because the the "quoter" is either a scientist or a writer (with masses of experience) for popular magazines who simply repeats what he hears without testing the veracity of it.  Heresay is not fact.

Looking back at the utterings and/or writings of scientists and magazine writers was the test for me of their credibility.  If they still quoted that mistaken view about color in turbid water, I simply dropped them off the credibility list that I'd drawn up.  I had gone to the trouble of drawing up such a list from those large circulation and popular magazines (both writers and quoted scientists).  I also looked at tournament participant utterings, videos and articles.

Maybe 1 single pro might be interested in "refining techniques based on gaining a competition edge", so I offered ALL of the data to one free.

Didn't get a response.  Not even a "thanks but no thanks".

THAT'S why I'm wary of experience and experts and started doing this work by myself.  Practically.  Hands on.  Fishing.  Experimenting with fishing techniques based on my findings.  Real-water testing the factual basis for techniques.  I had a wry smile when the subject of academia was raised a few posts ago.  I'm just not that smart.

Attached is an image of the sophisticated equipment that we in academia land use in our well funded research.  Only the best of course.

Not being a scientist meant that initially I didn't even know enough to ask the right questions to find those ignored facts.  But I got better at it over time.

Having reached the point where I felt confident enough to share what I'd found with others, I pondered over the sure-fire reaction that I was going to get from the establishment.  Essentially, what I would be doing was challenging years of vested interests, egos, credibility and advice.  Not an easy task and one certain to draw "shoot the messenger" responses. 

Like a lot of you guys (I think), I have fewer years ahead of me than I have behind me so one thought foremost in my mind was "is it worth the trouble that's bound to come"?.

Frankly, I didn't think that it would be, so the path I chose was simply to put it up on a forum somewhere and aimed at people just (or recently) starting off.  They could make of it what they wanted but they'd have a much better and more informed starting point available to them than we did.  Maybe the thoughts might spread.

They could then hone their techniques from a factual base.  That base would allow them to look at other things (like those bo brought up and who had to learn them the hard way) and maybe work out "the why is it so" about those things at a much earlier time in their fishing interest.  Question commonly accepted views based on their experiences.  Learn from the process.

Anyway, it is what it is and when I finish putting up those views I can relax and go fishing again.

I still have a little bit to go to fill in a couple of gaps.

Sorry I'm so late to the Discussion, been on vacation with the Wife and not reading everything posted everyday.

So I'll start with a little about me. Just a Plain ole Guy who since the tender age of able to carry a Stick with some line wrapped and tied onto it has been Fishing for everything from Trout to Bass and a few saltwater species, but my Love is Bass Fishing.

Began my pursuit of Understanding Bass Fishing Better back in or about 2011-2012. Read everything I could find, absorbed info like a sponge. Guess I know enough and have enough experience to "hold my own"  when it comes to Bass fishing. Oh and I'm just a HS Grad.

I find what you are writing and posting Fantastic. But then I have an Analytical Mind that once focuses on a Situation simply will not shut down until it finds and explores every possible avenue and situation for Truth. Why my "stories" are long winded and take awhile to get to the point, because I fill in the Details that got me there. Lee (FD) can attest to that. I also retain Information that most others have long forgotten and can pull it up from wherever my Brain has it stored to give the Details about almost every (well not every) Conversation or Occurrence of significance in my Life.

What you have posted, by looking at the download count, Most have not even Read just commented on it. Some prior to me opening them had 1 Download. Hard to discuss something in detail that you haven't even taken a look at in the first place.

There is an old saying that Experience is the Best Teacher, and that is true to a part. But what if the Experience you have had could of been made better with Better Information to start with that Could of Gave you a Different and even possibly a Better Outcome?

The Lateral Line is most often discussed as a way for Bass to sense Movement in Dirty or Darker waters. But if that was it's only purpose then why do most tend to use Dark or Black Colors at Night and Chartreuse Colors during the Day in those conditions? Isn't it so the Bass can "see the lure" better?

Then why not begin to Understand to Potential the Lateral Line could Possibly Play in allowing a Bass to Seek and Destroy Prey not only in Darker Waters but AT ALL TIMES AND IN ALL CONDITIONS?

