Let's get physical (elements)
Posted: Sat Jan 04, 2003 8:01 pm
I’ve been fishing since I was 8 years old and began fishing artificials 25 years ago with Cotton Cordell’s, Big-O crankbait and Bill Norman’s Snatrix plastic worm. I’ve read hundreds of articles that gave reasons why fish attack lures, but my experience tells me that there are abstract qualities in a lure that cause it to be struck.
Anyone who believes that fish bite because of traditional reasons, (i.e. ‘match-the-hatch’ or 'simulate-the-forage'), may be completely right based on their experiences and confidence in lures that support those concepts. But there are too many lures that resemble nothing in nature and that catch fish when the current forage looks like something different entirely.
The fish-catching elements of a lure that I emphasize concern ‘contrasting-qualities’ that account for a classic lures success, year-after-year. These qualities may be subtle or undetectable by humans, but underwater, just another junk-food item to 'ol bucketmouth.
Vibration is key when distance is a factor; visual elements are key when a lure is within visual range. Fish biologists have confirmed that fish can track a living thing in the water by its lateral line, even with eyes blinded. In nature, fish with cataracts have lived to healthy old ages via lateral line-tracking/feeding. Lateral line tracking works because of a still object’s reflected vibration, not inherent vibration.
A bell is heard when rang. A submerged bell can be ‘felt’ by the lateral line’s, nerve receptors that pick up sonar-like pressure-reflections off of its surfaces. Fish ‘feel’ the size, direction-of-movement and swimming characteristics of a living creature, within a detectable range of many yards.
Color and outline support what the lateral- line-to-brain stem, ‘knows’. Keeping this in mind, I believe that the simple, elementary, physical characteristics of light (color or flash and form) and sound vibrations (inherent and reflected) make a lure effective.
Lures that look like the real thing may contain those characteristics; but unrealistic-looking and -sounding lures, that display abstract qualities of one or more of those characteristics will at times do as well or better.
Color/pattern contrasts, (not a specific, realistic hue or photo-quality surface), is what gets their interest and provokes a strike. As Dan said, the Color-C-Lector proved that pink isn't just for guys living an alternate life-style.
A drab colored lure(i.e. black, twin-tail grub)used in murky water is drab, period, but it's the object's reflective surfaces and/or inherent vibration, that indicate object size and motion by water- displacement, pressure waves.These surface elements create stimuli that contrast with other edible objects that may be present.
The flash of tiny, silver flakes (i.e. Fin S Fish - color 02- clear/siver flake), a flourescent color-combo (i.e. clown or firetiger), a sound chamber, or a jerk-jerk-pause-retrieve, may provide the needed 'contrast-stimuli' to provoke a predatory strike that irritates a fish more than jock-itch in July.
Again, I'm not talking about color alone as a primary stimulus,(although color confirms shape, contrasts with the background and which can be very important at dusk or in stained water). I’ve used many unrealistic colors to catch many fish in one day such a sapphire blue, ruby red, florescent colors (especially chartreuse), rootbeer, grape, purple and black. The color didn’t matter as long as other lure characteristics did!
I use Fish Formula on my soft plastics because an oily surface reflects light better than a flat, dull surface, and not because licorice is a bass staple or feeding stimulant. (I also like to smell anise on my hands for some strange reason.)
(Question, Do fish salivate like Pavlov's dogs when they smell food? If so, do they spit when no one is looking!) :rolleyes:
Realism applies to people with even puny brains, not fish, (with even punier brains). Some anglers fall for a realistic finish and spend big bucks for it. They want to believe that a fish is interpreting the visual image the same way a human does.
HooDaddy worms don't represent any living thing(that can be proven), but they work superbly in many colors and sizes due to moving surfaces that enhance reflectivity and color, and that are felt by a fish's lateral line.
