Part 2: Making Sense of Your Fishing Journal
by Ted Phillips
with Barbara Pittman
Barbara: Sometimes you go fishing when you can, regardless of conditions. There are days when I know, intellectually, that nothing will bite, but that little glimmer of hope that some fish will confound and contradict all the experts has me packing up my stuff and heading out. I have learned a few of the basics about good fishing times from Ted and his journal—full moon, west wind, a stack of papers to grade—oops, how did that sneak in there? Anyway, I can turn on the weather report and figure out whether the fish gods are with me or against me on any given day. But what if there are other ways to interpret your chances based on what happened in the past? Now, I'm out of my league and leave it to Ted to explain that scary concept: analysis of data!
Ted: When analyzing the season, you could look at the fishing data collected and do a simple analysis of some variable, moon phase for example. Counting the number of fish caught during a full or new-moon period versus the number of fish caught during a half-moon phase may give some indication of which periods were more successful. However, it does not factor in the amount of time spent fishing during the different moon phases, so raw data can be deceiving. You may have caught 20 fish during the full-moon phase and only 10 fish during the half-moon phase and assume that the full-moon phase is the best time to fish. However, if you spent considerably more time fishing during the full-moon phase than during the half-moon phase, the full-moon phase may not have been as productive per hour spent fishing.
A better way to analyze fishing data is to convert the data to comparable terms. One of the easiest ways to do this is to calculate the numbers of fishing hours required to catch a fish during the periods being compared. So for moon phase, I would do this analysis by div iding the moon phases into two categories. Many people believe that the most productive times to fish are from 3 days before to 3 days after the full and new moons. Therefore, I put my moon phase data into two categories: (1) the new/full moon period (which includes the day of the new or full moon and the 3 days before and after both) and (2) the half-moon period, which includes all other phases. After determining the two moon-phase variables, I add up the number of hours fished during the full/new-moon period and divide that by the number of fish caught during that period. That tells me the average number of hours required to catch a fish during that moon period. I then do the same thing for the half-moon period. That gives me numbers that are easily comparable so I can determine which of those two times is the most productive to fish.
The following table shows my comparison of the success we had based on the two moon phases during the 2002 muskie season. In my calculation, I also included the number of fish hooked (which includes both landed and lost fish), because variables like moon phase have no bearing on whether hooked fish are landed or not.
| MOON PHASE |
HOURS/FISH CAUGHT |
HOURS/FISHED HOOKED |
| Full/New |
5.4 hours/fish caught |
3.3 hours/fish hooked |
| Half |
9.2 hours/fish caught |
6.3 hours/fish hooked |
| Total (both phases combined) |
6.4 hours/fish caught |
4.0 hours/fish hooked
|
These calculations show that during the 2002 fishing season the full/new-moon periods were almost twice as productive as the half-moon periods.
We are all interested in times when big fish are caught, so I look at that data, too. Everyone has a different idea of what a big fish is, so you will have to determine this for yourself. Based on the waters that I fish I consider any fish 44 inches or over to be a big fish. I caught four big fish in 2002 (51, 48, 46, 44 inches), and of those four big fish two were caught during the full/new phase and two were caught during the half-moon phase. I think this is a little surprising because I would expect to catch a majority of big fish during the full/new-moon period. However, four fish is a pretty small sample size. If I expand my definition of a big fish to 40 inches or more I found that six fish were caught during the full/new-moon phase and three were caught during the half-moon phase. This is still a fairly small sample size, but it sheds a little more light on the subject. To make this type of data more meaningful it would be better to include data for big fish over a longer period of time (unless you are fortunate enough to catch a lot of big fish during the year).
