• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

Will the use of technology affect fish behaviour?

Anthony Pearson

Anthony Pearson

Senior Member
As some of you will know, I've been toying with the idea of purchasing a Deeper Smart Fish-Finder. In fact, I've borrowed one off a mate and have been fascinated by the information it gives. However, I have a problem. On a recent visit to a river stretch I am unfamiliar with, I used my watercraft and picked a swim. Before fishing I cast out the Deeper and discovered a really impressive drop-off about 40 yds downstream. This looked too good an opportunity to miss so I shifted all my gear to the peg below it so I could upstream ledger the spot. Despite giving it a real go, I managed only one small bream.

Now, there could be many reasons for this such as better features nearby which I was unaware of. But it had me thinking: if a feature becomes well-known and heavily fished, does this pressure lead to a change in fish behaviour i.e. do they avoid this area? I've read about this happening when anglers fish directly into holding areas such as snags etc, but is this the case for those locations we identify as feeding areas? If you take this to its conclusion, will the increased use of technology to find the theoretical hotspots and the sharing of this information have a detrimental impact (from an angler's perspective) on the numbers of fish in such a swim? We are of course talking long-term here, but if the fish move from a heavily fished raft feature (because they don't feel safe) why could the same not happen in a regular feeding spot?

On a different note, when fishing a big, relatively featureless-looking river, if I only target the ones identified by a fishfinder, am I restricting my chances of success or improving them?
 
Hi Anthony, I'd have thought however we come by the knowledge (watercraft/happenstance-luck/technology) any 'action' by the angler based on that knowledge will result in a 'reaction' by our prey, the barbel. That is..if an area is pressured then that area will eventually be abandoned by the fish.
On your last point/question...I believe that luck plays a lesser or greater part in almost every success on the banks, so having a closed mind will tend to limit our chances of 'getting lucky'.
IMHO :D
 
a good friend of mine tries to rationalise his days fishing in advance based on his past experiences. Bearing in mind he's 77, has a very good memory and inherent pessimist...he seems to be a self fulfilling prophecy of doom before we even start.

so for me I like the luck, the learning and the not knowing. trying to pre-determine with technology does take the fun out of it and...... I definetly know as I used a fish finder for years living in Ireland and it definitely pushed the fish around.
 
Anthony , I think Jason has hit the nail on the head ,I think that using ' technology '' will take all the fun, and indeed the mystery out of fishing . I did have a brief mess about with a fishfinder a few years a go , one like a little yellow duck that you fastened on the end of a running line . Yes it gave me some indications of topography of the river bed and indeed the presence of some fish but it also was a magnet for pike who kept attacking it ! I reckon observation, a bit of leading around, or running a float through a swim is sufficient . The other thing that might happen is if you find a fish holding spot you may be tempted to keep fishing in the same area and be less inclined to explore .
 
Brought one when they first came out and rate them. Brilliant for my stillwater fishing saves lot of time and I've used it on rivers . I think I'm OK with watercraft but features I find using it been brilliant. I'm 47 perhaps I'm still down with the kids .Can't see how it's taking the fun out of fishing if honest.
 
I used a similar device on a stretch of the Lower Severn a few seasons back. After a bit of searching I found a decent 'scour' in the riverbed that screamed fish. Having lost gear in that swim in the past, I suspect it was left behind when a snag was moved along the riverbed in times of flood.

I fished the new hotspot with great optimism on several occasions, with only the odd bream to show for my efforts. At the same time, I was also fishing another swim nearby that shows as flat and featureless on the depth finder, but contains freshwater mussels and snails. Results from this area were much better with several decent double figure barbel through the autumn.

I'm all for the use of technology, and each to their own and all that. However, on this occasion it was previous experience and time spent on the bank getting to know a stretch of river that trumped the 'quick fix' of technology.
 
Thanks for the comments chaps. It's always useful to hear someone else's point of view.

