downriggers

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by Serengeti Charters

Fair enough, but if youre fishing snapper shouldnt be using downriggers. Either way, I'm a Scotty man...obviously Their customer service is amazing too...great people that want you to leave happy

if you can find the right spot downriggers work just fine for red snapper.my father and I had no preconceved notion's of how to fish on the west coast,you probably jig hali in a tide rip we learned to back troll with down riggers. different ways to solve the same problem. I was using flys in the prop wash for coho in 1980 5 years before we ever found the technique in print not saying we were first.just how not having any idea of how things are supposed to be done.let us fish in unconventional manners some worked some did not.

[Bigdad013]

Originally Posted by EZM

Bigdad - If you re-read my post I basically do what you are suggesting - I crank up the sensitivity to see all the "fish farts", bait fish, where my gear is running etc.... and then switch modes over and bring the sensitivity down to show me where the "mass" of the fish are holding. I drag my gear thru that depth. It seems to work well and eliminate too much clutter as im moving the gear, steering the boat and fighting fish etc... I found turining the sensitivity way down helped me stay at target depth as i wasn't as temped to move stuff and tinker too much. That way I can quickly glance over, steer the boat, etc....

I have been able to consitently land good fish on the lake - so my comment about rainbows shallower than bulls (on that lake in that time of year) coencides with the fish that end up on my boat .... so you are correct .... my fish finder does not distinguish between species. I spent a week out there last summer (as I do every year) and landed good numbers of fish everyday and my comments are based on actual results (bulls were deeper than bows).

I do offer a differnt opinion on your comment indicating you can't tell size but you can tell quantities of fish - that is actually, at least as I understand it, a contridiction. These are both functions of target seperation (returns). If I'm understanding the manufacturer's claim's correctly, the size of the symbol, given the target seperation, should, in most cases, indicate the size of the fish (generally). I know the arch does the same, but I like the fishy things. If you were to insinuate anyone who uses the fishy symbols may be using the equipment incorrectly, might be innacurate. Maybe I'm wrong.

I understand two fish can return on one hit, but generally, the target seperation (noted at 1/4") should be pretty good. I agree with the manufacturer. This too, seems to match what I'm seeing.

This is consistent, from what I've seem so far, when I'm on different lakes after perch (small bubbles); walleyes (meduim) etc......

I guess the ultimate test is - are you landing more fish using electronics - so far, so good. I guess we have derailed this thread - so please accept my appologies.

I like scotty - easy to find parts if you need them, excellent quality, and much cooler looking than other brands lol.

I agree with your findings on bull trout being deeper. With the arches being diff size as to size of fish, yes that can be true except for the fact if a fish marks in the outer range of the transducer it will be a smaller arc, that same fish directly under the boat will come in as a larger arc. It's all interpretation and alot of guess work with whats marking. In no way was I suggesting you were not a good angler, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was just surprised that having a top of the line finder with all it's power and tech that you would be using the fish id. I use to think it was a pretty cool option 15 years ago, but I personally have found I have caught many more fish turning that off and going with the arches cause i know they are fish. Just my take on it. Sorry for any misunderstanding

[Bigdad013]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

im a suggesting that with 300' of cable at 3 mph you will be lucky to reach 225' you are suggesting this is incorrect. mr ezm seems to find my suggestions fairly accurate he even shows his sounder with a 257' mark out or reach to a scotty loaded with wire.and on the shushwap I have marked fish deeper still you have your own oppinion if you would like to provide you in put I am more than willing to learn I spent 10 yrs on kootaney lake and am always willing to learn more.

What I was refering too was the comment about reaching the summer rainbows with a scotty. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you meant with that.

As for the depth diff. Are you using canon balls or the fish shaped weights? I use a 8lb fish weight, glides through the water better. I don't fish at 300 or ever been down that deep, but will get to 175 185 ft. And my weight is usually right at the level shown on the downrigger, if I get a fast troll going 3-3.5 the weight might come up a couple of feet. That is from my personal experience.

