How did you learn to use your fish finder?

[bkrunner]

As the title says, other than the manual or YouTube, is there a course you can take to learn how to use and read sonar / fish finder? I'm new to this and sure I can get basic info such as depth or basic under water structures but how do you learn about the details, frequencies to use? all newer sonar tech out there?

[pinelakeperch]

Trial and error, instruction manual and Youtube.

[Ken07AOVette]

I read the manual front to back several times over, installed and went fishing.

[aulrich]

Lots and lots of staring at the screen and monkeying with the settings.

[cube]

Originally Posted by bkrunner

As the title says, other than the manual or YouTube, is there a course you can take to learn how to use and read sonar / fish finder? I'm new to this and sure I can get basic info such as depth or basic under water structures but how do you learn about the details, frequencies to use? all newer sonar tech out there?

Dr. sonar used to have DVD's etc.

https://doctorsonar.com/



Otherwise just need to spend lots of time on the water with the unit and the manual while fishing as well as the things your already doing.

Good Luck this summer

[Mr Flyguy]

Actually read the instructions/manual, didn't help though!

[Walleyedude]

Have you got any buddies with the latest gear that you can jump in with? That’s always a great way to learn in my experience. Take advantage of their knowledge and be able to use the units hands on.

The owners manual is good, so are forums. There’s a TON of info on YouTube, but you have to do some sorting through it, some is better than others.

The manufacturers also have a lot of good info out there. Google your unit and dig around, it’s surprising how much info is out there for the Lowrance units once you chase down a few rabbit holes.

The #1 way to learn is time on the water and hands on and trial and error with your unit on lakes you fish. Set aside time to not be fishing, just learning your electronics. It’s time well spent.

[RavYak]

The easiest way is to go out and find a spot that you know has structure and fish. Play with the settings until they are giving you the clearest most straightforward returns.

Youtube is helpful as is google but you will have to sort through as much questionable information as good information. Just look at multiple sources and you should be able to piece together what the truth is.

The amount you need to learn depends on the unit you bought. Basic sonar is for the mostly helpful for telling you depth and pointing out structure(finding edge of weeds etc). You might mark the odd fish which will show up as arches and eventually you will start to interpret fish marks better but for the most part you will be looking to find the structure that fish like to hold in and then fishing it rather then actually trying to mark fish(most fish don't just sit there while a boat goes over top of them).

If your unit has down imaging or side imaging etc then that takes some more practice and research. I would just try to get the basics figured out your first few trips then you can start looking into the more detailed topics as you start to understand it all better and have some experience using it.

[cube]

Not sure What sonar you have but I found this video taught me the most at the start for what you want or can expect if you take a bit of time to set it up.

It's from Salt Patrol https://vimeo.com/15426536

[58thecat]

Get out and push buttons, play with it, all part of the fun or have a know it all buddy memorize the manual....take him out fishing once, gather the useful info and flush the rest then enjoy the rest of the season with your new fish liar oops I mean finder

[dodger]

I go to Bass Boat Cenntral and there is a wealth of info on all brands.

Dodger.

[EZM]

I've done the you tube thing, reading the manual, looking on forums, etc... over time, and repetition you get the hang of the more basic and intermediate functions.

The complicated stuff you don't do often, still, to this day, has me scrolling through menus and messing around trying to find or do something ....... with units as complicated as they are now days - that's going to be a part of the fun of messing around with your equipment.

[coyoteman]

I had the fish finder on simulation, to better understand how to use, went to Pine coulee, forgot to turn to real life---wow there was lots of fish, and no bites, fished and trolled for a considerable time, before reality set in---My fishing pards not amused.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by RavYak

Basic sonar is for the mostly helpful for telling you depth and pointing out structure(finding edge of weeds etc). You might mark the odd fish which will show up as arches and eventually you will start to interpret fish marks better but for the most part you will be looking to find the structure that fish like to hold in and then fishing it rather then actually trying to mark fish(most fish don't just sit there while a boat goes over top of them).

Learning to interpret the standard 2D sonar is the most important thing you can do. Beyond reading up on your sonar unit specifically, do some reading on how 2D sonar actually works - the affect of different frequencies, cone angles, why fish appear as arches, bottom return intensities, etc... There is an incredible amount of information in that simple display beyond depth and structure. Once you learn to read it, you'll understand the bottom composition and you'll know not only that there's a fish under you, you'll learn to recognize instantly how big it is, where it is in relation to your transducer, and even what species it likely is simply by looking at the shape of the fish arch and where it is in the water column.

There's so much more to 2D sonar than just depth and structure. Once you've learned to use it and developed confidence in your unit and your settings, you'll learn to trust that screen. If you're not seeing fish, it's because they aren't there. There are exceptions to the rule (very shallow water for example, or very rocky/weedy bottom), but in general, I no longer fish structure, if I'm not seeing fish on the graph, I'm moving on until I do. That approach has dramatically increased the amount of time I spend catching vs the amount of time I spend fishing.