Stephen, it would take forever and be pretty difficult on a big river to get accurate results with a marker float. Also, river beds are frequently changing so the technology would be a time-saver.

Mike, I can see your reticence about restricting oneself to what the sonar says, but as far as fishing the same spots repeatedly, I'm fortunately past that stage, with or without the tech.

Bruce, I lost several fish to a hidden snag but have now been able to identify it in more detail and this has given me the option of casting to the swim from a different peg. When conditions are right I'll be giving it a try.

I am fortunate to be in the position of having more miles of river to fish than I have the time or energy to do so, even if I am changing swims regularly. Perhaps I'll keep a diary and write a book on the success/failure of using such a device as I don't think anyone's done that on the rivers yet. ;)
 
Sorry Anthony, what I meant is that it's not cheating etc it's undoubtedly faster and probably more effective but the ultimately the aim is the same, to produce an idea of the features in front of you. I don't see an issue with it.
 
I haven't used a fish–finder but I can a see clear use for them in certain circumstances.

On a technical note - does the signal bounce back off silt?

Imagine if you will a flat river bed on a deep slow part of the river with a hard gravelly/ rocky bottom and the finder indicates a deep depression amongst that - would the reading be the same if the depression was full of silt, (level to the top) or free from silt?
 
Anthony Pearson said:
As some of you will know, I've been toying with the idea of purchasing a Deeper Smart Fish-Finder. In fact, I've borrowed one off a mate and have been fascinated by the information it gives. However, I have a problem. On a recent visit to a river stretch I am unfamiliar with, I used my watercraft and picked a swim. Before fishing I cast out the Deeper and discovered a really impressive drop-off about 40 yds downstream. This looked too good an opportunity to miss so I shifted all my gear to the peg below it so I could upstream ledger the spot. Despite giving it a real go, I managed only one small bream.

Now, there could be many reasons for this such as better features nearby which I was unaware of. But it had me thinking: if a feature becomes well-known and heavily fished, does this pressure lead to a change in fish behaviour i.e. do they avoid this area? I've read about this happening when anglers fish directly into holding areas such as snags etc, but is this the case for those locations we identify as feeding areas? If you take this to its conclusion, will the increased use of technology to find the theoretical hotspots and the sharing of this information have a detrimental impact (from an angler's perspective) on the numbers of fish in such a swim? We are of course talking long-term here, but if the fish move from a heavily fished raft feature (because they don't feel safe) why could the same not happen in a regular feeding spot?

On a different note, when fishing a big, relatively featureless-looking river, if I only target the ones identified by a fishfinder, am I restricting my chances of success or improving them?
Click to expand...


Is this a wind up? How the Hell would anyone know? Are you suggesting we should take out the gut feeling we have in trying to locate fish in favour of this contraption, are we to order up doubles like a fast food... and if you actually can identify the Barbel and you were able to catch it would you feel as pleased as opposed to just ANGLING for it. And would you feel even more frustrated if you blanked after spotting all those fish that you couldn't catch?

I don't know about you, but for me the magic is NOT knowing, it's why I do it, but then again in this must have society, I suppose the temptation is there
...but you posed the question would it be detrimental to your chances? Frankly I care not about your chances, but it would be detrimental to the Barbels, should we pursue them to these extremes ? :rolleyes:
 
Terry Simner said:
Hi Anthony, I'd have thought however we come by the knowledge (watercraft/happenstance-luck/technology) any 'action' by the angler based on that knowledge will result in a 'reaction' by our prey, the barbel. That is..if an area is pressured then that area will eventually be abandoned by the fish.
On your last point/question...I believe that luck plays a lesser or greater part in almost every success on the banks, so having a closed mind will tend to limit our chances of 'getting lucky'.
IMHO :D
Click to expand...

Far kinder reply Terry, but alludes to the same thing. :)
 
and if you actually can identify the Barbel and you were able to catch it....
Click to expand...

Neil, you posted your feelings about the technology on the other thread I started and if you'd read it properly, you would have noticed that I stated that I had no intention of using it as a Fish Finder. It was always as a more efficient way of discovering submerged features.