[Mudslide]

I have to say I was a little surprised to see the fish ID on myself. Usually the number one thing an experienced sonar user does is turn that off because they know what a fish return looks like and because using it is a little like having someone translate Italian into English for you. There is often something lost in the translation. That said: the HDS is probably the best of the best as far as sonar goes and in a situation where you are marking single large fish perhaps it would be fine. My experience is that in many cases, fish ID lies, but hey, a fish in the boat says otherwise.

[Mudslide]

I never pay much attention to the depth meter on the downrigger because I can see it on my sonar and know exactly what depth it's running at. It's that straight line on the graph that only moves when you raise or lower the ball. The deeper you run the more drag there is on both the canon ball and the line. Therefore it runs back at an angle and rides higher in the water column. The deeper you run the more weight you need. Tides have even more effect and require more weight to run and be seen within the sonar cone.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by Bigdad013

What I was refering too was the comment about reaching the summer rainbows with a scotty. Maybe I am misunderstanding what you meant with that.

As for the depth diff. Are you using canon balls or the fish shaped weights? I use a 8lb fish weight, glides through the water better. I don't fish at 300 or ever been down that deep, but will get to 175 185 ft. And my weight is usually right at the level shown on the downrigger, if I get a fast troll going 3-3.5 the weight might come up a couple of feet. That is from my personal experience.

you will note I said big bc lakes this includes. arrow, shuswap ,slocan not just. kootaney I used 15 lb plates. I am sure you do fine on good rainbows but they are not the fish I am after.you wont believe this but I have seen fish approaching 50 lb on all of these lakes monstrous rainbows.these are the fish I want. our best was 26 lb this is not a bad fish but when you spend a full year on the lake you will understand. live on the lake then you to will buy penns to reach this deep. one of my close friends in the area is a top fisheries biologists in the kootaney river system. he has information the average angler will never see.the key to our system is giant rainbows eat little rainbows so if one day when you are landing a nice 10lbr and moby grabs him you will want a bigger downrigger.mho.

[Speckle55]

I have used Scotty electric in 1984 on Lake Ontario and experimented abit with the graph paper sonar then in 86 at Port Alberni China Creek both were with guides . 2009 Kootenay and 2011 Kootenay and hand scotties Maligne .. the electric are awesome and i enjoyed using and had no problems we got good enough to call that we would catch that one and poof Fish On!!! would give a thumbs up for Scotty.. i think that 200 ft is enough for depth too i was in the 80 to 120 ft most of time and you could see the thermocline on the graphs if you fine tuned but now i just watch the average depth of percentage of fish i see.

Food for Thought
David

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Mudslide

I have to say I was a little surprised to see the fish ID on myself. Usually the number one thing an experienced sonar user does is turn that off because they know what a fish return looks like and because using it is a little like having someone translate Italian into English for you. There is often something lost in the translation. That said: the HDS is probably the best of the best as far as sonar goes and in a situation where you are marking single large fish perhaps it would be fine. My experience is that in many cases, fish ID lies, but hey, a fish in the boat says otherwise.

I hear what you are saying regarding reading the arches versus the fish id feature. There are a number of problems the "old fish ID technology" created such as misrepresentation of fish vs debris; time it took in ping return and conversion; target seperation etc.. etc... Lowrance has admitted it and taken some corrective action in thier finders a few years ago.

BUT .... According to the manufacturer alot of that has changed with the new sonars - it will convert your arches - realtime and allow you to "clean up" alot of noise. The issue I had (have) with the HDS unit is when I start out at a high sensitivity setting I get arches; my prop wash; my cable and ball and any fish fart and clutter showing up. I ussually set up this way to see what going on; where my ball is tracking; where the bait fish are; where the temp is changing etc.... then - in order to eliminate distraction - turn the Fish ID on to signal only on strong returns that are definitely (most likely) fish.