[Poppa]

One of the best pieces of advice I ever got regarding fishing, in general, (and it applies here), is: There is no substitute for time on the water.

[bobalong]

I bought my first sonar in 1987 an Eagle Z6100. It was really basic at 275w and 82 vertical pixels but having the ability to see structure and reefs completely changed my fishing especially for walleye. Their was no internet info at that time and the functions were pretty basic but I took the manual with me every time I went fishing and it didn't take long to figure out.

The sonar has improved a lot in the last 30 years or so, but time on the water with your unit and manual is still a good way to go. If you know someone who is proficient with sonar they can help a lot and speed things up. I worked in the fishing industry for over 10 years and was able to see and use the newer equipment when it came out. Once you learned the basic operation, using different units was fairly easy as the operation of them changed very little.

I doubt there is a single thing that will impact your walleye fishing like sonar, take the time to figure it out it will be worth it.

[bkrunner]

Thank you all for your suggestions

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

Learning to interpret the standard 2D sonar is the most important thing you can do. Beyond reading up on your sonar unit specifically, do some reading on how 2D sonar actually works - the affect of different frequencies, cone angles, why fish appear as arches, bottom return intensities, etc... There is an incredible amount of information in that simple display beyond depth and structure. Once you learn to read it, you'll understand the bottom composition and you'll know not only that there's a fish under you, you'll learn to recognize instantly how big it is, where it is in relation to your transducer, and even what species it likely is simply by looking at the shape of the fish arch and where it is in the water column.

There's so much more to 2D sonar than just depth and structure. Once you've learned to use it and developed confidence in your unit and your settings, you'll learn to trust that screen. If you're not seeing fish, it's because they aren't there. There are exceptions to the rule (very shallow water for example, or very rocky/weedy bottom), but in general, I no longer fish structure, if I'm not seeing fish on the graph, I'm moving on until I do. That approach has dramatically increased the amount of time I spend catching vs the amount of time I spend fishing.

I agree that sonar is the most important to learn, once you learn it then down and side imaging also make much more sense.

As for your comments on marking fish I agree in some situations but I think you need to qualify the statement by saying it depends on the species and that it can depend on a number of factors such as your boat and waterbody.

For walleye you should usually be marking fish although there are the odd times when they are shallow, up against weeds or hiding in boulders or on a steep drop off etc that may make it difficult to mark them even though there may be numerous fish around.

Lake trout are the main species that I would say if you aren't marking fish then you most certainly need to move. They are almost always deep enough that the boats don't scare them and with the deeper water you also get larger search areas.

Trout can range from shallow water to deep, hiding along weeds, holding the bottom, swimming suspended etc and some times you will mark fish and many times you won't especially if using a larger boat or motor since trout are much more finicky and scared of boats, shadows etc(even if you mark them good chance they won't bite at that point).

Pike are very structure oriented and unless you are fishing for suspended fish in deeper water you will rarely mark them.

Learn what your sonar and other fish finders features are capable of and also learn your fish species habits and then use the combined knowledge to figure out how your fish finder's features will help you find those fish. Some times it is marking fish, sometimes it is finding a rocky spot, a weedy spot, a certain depth, a drop off etc.

Marking fish can be very important but depending on the species it is often secondary to finding structure imo. I assume when Walleyedude says he doesn't fish structure anymore that he means he doesn't fish structure blindly expecting it to hold fish. I expect he still fishes structure regularly and actually burns from one part of structure to another when trying to find/mark fish. Aimlessly motoring around on a lake trying to mark fish can be useful in some situations(such as suspended trout) but is often not the most productive way to find fish since many species are very prone to holding to structure and if you can find that structure will usually find the fish.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by RavYak

I agree that sonar is the most important to learn, once you learn it then down and side imaging also make much more sense.

As for your comments on marking fish I agree in some situations but I think you need to qualify the statement by saying it depends on the species and that it can depend on a number of factors such as your boat and waterbody.

For walleye you should usually be marking fish although there are the odd times when they are shallow, up against weeds or hiding in boulders or on a steep drop off etc that may make it difficult to mark them even though there may be numerous fish around.

Lake trout are the main species that I would say if you aren't marking fish then you most certainly need to move. They are almost always deep enough that the boats don't scare them and with the deeper water you also get larger search areas.

Trout can range from shallow water to deep, hiding along weeds, holding the bottom, swimming suspended etc and some times you will mark fish and many times you won't especially if using a larger boat or motor since trout are much more finicky and scared of boats, shadows etc(even if you mark them good chance they won't bite at that point).

Pike are very structure oriented and unless you are fishing for suspended fish in deeper water you will rarely mark them.

Learn what your sonar and other fish finders features are capable of and also learn your fish species habits and then use the combined knowledge to figure out how your fish finder's features will help you find those fish. Some times it is marking fish, sometimes it is finding a rocky spot, a weedy spot, a certain depth, a drop off etc.