While not ever done any such research as you have presented here, I can attest that by Default that my own such research (ie: Experience) shows me that most often a Slower Moving Retrieve Approach gets me the most bites and therefore the Most Bass in the Boat.

Could it be that this slower approach is indeed producing Lateral Responses due to the HZ'z staying in the Under 10 range? Whereas a faster approach tends to raise even that Exact Same Lure HZ's into a range most often Higher than 10? 

Even though their brain may be the size of a Pea, the Creator gave the Tools they needed to Survive and Thrive even in the extreme worst possible conditions.

Turkeys have a similar sized brain. When I began my pursuit of Knowledge on how to Hunt Spring Gobbler it quickly became apparent that the "truths" that had been held onto so dear for many many years and decades simply were not "truths" at all and merely only a small part of the entire story.

Back then it was 3 Yelps and 1 Cluck then wait for at least 45 minutes and 60 was better. Do Not Over Call. But guys that are now well known names like Will Primos said that Calling Loud and Calling Often produced more Gobblers. He was SHAMED by the Ones in Charge of All things Turkey.

Only he was Right.

As I expanded my Personal Knowledge (experience) I found that Each Turkey was Different and Each One had their own personality and you had to "take a Turkeys Temperature" to see what they wanted. I became an Expert at Calling in Spring Gobblers and filmed many of them without shooting them. And I always got my Bird each Spring.

Why bring that up in a Bass Discussion? Well the "truths" as we know them are just that, As We Know Them. That doesn't mean that they are the Absolute Truths and there can't be more pieces to the Grand Scheme Puzzle. 

I for One am looking forward to more Discussions of the Lateral Line and it's Workings in a Bass's life. Bring it on.

[D.W. Verts]

I guess I'm a little crazy. But I've been thinking about this topic all morning. I'm not sure why- what the man says has merits, for sure. Does the fact that those merits don't mean as much to me, when as a self-proclaimed student of-the-game for so many years reflect on me as a person? Am I that much of a hard case?

I don't intend to be.

But still- I have been there and done that. And I still learn, constantly. But I also believe, and I've wrote this on this forum many times, that keeping things on the simple side will be much more productive for most bass anglers. Too much technical makes for sloppy bassing. You can quote me.

Put it this way- I don't care myself about colors. Oh yeah, I paint up all of those pretty baits that I've been giving away, and you bet there's colors that I've had extremely good luck with over the years, but seriously I put color WAY down on the scale of importance when it comes to catching bass.

And vibration. The lateral line. Well, that would be above colors on my scale of importance, but I'm not going to live and die by it.

To put MY thinking in perspective, I believe the most important aspect in bass fishing and the one thing that outranks all of the rest, is finding the bass. Catching them is so secondary. In all my years if I could  find (enough) bass, then I could catch them. And play with colors & retrieves & such. You can't catch them if you can't find them. Period. So bring on THAT technical discussion and I'm all ears and all in.

Folks throughout history have been made fun of and ridiculed for presenting new ideas. It's human nature. My question would be.... No, that would sound degrading. And I don't want that.

So, for a different slant and for perspective's stake to the OP- have you personally seen a radical difference in your catch rates? Are you catching bass more regularly? Are you catching LARGER bass? Give us some meat to go with the veggies. Maybe even some dessert. Are you documenting your studies? Where are you fishing? What types of waters? Highland reservoirs? Deep water? Or maybe a southern swamp... Do you take pics of catches? 'Cuz we LOVE bass porn on UB. You bet.



A few credentials with your writing might go a ways in sealing your bona-fides.

I'm gone. Peace.

Dale

[Deadeye]

I guess what I am not getting is the Attacking the OP is getting for merely suggesting that the Lateral Line has not been truly studied and if we can learn more about it we may be able to catch more Bass. Then submits his evidence to back up his thoughts.

From his first post the discussion went from Lateral Line (which almost no one addressed) to you have to find the food first, find the Bass or it doesn't matter, questioning if he even fished for Bass (although he stated he did for 30 years and had won tournaments) , to he must not be able to fish so instead he try's to teach, to if he doesn't show pics of caught Bass his TOPIC can't be serious.

What the heck kind of response to a New Forum Member is that? Seem more like the old Shimano Posse on that "other forum" from years back.