Simply turning down the sensitivity (in arch mode) does not clean it up enough. It seems (to me) that turning this on further turns down the noise ....???

On another note - they have a new side scan image that does not look like a line down the middle of the screen allowing a better "interpretation" of the structure up to 500 feet to each side of the boat. This too, will be a benefit for people like me who get easily distracted trying to desiminate the information on thier screen. It's not that unusual to have me put my rod down and spend an hour fidling with the sonar ..... perfect for A.D.D. people like me.

I also pay way more attention, more prominently when in shallower lakes, to structure, weeds, etc... and less to fish on the sonar.

Thanks for your thoughts - Maybe someone has lived thru this as well (getting a new sexy sonar/gps) and trying to "optimize" all the "data overload" to turn it into "useful information". That's my issue.

Now - I am a 6 time thread de-railer - so my sixth vote goes to SCOTTY. lol.

[EZM]

Originally Posted by Bigdad013

I agree with your findings on bull trout being deeper. With the arches being diff size as to size of fish, yes that can be true except for the fact if a fish marks in the outer range of the transducer it will be a smaller arc, that same fish directly under the boat will come in as a larger arc. It's all interpretation and alot of guess work with whats marking. In no way was I suggesting you were not a good angler, and I apologize if it came across that way. I was just surprised that having a top of the line finder with all it's power and tech that you would be using the fish id. I use to think it was a pretty cool option 15 years ago, but I personally have found I have caught many more fish turning that off and going with the arches cause i know they are fish. Just my take on it. Sorry for any misunderstanding

No big deal, I did'nt take any offence to it at all. Just did'nt explain myself well I guess. Really - after I get set up - it's easier to look over my shoulder and see the "average" depth of the gamefish after I crank the sensitivity down (default mode one touch). The reality is .... (see my last post to Mudslinger) .... the technology for fish ID has improved alot in the newer models. I have found it to be pretty good actually. Maybe I'm not maximizing it's potential. Not sure. Seems to work for me anyways.

This why I post on the forumn - to get info and share some of mine. All is Kosher ....

[Mudslide]

I'll be getting the Strucurescan module this spring. I'm also thinking pretty seriously of upgrading to the Gen-2 HDS at the same time. I do like the simplicity of having the depths read out per individual fish but I usu sally don't have a problem knowing the depth. Thanks for your input. Interesting discussion.

[chubbdarter]

Interesting thread.
my 2 cents
I fish Koot, Pend oreille, Flathead and Arrow fairly often during peak seasons.
I personally ignore marks deeper than 130 feet, I feel that watching feed lines and thermal breaks in stratified water you can find active fish not so deep.
I always use a 17lb fish shaped cannonball, I believe it is less resistant.
If running a flasher and hoochie or kelp cutter and hair, I will always use a OR1 release. If if set it deep in the pads it will hold even the Superlines.
If im running Billies or Water Dawgs i set less deep
Mooching rods do a great job to show Shakers that dont release from the clip.
I stay away from hockey sticks and conventional plugs because the speed needed to pull them properly works against my desire to stay deep, even a wide apex requires speeds far greater than a Billie or a Water Dawg. Also both the billy and Dawg tuned properly dive 14 feet past the ball on a 75 foot set back from the ball. Both these lures tuned correctly have a non random swimming action with a inconsistant kick out.


If you really want to enjoy your downrigger, set it up with a camera. Cant think of anything more fun than watching a fish try to atttack the lures on a short set back.

I used to use downriggers for my eye fishing but now have learned the calculations for my favorite cranks and now snap wgt. and lead line for my Ab. fishing.

Ive run Cannon, Big Jon and Walker. My favorite is Scotty Electrics for downrigging and my planer boards masts.