Peak periods during the day is another variable of concern to muskie fishermen. Almost everyone would agree that sunrise and sunset are prime times to be on the water. Beyond that, there are a number of solar/lunar tables with various calculations for the peak feeding periods of each day. Based on some of my previous observations, I think that the time of moonrise and moonset often produce feeding periods. In my analysis of peak feeding periods I divided my data into two categories: (1) within one hour of moonrise or moonset and (2) any other time of day not within one hour of moon rise/set. The following table shows the results of fishing during those two periods.
| PERIOD |
HOURS/FISH CAUGHT |
| Moon Rise |
4.0 hours/fish caught |
| Moon Set |
4.8 hours/fish caught |
| Combined Moon Rise/Set |
4.4 hours/fish caught |
| No Moon Rise/Set |
7.1 hours/per fish caught |
As you can see, these data show that more fish were caught during the moon rise/set periods of the day than during the other hours of the day. As you will notice, I did not include fish hooked in the moon rise/set category, because I didn't always keep a record of the time of day when I lost a fish, so including partial data could give misleading results. In terms of the four big fish that I caught during 2002, two (51, 48 inches) were caught within one hour of moonset, one (46 inches) was caught within one hour of moonrise and one (44 inches) was caught during a non-moonrise/set period.
No Moon Rise/Set 7.1 hours/per fish caught
Our success during different weather patterns is another variable I kept track of last season. This was a more complex type of data and I ended up with 6 different categories for weather pattern: (1) the day before a cold front (2) the day of a cold front (3) the day after a cold front (4) two days after a cold front (5) three days after a cold front (6) stable (more than 3 days after a cold front and/or more than one day before a cold front). The following table shows the results from analyzing weather pattern data.
| WEATHER PATTERN |
HOURS/FISH CAUGHT |
HOURS/FISH HOOKED |
| 1 day before cold front |
15.3 hours/fish caught |
10.2 hours/fish hooked |
| Day of cold front |
4.21 hours/fish caught |
2.9 hours/fish hooked |
| 1 day after cold front |
31.0 hours/fish caught |
15.5 hours/fish hooked |
| 2 days after cold front |
4.5 hours/fish caught |
2.4 hours/fish hooked |
| 3 days after cold front |
3.5 hours/fish caught |
3.5 hours/fish hooked |
| Stable |
4.6 hours/fish caught |
2.8 hours/fish hooked |
The thing that really surprised me about these results was the low productivity the day before a cold front moved in. The other results are not surprising, because I have always loved to fish the backside of a cold front, but not the day immediately after.
There are a number of other variables that I analyze, such as wind direction (closely related to weather pattern), wind speed, cloud cover, rainy/clear, etc. I'm sure there are a number of factors that I haven't thought of that you are considering right now. Of course, a factor that is very difficult to pull from analysis like this is the combined effect of different factors. For example, the combined effect of it being a full-moon period, but also being the day after a cold front has passed. There are complex statistical analyses that can show combined effects of variables, but the analysis of our fishing data should be fun, not work.
So the bottom line is, how can you use this data analysis to catch more fish? To tell you the truth, my data analysis does not greatly influence the way that I fish. I fish every day that I can regardless of moon phase, weather condition, or any other factor. However, I do sometimes make fishing adjustments based on previous data analysis. I teach at a university and have some time off during the summer months, although I do work on my research. So I try to work on days that have been less productive and fish on the types of days that have been more productive. I also try to be in places where I have raised nice fish in the past during moonrise and moonset periods. I'm often torn on this issue of scheduling according to the past, because I wonder if I'm missing the day when I might catch fish in unlikely conditions. So, I'm not promising that this type of analysis will do anything dramatic like double your fish production each season, but it may give you a small edge that will allow you to land a couple more fish each year. In any event, analyzing your muskie data can be a really interesting way to stay in tune with your passion during those cold winter months.
Barbara: Now that the 200 3 season is over, I am anxious to see what that data tells us for a number of reasons. First, the 2002 season was hot and sunny, and 2003 was cold and rainy. Even though I caught my first muskies in 2002, I had a really great season in 2003, catching nine fish, including my biggest to date, 49". Ted attributes a lot of my luck to me just improving my techniques, and paying more attention to what he says the fish are biting. No comment. It took a long time for the water to warm up around here last summer, and the fish waited for it. But once they were ready, they were ready. So, it will be interesting to see how the data compares from year to year, and whether we can further fine tune our chances this year. Oh, and did I say I caught my biggest fish? So did Ted, "52", and it was so big he had to sit down for those pictures!
|
|
|
|
|
