Ancient_Angler wrote on May 1^st, 2013 at 10:47pm:


I'm with you on this AA.  In WCPP and the more remote parks where I do my tripping I really believe I could catch fish with a safety pin and a piece of string.  So why lug another piece of gear and stick that ugly thing on the bottom of my beautiful canoe.  That being said, I take chairs and books and a travel Scrabble game so when it comes to carrying extra gear, who am I kidding  .

I would never go without a "fish finder".  They really aren't fish finder, but depth finders and structures finders.  Graphing fish and catching fish, at least for me, have a very small correlation.  Some shorelines drop off very fast and other very gradually.  You need to know if you are in 20 feet of water verses 60 feet of water.  If you are trolling, once you find how deep the fish are you can keep your lure in the proper zone.  Plus, sometimes, it just cool to know that you are in 200 feet of water.  I think Old Salt said without a fish finder, you are wishing-not fishing.

Jimbo wrote on May 4^th, 2013 at 11:56am:


I'm hardly what you'd call a seasoned veteran when it comes to fishing but based on the parameters that you've set for what you need to know, Jimbo, I wonder if a depth finder is the best thing considering the bulk, weight etc.  Consider a Fish Hawk
(You need to Login or Register to view media files and links)
This is a tool that fits in the palm of your hand and weights a couple of ounces.  If you're concerned about trout (or Walleye,) it seems to me that depth isn't really what you want to know anyway.  What you want to know is temperature.  Trout tend to be where the water temp. is between 48 and 53 degrees.  The Fishhawk will tell you the temp every 5 feet, the depth and whether your bait is in the zone.  That's a lot of useful info.  It won't tell you anything about structure.  So, unless somebody tells me about it or I happen to paddle over it or get some clue based on outcroppings, sand bars etc. I won't be able to know that there is an underwater reef, for example.  However, in terms of likely fishing spots, people have been fishing with great success without depth finders for years.  I can generally get a pretty good idea of what is going on under the water by paying attention to what is going on above it.  A hard drop off like a a cliff face above the water is probably not going to be a good place to fish whereas a gentle drop off or point with large rocks and small boulders ought to be a spot worth looking for Walleye.  And if there happens to be blow down and such like then there's a good chance for small mouth and pike etc., although I'm sure you get all that already.  I don't know if this Fish Hawk will be the ticket for me.  I bought one and I'll be trying it this summer when I stalk the wily trout.  I'll let you know if it's blaster or disaster come September.  I have high hopes.  I did pretty well last summer based mostly on guess work so I'm hoping a little tech will just add to my success.  But really, I don't quite buy the notion that without a fish finder, you're wishing, not fishing.

:dankk2

All great advice and appreciate sharing the perspective!

Like someone before me said . . . "If you're not using a depth finder, you're wishing, not fishing."

Although I suppose it depends on what your fishing goals and expectations are that determines whether you bring one or not.  Honestly, these things are so light and easy to use that I don't understand the "added weight" argument.  Anyway, w/o a locator you are paddling over trophy fish sitting on midlake structure.  Shoreline is easy enough to read to give you a pretty good idea of depth and what's down there but when you come across midlake structure . . . that's "treasure buried in a field" man.  I know of places on Pickerel, Jean, Cirrus, Quetico, Batch, Kasa where the bottom comes up from 60+ feet to 8 feet in the matter of a paddle stroke.  All the big fish party mid-lake.  But, if you don't want to catch them, that's fine by me.