Try working a no-weight, Texas rigged, 6” Hoo Daddy creature bait across matted weeds or pads. The fish will target the 6” lure without seeing it and will repeatedly hit that lure until it ‘kills’ it. Note, it can’t see it, but it 'feels' its bulk and creature-characteristics,(like when you ‘get the creeps’, probably).
Compare the hackles of a dog that go up when it sees something (i.e. like the mailman)it doesn’t like (but would like to kill or bite), to a fish’s dorsal fin as it goes up just before it attacks an object it decides it must masticate.
'Contrast' characteristics in a lure, are what I look for before I tie it on. If it looks like the real thing, great, but it must reflect light and color a certain way that is enhanced by the lure’s action and inherent or reflected sound. I remember that the best lures I've owned had certain characteristics, I believe, provoked mutilple strikes over many years.
For example, a Rapala minnow that swims in a steady retrieve is not natural or realistic. Fish do not 'wobble'. But, a twitch or jerk-and-pause retrieve does realistically simulate a dying-minnow, superbly. The Raplala's only 'realism' is in its flashes of reflected light and water-surface- dimpling as it floats to it; not what the lure looks like physically or how it swims without manipulation. What the angler causes to happen, namely intermittent light-flashes and water disturbances, provokes a fish's bully-response. The lure's balance, floatation and color allow a complementary retrieve.
The gliding swim of a small Fin S Fish on a 1/16 oz. jig head, is exactly the way a minnow looks like, realistically. My point is that both lures, and many types of retrieves applied to those lures, will catch fish by the 'triggering-contrasts' of specific sight and sound elements.
Sight and sound categories are easy to establish so you may say to youself, 'self, are these the conditions that merit a top-water pop, a buzz, a subtle dimpling, a walking action or the waking of a spinnerbait?
If conditions, such as water temperature, tell you a subsurface approach is needed, how deep, how big, how reflective (flash or color), what kind of lure action and retrieve will get more strikes versus causing more lure rejections.
Realism need not be exactly achieved, but an abstraction of life, (like a painting), can be accomplished, artificially. A lure's physical exaggerations of light, sound, and motion, combine to compel a fish to bite even if hunger is not a key reason.
(Just some winter reading (especially for those with lap tops that have run out of reading material in the you-know-where.)
Frank M
Frank M
Anyone who believes that fish bite because of traditional reasons, (i.e. ‘match-the-hatch’ or 'simulate-the-forage'), may be completely right based on their experiences and confidence in lures that support those concepts. But there are too many lures that resemble nothing in nature and that catch fish when the current forage looks like something different entirely.
The fish-catching elements of a lure that I emphasize concern ‘contrasting-qualities’ that account for a classic lures success, year-after-year. These qualities may be subtle or undetectable by humans, but underwater, just another junk-food item to 'ol bucketmouth.
Vibration is key when distance is a factor; visual elements are key when a lure is within visual range. Fish biologists have confirmed that fish can track a living thing in the water by its lateral line, even with eyes blinded. In nature, fish with cataracts have lived to healthy old ages via lateral line-tracking/feeding. Lateral line tracking works because of a still object’s reflected vibration, not inherent vibration.
A bell is heard when rang. A submerged bell can be ‘felt’ by the lateral line’s, nerve receptors that pick up sonar-like pressure-reflections off of its surfaces. Fish ‘feel’ the size, direction-of-movement and swimming characteristics of a living creature, within a detectable range of many yards.
Color and outline support what the lateral- line-to-brain stem, ‘knows’. Keeping this in mind, I believe that the simple, elementary, physical characteristics of light (color or flash and form) and sound vibrations (inherent and reflected) make a lure effective.
Lures that look like the real thing may contain those characteristics; but unrealistic-looking and -sounding lures, that display abstract qualities of one or more of those characteristics will at times do as well or better.
Color/pattern contrasts, (not a specific, realistic hue or photo-quality surface), is what gets their interest and provokes a strike. As Dan said, the Color-C-Lector proved that pink isn't just for guys living an alternate life-style.
