Forward facing sonar - fishing tech

[SwampCat]

I guess using ffs is somewhat like a thermal - you dont have any idea what it is like until you use it. But I would say there is MUCH more of a learning curve with ffs than a thermal.

I use ffs a fair bit - maybe 30 times a year. I cant tell what kind of fish I am looking at. You have to understand that the MS lakes where further restrictions were applied are probably the most noted crappie lakes in the country - so just like deer hunting - all land - are lakes in this case - are not created equal.

As a person who fishes a lot - I would hate to have to keep the first limit of fish I caught - whether using ffs or not. That would be the equivalent of having to shoot the first deer you shot - whether legal or not. Even the guys who can tell the species of every fish they locate, can not control it if another fish beats the target to the bait. I might be target speckled trout and a a flounder laying on the bottom, unseen - grabs the bait first - and the flounder season is not open.

I have rode ten hours on a plane to catch a fish I had no intention of keeping. In many ways, you cant compare hunting to fishing.

 

[Telemark]

My intent was not to compare hunting to fishing. I was pointing out how a specific technology, that gives you what is basically a superpower, can fit into a specific hunting situation if the regulations are appropriate for it. The reason I made that specific comparison was to argue that the regulations quoted in this thread for new crappie limits don't seem to me to be in line with their claim that FFS is causing a decline in crappie numbers.

I accept that FFS makes it easier to find and catch fish. I don't see how the regulations regarding minimum size limit fit into that narrative. In fact, it seems counterproductive. Larger crappie breed more effectively than smaller crappie. It seems like increased harvest efficiency would require a MAXIMUM size limit in order to ensure plentiful numbers of crappie for a sustainable harvest.

From AI:

Yes, older and larger female crappie generally produce more and higher-quality eggs compared to younger, smaller ones. As crappie mature, they shift their energy investment from growth to reproduction, making them more prolific breeders with age.

Key details regarding crappie breeding and age:

• Fecundity: Older, larger females can produce a significantly higher volume of eggs, which are often of better quality (higher energy content per egg).
• Maturity Age: While they can mature in as little as 1 year in the southern U.S., they typically reach their most productive spawning stage around 3 years of age.
• Spawning Behavior: Crappie are "indeterminate growers," meaning they continue to grow throughout their lives, generally leading to increased breeding capacity as they get older.
  
  Due to this, it is often recommended to practice selective harvest—keeping smaller fish for the table and releasing the larger, older, egg-heavy females.

This is in line with my understanding of reproduction in the sunfish family, as well as many other types of fish and even other unrelated types of animals, especially when there is heavy harvest pressure. If FFS is so efficient, why on earth would they want to rid a lake of its largest, most efficient breeders, while causing immeasurable stress and mortality on younger, smaller fish?

This discrepancy makes their claims suspect, in my opinion.

 

[omicron1792]

I don't have FFS on my boat, though my son does. I use side imaging to hunt for fish in a similar way - just without that real-time precision. The reality is that FFS doesn't make a fish bite; it just helps you find them. You still have to be an angler to close the deal.

Regarding overharvesting: that’s a human choice, not a tech flaw. My son and I return 99.9% of what we catch. Technology doesn't deplete a lake; poor ethics do. Saying FFS should be illegal is like the old arguments that compound bows were 'cheating' compared to longbows, or that crossbows shouldn't be allowed in archery season. It’s just the next step in how we engage with the sport.

Isn’t that same argument for thermals or drones with deer and elk hunting? Thermals and drones don’t kill the animals, they just help you find them.

Btw, I’m not against thermals or ffs. Just funny how we accept the tech we accept and think the rest is killing the sport.

 

[omicron1792]

I guess using ffs is somewhat like a thermal - you dont have any idea what it is like until you use it. But I would say there is MUCH more of a learning curve with ffs than a thermal.

I use ffs a fair bit - maybe 30 times a year. I cant tell what kind of fish I am looking at. You have to understand that the MS lakes where further restrictions were applied are probably the most noted crappie lakes in the country - so just like deer hunting - all land - are lakes in this case - are not created equal.

As a person who fishes a lot - I would hate to have to keep the first limit of fish I caught - whether using ffs or not. That would be the equivalent of having to shoot the first deer you shot - whether legal or not. Even the guys who can tell the species of every fish they locate, can not control it if another fish beats the target to the bait. I might be target speckled trout and a a flounder laying on the bottom, unseen - grabs the bait first - and the flounder season is not open.

I have rode ten hours on a plane to catch a fish I had no intention of keeping. In many ways, you cant compare hunting to fishing.

I’ve used both ffs and thermals extensively. FFS is waaaaaay more of a game changer than thermals for daytime hunting. Not even same ballpark.

Night hunting predators with thermals is more akin to ffs for fishing.

 

[SwampCat]

My intent was not to compare hunting to fishing. I was pointing out how a specific technology, that gives you what is basically a superpower, can fit into a specific hunting situation if the regulations are appropriate for it. The reason I made that specific comparison was to argue that the regulations quoted in this thread for new crappie limits don't seem to me to be in line with their claim that FFS is causing a decline in crappie numbers.

I accept that FFS makes it easier to find and catch fish. I don't see how the regulations regarding minimum size limit fit into that narrative. In fact, it seems counterproductive. Larger crappie breed more effectively than smaller crappie. It seems like increased harvest efficiency would require a MAXIMUM size limit in order to ensure plentiful numbers of crappie for a sustainable harvest.

From AI:



This is in line with my understanding of reproduction in the sunfish family, as well as many other types of fish and even other unrelated types of animals, especially when there is heavy harvest pressure. If FFS is so efficient, why on earth would they want to rid a lake of its largest, most efficient breeders, while causing immeasurable stress and mortality on younger, smaller fish?

This discrepancy makes their claims suspect, in my opinion.

Yes - in general, larger fish provide more egg production than smaller fish. In my area, I would say we catch 100 crappie under two pounds for every 2 pound plus fish. I promise, those 100 fish under two pounds are producing more fry than the one over two pounds. We probably catch 20 fish for every 1.5 to 2 lb fish. Again, those 20 fish are producing more fry than that one 1.5 to 2 lb fish. Sub ten inch crappie are very often sexually mature. While they might not produce as many eggs as a 2 lb fish, their are logarithmically more of them

I’ve used both ffs and thermals extensively. FFS is waaaaaay more of a game changer than thermals for daytime hunting. Not even same ballpark.

Night hunting predators with thermals is more akin to ffs for fishing.

I agree 100% - with the caveat that - in my opinion - ffs has MUCH more of a learning curve. When I got my thermal scope, I started killing that night. I have had ffs on my boat for six years and still learning it. I catch a LOT more fish now with ffs than I did without - but I still have a fair bit of difficulty determining species on my home lake, adjusting settings for water conditions, shallow water use, etc. All lakes are not the same, either. But I agree that ffs has relative positive catch increases over non ffs as does thermal over non thermal scopes.