Knapp: Man-made structures can be attractive fishing spots
For late November, the conditions were ideal. Light south wind, partly cloudy skies, afternoon highs in the mid-40s.
The spots we were fishing are familiar to me, modest-sized hard-bottom humps that top off in the 10-foot range. Rather isolated places that attract active fish. If fish are present they tend to bite, even in 44-degree water.
Along two of these closely situated humps, sitting in around 10 feet of water, are the remnants of building foundations. Based on previous experiences I mentioned to my partner Sid Brown we might contact smallmouth bass there.
The lure from Sid’s first cast had barely touched bottom when he reacted with a strong hookset. The fish was strong and heavy, making runs that tested the drag and pulling line from the spool. He gingerly worked the fish toward the surface, where its identity as a smallmouth bass was confirmed. After a few anxious moments a bronzeback, was in the net, one that later measured at a touch more than 20 inches.
The old foundation complex produced two more quality sized bass before we left. Later in the day, another old foundation on the other size of the lake added a fourth.
Submerged foundations fall into what I categorize as manmade structure, permanent bottom features that function similarly as rock piles, ledges and creek channels, unlike cover which is temporary, such as weeds, brushpiles and shoreline laydown trees.
In addition to foundations, other man-made structures I’ve found to be productive under the right circumstances include submerged bridges and bridge abutments as well as existing bridges.
I should note I’ve found fish relate to man-made structure more so on some lakes than others.
For instance: on Keystone Lake, though I’ve located several submerged bridges and culverts, I’ve rarely caught fish near them. Perhaps this is due to their relatively small size as the primary creek channel and secondary ones were smaller streams.
Conversely, I’ve located several rock piles that are the remnants of foundations that were bulldozed over prior to the lake’s creation. These areas often attract bass as well as the occasional walleye.
Yellow Creek Lake features several bridge abutments as well as an entire flooded bridge which can hold bass and northern pike. Northeastern Ohio’s Mosquito Creek Lake has several submerged bridges that can hold both walleyes and crappies. And on Lake Arthur, there are three sunken bridges and abutments that are on my list of late fall crappie hotspots.
Existing bridges come into play on both our rivers and certain lakes. Bridges tend to funnel water, particularly during periods of higher flow. Oftentimes there are fish-attracting pools as a result. And the remnants of old bridges might be present. I think here of the Foxburg Bridge on the Allegheny, where cut stone from the prior structure is scattered in 5 to 10 feet of water and plays host to smallmouth bass much of the summer and fall.
On Pymatuning Lake, water squeezes through the bridge openings of the Espyviille/Andover causeway, creating a current flow that can be a walleye magnet during the spring.
While existing bridges are obvious, a submerged structure rarely is.
Sonar units with side imaging are especially useful for locating such. Two internet sources are, as well.
First is Google Earth, which has a feature that allows the viewer to look at historical images of a lake. If photos were taken of a lake when its level was drawn down, things like bridges and foundations appear.
Historical Aerials is another website where it’s possible to find images of an area before the lake was created. Naturally, this is dependent on the age of the lake and whether aerial photos were taken.
Man-made structures iare just one of the many bottom features that can attract game fish, a component of the fishing puzzle we’re always working to put together.
Jeff Knapp is an outdoors columnist for the Butler Eagle