The question I posed was not expecting a definitive answer, for as you bluntly put it, how the hell indeed are we to know? It was more philosophical in its nature, because there comes a point in a pastime such as angling where there is a paradigm shift because, in this case, of technological advances. I feel we may be on the cusp of such a change because wherever we look, new ideas are being developed which are being taken on board by an ever-increasing number of participants. Baitboats, sonar devices, underwater cameras....what next to improve our chances of success? If the lake carp are all in an island margin 150yds away and I can't cast to them, no amount of watercraft/knowledge etc. is going to be able to help me present a bait at that distance. So, it's a case of necessity...a bait boat is required and anglers use them. If I can wade a stretch of river (without disturbing other anglers) I can find the features but once it gets over a certain depth or power of flow, that becomes impossible. A sonar device is the answer to the problem.

Perhaps you fish gin-clear rivers where you can sight-fish and in some circumstances target the bigger ones. Does that make the capture any less relevant because you picked it out? I don't have that luxury in the rivers I visit, so I can be fishing in a stretch where there are no fish for a hundred yards in either direction, despite my watercraft suggesting otherwise. Blankety blanks get a bit tedious for some. So, a quick run through a stretch with a sonar device may alert me to the odd drop-off and theoretically improve my chances.

Maybe someone will invent a sonar device that doubles up as a ledger and gives a signal to tell the angler if there are fish in the vicinity. Some would definitely purchase it.

Finally, and this was the main reason I posted in the first place, I wanted other peoples' opinions because I still needed convincing one way or the other. As I posted previously, I used the Deeper to find a significant drop-off on a big river and fished it for six hours, only to catch a small bream. What I didn't say was what I caught on the other rod cast out on a hunch: in the opposite direction, to a spot where I hadn't checked for features. ;)
 
Hi Anthony
You make some excellent points
My apologies as I posted my opinion on a previous thread and missed that you were starting a new one.
In summary and simply my opinion having owned a Deeper Pro for the last 12 months
They are very useful for feature finding. I bought mine specifically to help me identify snags in a very snaggy spate river. I discovered that some swims that historically had been big fish swims, were absolutely festooned with snags. So you make a decision - accept the snags provide a haven for fish, but what is the likliehood of actually landing a fish, that's assuming you avoid the snags in the first place. My judgement and that of my friends is on the whole avoid the swim for the welfare of the fish. Unfortunately we don't own rights to both banks and in the summer an angler on the opposite bank fished this swim - result one nice barbel strung up dead in the snag-fest. I also caught a large pike one peg downstream that was starving with 2 traces deep in it's gut. Might be conicidence but don't think so, and supports our decision
They are useful in close season for mapping said snags, depth changes,hollows, shelves etc. On our river these constantly shift so what was relevant in April might be very different today after some floods.
I found a huge deep stretch of the river, it screamed big fish but I have yet to have a pull from it. On the stretches I fish the fish are invariably where the bait goes in and some of the swims are incredibly featureless on the Deeper.
If I was visiting for the first time and used the Deeper , I would almost certainly miss out a lot of the top producing pegs based on underwater topography alone. The Deeper hasn't changed how I fish or where I fish.
And we all know the fish are where they are, not always where we want or expect them to be

I tend to ignore the fish finding function, unless I'm piking and I see a shoal.

They drain your phone battery and can be temperemental with connecting

You need a beefy rod to chuck one across the river - I use an old pike rod and 80lb braid as don't want to lose it in a willow, so more gear to cart around

I haven't used it for months but have had a reasonable season to date.
In principle they are a great idea and do have some uses, as for catching more fish, in my personal opinion, save your money.
Quite a few people have had a play with my Deepr but none have bothered to go and get one, which says a lot.
Best thing I invested in this year was 1 hour of my fishing time sat with a senior angler watching him feeder fishing and asking questions - never looked back and that has caught me a load more fish.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top