"Relocating" fish before a tournament

[Ron Fogelson]

dissenting views/opinions really are more valuable than groupthink...

Very true      that is how we all learn something, if everyone was the same we would all still be stuck on a bank fishing with bone hooks, a stick and some leather string.   

[catt]

Attached is a link to Bass Resource; pay special attention to committs made by microbiologist Lane Gergely, owner of Sure-Life Laboratories

http://www.bassresource.com/bass_fishing_forums/YaBB.pl?num=1192120855/49#49

[denis]

Great.  I didnt get sucked into the small part about SCENT.    The way you portray it the book should be named:  Why you should use Berkley scents"

Again there is MUCH MUCH more to the book than someone trying to get you to buy purefishing scents.   If you can make it past the first few pages, I DOUBT you are reading it to be convinced on scents. As you will read in this link, even Catt was almost convinced to buy scents based on the comments in the thread.  So that proves you dont need to write the literary equivalent to ambein,  in order to convince people to buy scents.

When your link has an unsubstantiated claim and an advertisement for another company.  Oh and you did end up saying that you were about to go buy a Megastrike product.   So you are here discrediting one guy but you were suckered into the purchase of another based on a message board.


Also your link has no credibility because he portrays ANISE as a good scent, it is NOT a good scent.  It will mask human scents but its not something that will attract bass.  


FYI I dont use any scents, have maybe one or 2 packs of powerbait, It was 99 cents at sportsman warehouse.  I do own some scents but have never used them.

Again you should REALLY read the book, before you comment.  Opening it up and seeing a chart doesnt cut it.    I learned more about how fish see, feel, and attack baits,  and I never even focused on the scent portion of it.

Oh and those couple packs of a Powerbait BEAST are my ONLY Berkley products.

So here we are, focused on discrediting an author who says after bass are caught they will suspend near the closest cover.  Why? Because some of you are so wrapped around the scent thing.

Wait: I do still have some scents SOMEWHERE. I bought this mashed up shad and craws that are in there rancid bottles.  I tried to make soft plastics with it,  ( soft plastic has a nasty smell) and being water based it didnt work.   The best you should expect from a scent is to cover that nasty plastic taste and smell.



Edit: i do not own ANY  other pure fishing products except for some Sensation line.

[Homerthumper]

I read the story, this is just another persons opinion of Dr. Jones and Berkley and the tactics they use in testing. Personally I did'nt get much out of it.But i will say that success speaks for itself!!

[coldfront]

Catt,

Thanks for the link and the comments from the good Dr.  Certainly is something to think about there...and I'll dive into this a bit more.


What I did wonder in the aftermath of this however was that (and I'll reread the book) there didn't seem to be any implications from Jones that dispersed scent (powerbait/Gulp!) had any value in attracting fish.

The 'blurb' on the back of the Powerbait package DOES say that fish hold on to it longer... and yes, granted those are hatchery fish...(I'll have to call my friends that work at the Spirit Lake hatchery...find out how they get their brood stock?)

And I've noted in my own personal fishing that there are times when fish seem to hit (okay hold on longer) better when I have scent (typically craw flavored smelly jelly) on my plastics...but there are also days when they don't seem to want to hit the bait IF it HAS scent on it...

What I have noticed is that fish behavior is quite variable...I've always thought that fish can be as individualistic as we humans...and that 'that' has a lot to do with my success...as much as anything else.


Again, thanks for the post/link...excellent point.

[BKBASSER]

Sorry muddy. Oops i mean BK, don't want to blow your cover. 

  Thats extraordinary: I gave up my name myself, any other intellectual insihgt on your part

[BKBASSER]

Me personally, I  believe a certain somebody hates Berkley and all of the sponsors of Ultimate Bass. But then again i may not be as smart as some, I'm just a good ol country boy from West Virginia.

  You should try reading instead of feeling, you might get furthur in life. I said nothing about Berkley I said DR> JONES , who in my opinion sold his credentials to a lure/attractant company. There have been other posts threads and opinions on TEXAS BASS FORUMS<UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN <and even some older stuff on Tackle tour, questioning the validity of it all.

[Homerthumper]

He's back!!!!!!!!

[denis]

Again, how does this Bias to berkley affect the bass getting caught and relating to cover?

[iClass]

I guess no one else realizes this.....

 

[-Shawn-]

I am still trying to figure out how this became about scent ? 

What I thought was being talked about is Dr jones research on bass movements and behavior.  I could give a crap less about what bait company he is working for or what scent he endorses. 

[Camden]

wow this thread went somewhere but im not for sure where.

[catt]

My post is not about scent but about Dr. Jones, his research, & his junk science.

Just because someone has "Dr" in front of their name, wears a white lab coat, has a pocket full of pens, and horned rimmed glass doesn't make the research valid. Peer review by the scientific community validates individual research under which "Dr." Jones fails. Another misconception is research done by universities has to be valid but that to must be peer reviewed.

[coldfront]

My post is not about scent but about Dr. Jones, his research, & his junk science.

