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.

 

[omicron1792]

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 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.

I hear you. Sounds very reasonable and accurate assessment.

 

[Kdog]

I think the bass are doing ok with the ffs - a lot of fishermen throw a lot of bass back. Where it seems to have made a negative difference so far - with the result of new regulations in some states - and anecdotal evidence where I fish - is with crappie. Not a lot of folks throw a lot of crappie back.

Understood, but that is a human choice. I went crappie fishing from the bank a couple weeks ago and caught over 70 in less than 3 hours without FFS. Two boats with FFS were casting straight to the fish after they saw me catching some. They were catching 1 each to every 10 or so I caught and left because the fish were not biting good.

My point is exactly what I said before. Technology doesn't make a fish bite; it just helps you find them. You still have to be an angler to close the deal.

 

[Howboutthemdawgs]

Well technology sure as hell helps or else we wouldn’t be addicted to it. Most people with a lick of fishing sense can use ffs to find and adapt to what a school or even a particular fish is doing. Just stare at your screen and watch its reaction. I don’t have a dog in this fight, I’ve abandoned big water, boat fishing but all I know is there will definitely be a degradation of the resource from all this. Limits were never made for everyone to achieve them. People generally regard a limit as a staying within ethical bounds so if more people achieve this success the strain will be real. As far as bass go, I doubt it will impact the resource all that much as 95% of fish are caught and released.

 

[Kdog]

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.

The difference is that thermals and drones are not legal and are restricted as an aid in the use of harvesting game animals (in most areas). I support using whatever tech is legal, but not what is illegal. If the biologists and regulators decide FFS provides an unfair advantage and ban it, I’d support that decision too.

 

[SwampCat]

Understood, but that is a human choice. I went crappie fishing from the bank a couple weeks ago and caught over 70 in less than 3 hours without FFS. Two boats with FFS were casting straight to the fish after they saw me catching some. They were catching 1 each to every 10 or so I caught and left because the fish were not biting good.

My point is exactly what I said before. Technology doesn't make a fish bite; it just helps you find them. You still have to be an angler to close the deal.

Yes, 100 percent. This is the time of the year when most of us non ffs sonar experts always looked forward to - the spring spawn. The time of the year when it takes the least amount of crappie fishing know how to catch crappie. There are folks around here sitting around the bank and catching fish. For the scopers - this may be the toughest time of the year. For the last month, I have been catching crappie in 18” of water - but the scopers are still finding them moving in and moving out. The other ten months of the year when folks who fish the bank are SOL - the scopers shine.

And as far as you cant make them bite - I think you can make them bite if you have ffs - at least to some extent. When fishing for anything, I feel I need to find them first, and then figure out what they want to eat or how they want to eat it. A scoper will find fish and watch how they react when the bait is presented. Do they approach and turn away - may change bait or color and see what they do. You cant do that without a scope. Maybe they want the bait active - maybe still - scopers can watch the fish in real time and make on the fly bait presentation adjustments that non scopers have to learn by trial and error fishing blind.

Some scopers never put a bait in the water without a fish to target. There are a lot of days when I dont use a scope - my wife hates it - that I wonder if I ever cast near a fish. Some of the good scopers I have talked to will fish a single large crappie for five or ten minutes, just like they were fishing a bass on a bed - and finally make it bite.

There is no offseason for ffs crappie. I am not saying it will be the ruination of crappie fishing - or any other fishing. But many of the studies show catch rates greatly increase when using livescope. And like our state, they did a study four years ago and none since. A MN walleye study showed ffs users were increasing over time. Tech is getting better over time. The research does not need to be a one and done - it needs to be updated every couple years and on all lakes - because all lake are different. They just need to stay on top of it.

 

[Telemark]

. Technology doesn't make a fish bite; it just helps you find them

That is the most challenging part of fishing for me. I've never been skunked on lake trout since I started using sonar. My sister won't even drop a line anymore on lakers that are deeper than 70 feet. Used to take a lot more effort to find them. We only throw back tiny ones under 2 lbs., and only if it burped.

Walleye are even more difficult in the clear water I fish. I put around the shoals looking for them on sonar and then drift or troll back over them, and even then I don't always catch one. But the smallest I ever caught was 3.5 lbs. Biggest was 14. Definitely worth the effort on shy fish when they are big.

I probably wouldn't even bother with either species if I didn't have GPS and sonar. I enjoyed fishing, but I do it primarily for food. The $20 I would have spent on gasoline could have bought enough fish for dinner, and then I haven't wasted my day. Turns out I like catching fish a lot more than I like "fishing". My goal is usually to limit out as fast as possible and get back home.

My nephew is 10 and still in the learning phase. I'm hoping by age 18 he'll be better than I am at fishing, and then I can spend more time on grouse and deer habitat, and he can catch dinner.