Good luck with whatever you choose

[Bigdad013]

Originally Posted by fish gunner

you will note I said big bc lakes this includes. arrow, shuswap ,slocan not just. kootaney I used 15 lb plates. I am sure you do fine on good rainbows but they are not the fish I am after.you wont believe this but I have seen fish approaching 50 lb on all of these lakes monstrous rainbows.these are the fish I want. our best was 26 lb this is not a bad fish but when you spend a full year on the lake you will understand. live on the lake then you to will buy penns to reach this deep. one of my close friends in the area is a top fisheries biologists in the kootaney river system. he has information the average angler will never see.the key to our system is giant rainbows eat little rainbows so if one day when you are landing a nice 10lbr and moby grabs him you will want a bigger downrigger.mho.

I know there are the big fish in Kootney, no disputing that. I have fished the shuswap for 35 years, and not just a couple of weekends a year. There are very few people I have met with the success I/we have out there.

Questions: How do you see 50lb fish on these lakes?
Tell me please how catching a large fish requires a bigger downrigger, unless your reeling them in with the downrigger?

[fish gunner]

on kootaney lake wilst reeling in I est a 6 lb bow smashed 10- 15' from the boat by a massive rainbow.2 witness who have both landed bows 25+our feelings were it was over 40.in the lardau river a fish weighing 40+ lbs was confiscated from a poacher.on the upper arrow when we first got a chance to use ion control,a rainbow with an adipose fin larger than my fist rolled in front of the boat just a guess but it was the largest rainbow I have ever seen. I know you feel this is b/s but ask mr wasic (excuse my spelling)if you know who that is.i have my birchgrove trophy. and on the slocan a friend was reeling in a nice 4 lb bull that was engulfed by a fish of unknown size but it had a big red stripe too far to see properly but it was huge. and the best method to separate these fish is fishing very deep in august . and even with a 15 lb plate at 2.5 or faster you lose roughly one third indicated depth with wire.and just look up the green wood rainbow claimed 56lbs out of a lake smaller than gull.

[EZM]

Definitely big bows in there. I would believe a 40lber exsists somewhere in there.

The nieghbor in Balfour, an oldtimer, landed a 35lb rainbow, a few years ago. I have seen the pictures and, to my surprise, she looks legitimately like a 35lb fish. I asked him why he would'nt enter a fish like that in the books (I was thinking, but not sure, it might be a BC record Gerhard).

He said (and I can't blame him), "then more of you Albertans will be swarming over here", "what good is my picture posted everywhere", "I retired out here to get away and to enjoy my time at a quiet lake without too many people".

He does not use a downrigger at all most months. (Sometimes in summer but very rarely). This silly bugger drags a giant (maybe 6-8oz) banana sinker, flasher, home made snubber and hoochie. He says big Rainbows are near the surface - max. 50 feet in his opinion. He drags his gear at something like 3.5mph and kicks it down to about 2mph and does it over and over.

Since he catches more big bows than me, I trust the ol' bugger. I ended up raising my rigger to run 60 down (trailing at 45 feet or so) and went with a flasher (green oil slick) trailed by a green tiger pattern hoochie only 30' behind the ball. Hit some bigger bows. The ol' bugger was right.

I also caught my largest bows even shallower on a 4oz banana sinker, beaded swivel front and back, with a ford fender and small hot pink apex. The intent was to hit Kokanees and I landed as many bows actually. They seemed to get bigger the shallower I pulled.

I lost a real nice one close to 20 (from my guestimate) skipping a black/silver beaded fly right on the surface in some chop at close to 4mph. That too, was a tip from the crusty ol' bugger.

Riggers are good to have - no doubt in August - but most of the time, good ol' crusty does'nt bother.

To respond to an above comment - I too, like the cannon ball type. For whatever reason the disks seem to flop when you come up over 3 mph and I find you get more twisting (even with swivels) it seems. I have seen no huge descernable difference in diving depth either. Not sure if disks are a gimick or actually dive much deeper - I can say, at least for me, they certainly don't track better.

