Page 1 of 1

Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:15 pm
by beckman44
Pg. 49 After working all the important water in the state, I had no trouble picking out the most productive lakes. I had the least trouble picking out the Best bass lake in the state. The moment I laid eyes on it, I knew it was THE lake in the state. The lake did not have a very good reputation as a good fishing lake. The reason why it was not fished successfully were the same reasons why I knew it would be the best one! The water color was perfect for maximum growth and movement of the fish. BUT the terrain and the make-up of the lake told me that productive structures would be few and far between. It also told me that the migrations on these structures would be very limited. In fact, so limited the fish would seldom come far enough for the average fisherman to make contact. I also knew if I found the spots, I would find not only lunker fish but lots of them. It turned out just like I figured. It was the best lake in state for lunker bass.
Every time I read this paragraph, It shows what a great fisherman Mr. Perry was. Lets discuss this. My thought is that it is a flatland reservoir with deltas a long way from shore. Bill.

Re: Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:16 pm
by madporra
Africa We have many, MANY of these flatland reservoirs in South Africa. I think we only have 2 natural lakes in the whole country!

I will be watching this thread with anticipation

_________________
Paul "madporra" Pereira - madporrapaul@gmail.com

http://www.basschallenge.co.za
http://www.bassing.co.za/bassingforum

Re: Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:16 pm
by John Bales
Bill,
It seems to me that he said that about a reservoir in southern Indiana. Said that the reason it would be loaded was because the breaklines were deeper than most of the fishermen were fishing. It may have been poisoned out shortly after the catches were made. Dont that figure.
John

Re: Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:16 pm
by brett
"The water color was perfect for maximum growth" - I've overlooked this. Was he saying that better color = better growth?

Or maybe someone can offer their thoughts in general on how they can (or how Buck could) sniff out one body of water for maximum size bass over another.

I've been wondering a lot lately why certain lakes/rivers produce bigger natural bass over others.

Re: Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:17 pm
by John Bales
Mr. Perry told me that a yellow green is better than brown. When he and Terry fished Monroe Reservoir when it was teeming with small bass, Mr. Perry commented that he did not like the water color. It was a brownish tint(not cypress). Always better growth with a yellow green. More fertile(better poop)........... I believe that Monroe is a yellow green again. And it has some big bass now. There is always the exception anywhere you go. Some clear bodies of water produce some giants too. Some dont. Mr. Perry seen it all and done it all. He knew all of the answers that we are still dreaming about. His genious mind allowed him to achieve his goals but not without maximum effort. John

Re: Mapping and Interpretation Part 2

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:17 pm
by brett
"BUT the terrain and the make-up of the lake told me that productive structures would be few and far between."

I'm assuming he thought this because the terrain was flat and unchanging and in the make-up of the lake there were not many feeder creeks and no noticeable turns in the channel from above water?