I'd be surprised if the guy even stays here for long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Fun4me]

I guess what I am not getting is the Attacking the OP is getting for merely suggesting that the Lateral Line has not been truly studied and if we can learn more about it we may be able to catch more Bass. Then submits his evidence to back up his thoughts.

From his first post the discussion went from Lateral Line (which almost no one addressed) to you have to find the food first, find the Bass or it doesn't matter, questioning if he even fished for Bass (although he stated he did for 30 years and had won tournaments) , to he must not be able to fish so instead he try's to teach, to if he doesn't show pics of caught Bass his TOPIC can't be serious.

What the heck kind of response to a New Forum Member is that? Seem more like the old Shimano Posse on that "other forum" from years back.

I'd be surprised if the guy even stays here for long.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well said Deadeye, both this post and the last one! The attacking he's getting is ridiculous to me. I've never seen this side of the forum before (I haven't been here for a long time though). And all of this because he decided to share some scientific information.

[Oldfart9999]

The only thing I "attacked" is that experience doesn't count and note taking and observations taken by fishermen. It may not be as thorough as scientific studies but that doesn't negate what was done. I find it strange that personal observation must be discounted, fish in different waters can react differently do to environmental differences. How a bass reacts in a deep clear body of water is different from a shallow turbid body of water is different than a flowing stream. I fish mostly clear natural lakes many with grass beds and 4 seasons including ice cover. That is different from many southern reservoirs, what I do in particular circumstances may well work for me where I am but not for you where you are.
Rodney

Sent from my SM-T290 using Tapatalk

[Deadeye]

In the pursuit of Bass I'm not saying that the other items brought into this Thread are not important, they are.

Finding and Following the Food Source is a Part of it, and one that is Well Known.

Finding the Bass and THEN trying to make them Eat is a Part of it, and one that is Well Known.

Others such as: Water Temps, Water Clarity, Colors, Type of Bait being used, Time of Day or Night, Before or After Fronts, Spawning and what Phase, and Much Much More.

All of these can and do effect both the Bass and how we target them.

So WHY is the idea that Perhaps the Lateral Line could possibly play a Bigger Role than previously thought considered as well, Blasphemy.   Or could it be that perhaps a Better Understanding of How it Works and Effects What a Bass Does might just possibly make us a Better Bass Fisherman?

And Why were those Other Topics brought into this Thread as a Challenge to Prove the Lateral Line Theory doesn't exist?   

As the OP posted he would be willing to discuss all of those at a different time, but to keep this thread on point let's stay on this Topic, which I agree with.

I for one certainly hope that THIS DISCUSSION continues and focuses on the Topic of Lateral Lines and their Effects on How a Bass reacts to our Lures and presentations.


Then by all means, Start Another Thread on all those other topics. I'd enjoy those too.

I guess my main point in all of this is: What Type of Forum is UB going to be? One where Ideas can be brought forth and discussed or One where IF you dare bring forth an idea outside of the "norm" you will get a Pack Attack that sends you running? If the latter then UB is certainly not the Forum I know from that last 10 years.                                   

[Deadeye]

The only thing I "attacked" is that experience doesn't count and note taking and observations taken by fishermen. It may not be as thorough as scientific studies but that doesn't negate what was done. I find it strange that personal observation must be discounted, fish in different waters can react differently do to environmental differences. How a bass reacts in a deep clear body of water is different from a shallow turbid body of water is different than a flowing stream. I fish mostly clear natural lakes many with grass beds and 4 seasons including ice cover. That is different from many southern reservoirs, what I do in particular circumstances may well work for me where I am but not for you where you are.
Rodney

Sent from my SM-T290 using Tapatalk

Rodney you have my Respect, I hope you know that. We have had many many conversations over the years that brought good stuff into this sometimes dreary world.

I kind of think perhaps you got pulled in when the Other Topics started being discussed instead of the one at hand. You are Correct Sir that Your (not just yours but everyone's personal) Experience DOES Matter, in particular in the very areas of which you fish.

A Deep Clear Water Guy in not going to need or understand Shallow Grass Filled Lake Fishing, nor will the Shallow Guy understand the nuances of the Deeper Water Technique. They are, or can be specific to the area.