Marking fish can be very important but depending on the species it is often secondary to finding structure imo. I assume when Walleyedude says he doesn't fish structure anymore that he means he doesn't fish structure blindly expecting it to hold fish. I expect he still fishes structure regularly and actually burns from one part of structure to another when trying to find/mark fish. Aimlessly motoring around on a lake trying to mark fish can be useful in some situations(such as suspended trout) but is often not the most productive way to find fish since many species are very prone to holding to structure and if you can find that structure will usually find the fish.

I did in fact mention a couple scenarios where there's potential to not mark fish, but other than that, I guess we'll agree to disagree on marking fish.

And yes, structure is still key when it comes to holding fish, that's always where I start, but like I said, if I'm not marking fish right away or pretty darn quick, then I'm not fishing the structure because fish "should" be there or because I think I'm just not marking them.

There's nothing aimless about it, it's systematically eliminating water in favour of locations and structure that are holding active fish.

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

There's nothing aimless about it, it's systematically eliminating water in favour of locations and structure that are holding active fish.

I think your first post just didn't come across the way you meant.

If you're not seeing fish, it's because they aren't there. There are exceptions to the rule, but in general, I no longer fish structure, if I'm not seeing fish on the graph, I'm moving on until I do.

Which I interpret as you saying you don't fish structure, you just look for fish marks on the graph and keep moving until you find them.

In reality I believe you are using your fish finder to first and foremost find structure(whether it be a certain depth, a drop off, a hump, bottom type, weed edge etc) then you are trying to mark/catch fish and if you don't then you move on to try a different structure. It is the process of eliminating structures/locations that is systematic, not your search for marking fish. I believe this is the case because it is what I also do.

If you were really not fishing structure and moving till you find fish then that would be like fishing for pelagic species that just swim around suspended(like trout can do at times but most of our species do not usually do). There is little systematic about that procedure, you just cover ground until you mark fish then you try to catch them.

I guess the point I am trying to make in other words is the following.

If you could have a fish finder that shows you depth, bottom type, weeds etc but was not able to mark fish would you take that over a fish finder that only was able to mark fish and not be able to tell you depth, information about structure etc? I for sure would want the first option and assume you would too. Finding interesting structure is the hard part(unless you know the lake already) and it only takes a few minutes to try and fish a spot to realize if it does or does not have fish.

[pikeman06]

Walleye dude is on the mark. I'm in the market for a new finder with some detail and new features but if they are glued to the bottom my old rigs never showed fish. You still have to use your head and go with your gut. Fish relate to structure after the spawn cycle. It's nice to know a change in bottom composition. Take it from there and fish with good gear and bait and do what you can to stack the odds a bit in your favor. If the fish are there they should bite. The suspended fish that show on your finder tend to be on the move rather than actively feeding I find with the exception of Lakers and whitefish that relate to the thermocline. I am shifting my focus to whites and that's why I am interested in a new rig. I mainly used mine for staying on a depth more than marking fish. Make sure your transducer is level and sensitivity is at the setting that picks up your hook jogged below the boat and that's all I every did. Maybe zoom on the bottom a bit too.

[Walleyedude]

Originally Posted by RavYak

I think your first post just didn't come across the way you meant.

Which I interpret as you saying you don't fish structure, you just look for fish marks on the graph and keep moving until you find them.

In reality I believe you are using your fish finder to first and foremost find structure(whether it be a certain depth, a drop off, a hump, bottom type, weed edge etc) then you are trying to mark/catch fish and if you don't then you move on to try a different structure. It is the process of eliminating structures/locations that is systematic, not your search for marking fish. I believe this is the case because it is what I also do.

If you were really not fishing structure and moving till you find fish then that would be like fishing for pelagic species that just swim around suspended(like trout can do at times but most of our species do not usually do). There is little systematic about that procedure, you just cover ground until you mark fish then you try to catch them.

I guess the point I am trying to make in other words is the following.

If you could have a fish finder that shows you depth, bottom type, weeds etc but was not able to mark fish would you take that over a fish finder that only was able to mark fish and not be able to tell you depth, information about structure etc? I for sure would want the first option and assume you would too. Finding interesting structure is the hard part(unless you know the lake already) and it only takes a few minutes to try and fish a spot to realize if it does or does not have fish.

If I just surrender and say you're right, can we stop debating your interpretation of how I fish?

[RavYak]

Originally Posted by Walleyedude

If I just surrender and say you're right, can we stop debating your interpretation of how I fish?

I am interested to know the answer to my last question.

If you were going to fish a new lake for walleye would you choose a fish finder with sonar, down and side imaging but doesn't show fish marks or would you pick one that only marks fish and gives no bottom or depth detail?

If you would choose the later I am surprised you don't use Garmin fish finders. Panoptix is without a doubt the best fish marking technology available right now. I had some doubts on its effectiveness but after seeing Aaron Wiebe test it ice fishing I was sold, I didn't realize it would pick up small objects like lures that well at distance.