I also, instead of using planners, run a dipsy magmun cranked all the way left or right sometimes instead of, or right beside, the rigger. This has been pretty easy to manage when it's me in the boat and I got to steer, adjust and work with 2 lines (which you are allowed to do in BC).

Stacking 2 on one rigger can be trouble if you need to turn, are fighting a fish or need to kick the boat down - I have had my share of doing the "untangle the lines whilst bobbing up and down not fishing for 20 minutes thing" too many times.

Riggers are the way to go if you have a pilot on board and more than a guy or two. Nothing like fighting (and feeling) a fish without a dipsy adding to the fight or a giant sinker to pull.

[fish gunner]

oh dont get me wrong, hair is the only way to go, some crazy days.we just fig the true giants would almost lurk away end of july mid aug or later, and after our limited results the ferocity of the strikes down deep blew my mind. hay who knows maybe we were pulling our plugs past sturgeon and fish carts.

[Bigdad013]

I have the scotty electrics, 30" boom on them. Last year with a good wind it turned my boat quite quickly and had to do some real quick manouvers to stop the boat kicker from getting into the one line. So with this thread, it was making me think,I called scotty and have ordered the 30-60" telescopic booms. Apparently a real easy conversion. Alot cheaper solution than buying new downriggers. Not sure if other manufactutrers are able to do that.

[bardfromedson]

Do you have a guard around your kicker prop? Might also help you out.

Originally Posted by Bigdad013

I have the scotty electrics, 30" boom on them. Last year with a good wind it turned my boat quite quickly and had to do some real quick manouvers to stop the boat kicker from getting into the one line. So with this thread, it was making me think,I called scotty and have ordered the 30-60" telescopic booms. Apparently a real easy conversion. Alot cheaper solution than buying new downriggers. Not sure if other manufactutrers are able to do that.

[Bigdad013]

Originally Posted by bardfromedson

Do you have a guard around your kicker prop? Might also help you out.

Now you tell me....
Seriously though, I was looking for a little more separation to run some surface lines behind, and I think with 19' separation between the downriggers it will give me a few more options of running extra surface gear

[bardfromedson]

Or a third downrigger out the back.

Originally Posted by Bigdad013

Now you tell me....
Seriously though, I was looking for a little more separation to run some surface lines behind, and I think with 19' separation between the downriggers it will give me a few more options of running extra surface gear

[Bigdad013]

Now your going to get the wife mad. That is an awesome idea. Nothing says I love you on Valentines day like a new electric downrigger

[BeeGuy]

How feasible is it to put a manual DR on my canoe?

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

How feasible is it to put a manual DR on my canoe?

totaly as long as you have a motor of some kind, no reason you cant paddle.would get puffed fair quick draging 5lbs of lead down 50'. I have in in the past put a 1lb lead down on an other rod to make a mini down rigger??

[EZM]

Originally Posted by BeeGuy

How feasible is it to put a manual DR on my canoe?

I saw a guy put one of the small Scotty's (I think it's called a lake troller) on his canoe using a scotty clamp clip. These are about $80 or so.

He was running a 3lb ball and doing just fine. I probably would'nt run any more weight than that - you just have to compensate a bit for the reduced weight (meaning the ball will track at a higher angle a bit so you have let out a little more cable).

But down to 50-70 feet it should be fine.

Have at it.

[Sea Hawk]

I would be very cautious putting a downfigger on a canoe. If you hang up on the bottom you would tip or have the canoe pulled under very quickly.You might get away with it if you set your slip clutch very low.

[fish gunner]

Originally Posted by Sea Hawk

I would be very cautious putting a downfigger on a canoe. If you hang up on the bottom you would tip or have the canoe pulled under very quickly.You might get away with it if you set your slip clutch very low.

well said,that could go wrong fast. a hang up in a wind could get ugly.

[Bigdad013]

Needed a part for my scotty, just called them and they found me a dealer in BC who will ship to me in 3 days. Awesome service