However, having Personal Experience does not mean that we understand everything there is to know-- even if we have spent our entire lives doing it. Bringing up the Topic of lateral lines is something I rarely if ever see discussed and I simply do not see it as a Challenge to Our Experience but an added benefit that we can apply to it.

In effect they are Two Separate Topics of Discussion, at least in my opinion.

[Oldfart9999]

Bass have 3 things they need, food, reproduction, cover, the lateral line may well be the single most important organ to achieving these 3 things. The lateral line is highly accurate at determining the distance from a bass, the direction including where in the water column even in turbid water, It's why a bass that is blind can feed, a bass knows when a bait has entered the water no matter the turbidity and is able to tell the difference between food and danger. It is able to do this even in the dark, the bass is able to feed at night quite well.
BASS has written about this over the years as have In-Fisherman and other magazines, Bass A scientific Study, I think is the title of the book written by Doctor Jones from Berkeley Fishing, he has a pretty complete study on the lateral line and explains in plain English, as well on eyesight and smell. The info is out there and done in plain English. It's something we need to discuss every once in a while along with sight and smell.
There is much positive in the observations of our fellow anglers as well, there may be misinformation, we're only human, but some of that may also be from different areas. A lot of techniques and observations will translate but may require experimentation to see how it'll work in another part of the country.
Rodney   

[Deadeye]

Bass have 3 things they need, food, reproduction, cover, the lateral line may well be the single most important organ to achieving these 3 things. The lateral line is highly accurate at determining the distance from a bass, the direction including where in the water column even in turbid water, It's why a bass that is blind can feed, a bass knows when a bait has entered the water no matter the turbidity and is able to tell the difference between food and danger. It is able to do this even in the dark, the bass is able to feed at night quite well.
BASS has written about this over the years as have In-Fisherman and other magazines, Bass A scientific Study, I think is the title of the book written by Doctor Jones from Berkeley Fishing, he has a pretty complete study on the lateral line and explains in plain English, as well on eyesight and smell. The info is out there and done in plain English. It's something we need to discuss every once in a while along with sight and smell.
There is much positive in the observations of our fellow anglers as well, there may be misinformation, we're only human, but some of that may also be from different areas. A lot of techniques and observations will translate but may require experimentation to see how it'll work in another part of the country.
Rodney

Good Stuff.

[Deadeye]

I took the time to read over this

- -

and found out just how little I really understood about the Lateral Line in all fish species.

Didn't know that different Species have Lines that run in different places, Some down the Middle of the side like Bass, some just on the Front Side and Some Just on the Rear Side. That MOST have receptors on both the Top of their head and Bottom of their jaw. That some use their lines for Navigation in Blindness and some more for Feeding and Protection.

Pages 24 through 34 were GOLD.

My Thanks to the OP for sharing this.

[BassmanRudy]

I always enjoy hearing another side to something I enjoy doing whether it's fishing, guns, photography, etc. I def see ZERO reason to attack someone personally for posting about a subject.

Ironically enough though those doing the bashing are also on my "ignored" list so just proves yet again to me WHY I chose to not view what they say anyways.

If 1 small thing from any of the OPs helps me catch a fish then it's been 100% worth my time and I appreciate him posting it up! Heck just having to type all of that stuff in had to take him a long time!

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[jwkelley51]

Thanks for posting about lateral line. It's been pretty obvious to me that a critter that can catch craws and minnows in the dark is more capable of finding a lure than manufacturers would have me believe. I'll have to read the longer pdf one a few times to get it all.
Now, where is the "fish don't see blue" link? I use some blue worms and am a fan of the "woops"y shad pattern on skirts and lures.

[Oldfart9999]

Thanks for posting about lateral line. It's been pretty obvious to me that a critter that can catch craws and minnows in the dark is more capable of finding a lure than manufacturers would have me believe. I'll have to read the longer pdf one a few times to get it all.
Now, where is the "fish don't see blue" link? I use some blue worms and am a fan of the "woops"y shad pattern on skirts and lures.

It was near the beginning, fish have eyes built differently from ours. Fish, and many other creatures see differently than we do, see colors we don't and don't see some we do. Bass see blue as a different color than us, perhaps a shade of gray, but a color that a food source uses, at least part of the year, it's why it works.
Rodney

Sent from my SM-T290 using Tapatalk