Just because someone has "Dr" in front of their name, wears a white lab coat, has a pocket full of pens, and horned rimmed glass doesn't make the research valid. Peer review by the scientific community validates individual research under which "Dr." Jones fails. Another misconception is research done by universities has to be valid but that to must be peer reviewed.

Catt,

here's one 'real world' view...Dr. Jones works for Berkley in Research and Development.  His product is intended for patentability if possible; company advantage at the least.  What really goes on there will be carefully censored/controlled as to what actually reaches public without proper patent protections.

That's the business world.

That's also why a scientist in the employ of a company won't submit their work for peer review...because it's just not public domain.

On the other hand, a company won't commit a whole lot of money to an idea that doesn't work.


Now, we can argue for a long time about whether or not Jones work is 'junk' science...but suffice it to say there's a company that based a huge part of their revenue stream on that same 'junk' science...and I would say quite successfully.  And they don't do it on the basis of Dr. Jones being the 'pitch man' for the product.

Now, my favorite scent for fishing is 'craw based' or 'shad based' and I don't use them to attract...I use them to help the fish hold onto the bait a little longer...even one heartbeat of additional time is often enough to make a difference between a successful or unsuccessful hook set...for me...

Now, COULD this all be about personal confidence?  Sure...it could be...but regardless, the use of scent makes a difference to me in my fishing.

And I don't use Berkley powerbaits for a whole host of reasons...primary among them is that when they have a product that works great, (and it's happened twice to me now) they discontinue it...and that has more to do with product design than scent...

This is a great discussion thread...Catt, would you mind starting a new thread so we could get this one back to the original topic?  But not lose this discussion in the process?

[catt]

What's at question is not scents or Berkley Powerbaits but Dr Jones's book "Knowing Bass" which is based on his own research. His research has not been considered by me as Junk Science but by his peers in Microbiology, Chemistry, & Marine biology.

[coldfront]

What's at question is not scents or Berkley Powerbaits but Dr Jones's book "Knowing Bass" which is based on his own research. His research has not been considered by me as Junk Science but by his peers in Microbiology, Chemistry, & Marine biology.

I got the impression from your post that this is due to it not being 'peer reviewed'?  Just wanting to be accurate on my end...as there's a reason why 'work product' won't ever BE peer reviewed...

but basic research WILL typically be peer reviewed...  and again, it's my perception that all those references at the end of the book are 'basic research' papers...help me understand where my position is wrong...

[catt]

"Knowing Bass: The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish"

It's theory not science

In the scientific or empirical tradition, the term "theory" is reserved for ideas which meet baseline requirements about the kinds of empirical observations made, the methods of classification used, and the consistency of the theory in its application among members of the class to which it pertains.

Junk science is a term used in U.S. political and legal disputes that brands an advocate's claims about scientific data, research, or analyses as spurious. The term may convey a pejorative connotation that the advocate is driven by political, ideological, financial, or other unscientific motives.

Empirical cycle degree of manipulation:
The general objective of observation is to record the activity in its natural state, so ideally the researcher should not interfere with the activity.

Dr. Jones's research is based on bass in captivity not in their natural state!

[Dug]

Moderator alert!!!+++++++++++++++***********

Alright folks, this subject has gotten way off topic.  If you want to discuss the pros and cons of Dr Jones' book, then let's start a new topic.    I don't care whether or not you believe in the value of the "Knowing Bass: The Scientific Approach to Catching More Fish"   book or not.

The question was, do you believe relocating bass before a tourny is cheating......

So new topic and poll located here:

http://www.ultimatebass.com/bass-fishing-forum/index.php/topic,73314.0.html

Dug

[Allen Shadd]

 To get back on topic, while it may not be cheating out right, it is certainly questionable sportsmanship and open to interpretation. I am guilty of it on one occasion, and it wasn't for my benefit to catch later, but was to remove the fish that someone else was intending to catch. I was prefishing a tournament once and went into a small back water area that was a spring, crystal clear water. It was an area not widely known, but a few of the local pros knew of it and it would get hammered pretty hard during the spawn. As I arrived, a local guy that is now a pro on the Elite BASS tour came in and trimmed his motor down, and proceeded to circle the area for the purpose of muddying up the water so I couldn't see 'his' fish. So I parked the boat and ate a sandwich while I waited for the water to clear up. As it cleared up, I saw a good number of spawning fish. I also saw another boat come in and proceed to fish. When they caught one, they threw it in the ice chest. We call them 'meat' fishermen. So I caught as many as I could before the other boat did, put them in the livewell and carried them to a different area and released them. Sure enough the next morning a couple of boats raced to get to that spot, and managed one fish between them. I wouldn't have done that though if the 'pro' wouldn't have tried to muddy the water up like he did and also the meat fishermen hadn't been there catching those fish.

 So yes. moving the fish before a tournament does impact the catch, I believe. Just not for the same reasons implied that the person will catch them again later during the tournament.