A drab colored lure(i.e. black, twin-tail grub)used in murky water is drab, period, but it's the object's reflective surfaces and/or inherent vibration, that indicate object size and motion by water- displacement, pressure waves.These surface elements create stimuli that contrast with other edible objects that may be present.
The flash of tiny, silver flakes (i.e. Fin S Fish - color 02- clear/siver flake), a flourescent color-combo (i.e. clown or firetiger), a sound chamber, or a jerk-jerk-pause-retrieve, may provide the needed 'contrast-stimuli' to provoke a predatory strike that irritates a fish more than jock-itch in July.
Again, I'm not talking about color alone as a primary stimulus,(although color confirms shape, contrasts with the background and which can be very important at dusk or in stained water). I’ve used many unrealistic colors to catch many fish in one day such a sapphire blue, ruby red, florescent colors (especially chartreuse), rootbeer, grape, purple and black. The color didn’t matter as long as other lure characteristics did!
I use Fish Formula on my soft plastics because an oily surface reflects light better than a flat, dull surface, and not because licorice is a bass staple or feeding stimulant. (I also like to smell anise on my hands for some strange reason.)
(Question, Do fish salivate like Pavlov's dogs when they smell food? If so, do they spit when no one is looking!) :rolleyes:
Realism applies to people with even puny brains, not fish, (with even punier brains). Some anglers fall for a realistic finish and spend big bucks for it. They want to believe that a fish is interpreting the visual image the same way a human does.
HooDaddy worms don't represent any living thing(that can be proven), but they work superbly in many colors and sizes due to moving surfaces that enhance reflectivity and color, and that are felt by a fish's lateral line.
Try working a no-weight, Texas rigged, 6” Hoo Daddy creature bait across matted weeds or pads. The fish will target the 6” lure without seeing it and will repeatedly hit that lure until it ‘kills’ it. Note, it can’t see it, but it 'feels' its bulk and creature-characteristics,(like when you ‘get the creeps’, probably).
Compare the hackles of a dog that go up when it sees something (i.e. like the mailman)it doesn’t like (but would like to kill or bite), to a fish’s dorsal fin as it goes up just before it attacks an object it decides it must masticate.
'Contrast' characteristics in a lure, are what I look for before I tie it on. If it looks like the real thing, great, but it must reflect light and color a certain way that is enhanced by the lure’s action and inherent or reflected sound. I remember that the best lures I've owned had certain characteristics, I believe, provoked mutilple strikes over many years.
For example, a Rapala minnow that swims in a steady retrieve is not natural or realistic. Fish do not 'wobble'. But, a twitch or jerk-and-pause retrieve does realistically simulate a dying-minnow, superbly. The Raplala's only 'realism' is in its flashes of reflected light and water-surface- dimpling as it floats to it; not what the lure looks like physically or how it swims without manipulation. What the angler causes to happen, namely intermittent light-flashes and water disturbances, provokes a fish's bully-response. The lure's balance, floatation and color allow a complementary retrieve.
The gliding swim of a small Fin S Fish on a 1/16 oz. jig head, is exactly the way a minnow looks like, realistically. My point is that both lures, and many types of retrieves applied to those lures, will catch fish by the 'triggering-contrasts' of specific sight and sound elements.
Sight and sound categories are easy to establish so you may say to youself, 'self, are these the conditions that merit a top-water pop, a buzz, a subtle dimpling, a walking action or the waking of a spinnerbait?
If conditions, such as water temperature, tell you a subsurface approach is needed, how deep, how big, how reflective (flash or color), what kind of lure action and retrieve will get more strikes versus causing more lure rejections.
Realism need not be exactly achieved, but an abstraction of life, (like a painting), can be accomplished, artificially. A lure's physical exaggerations of light, sound, and motion, combine to compel a fish to bite even if hunger is not a key reason.
(Just some winter reading (especially for those with lap tops that have run out of reading material in the you-know-where.)
Frank M
Frank M