As I browse for batteries to bring my striker along, I see a lot of small portable fish finders. Anyone got any experience with any of them? The descriptions make them sound perfect but I don’t know? No doubt that they will eventually be as good as any others but not for 40 bucks.

I was gifted an “Ibobber” a couple years ago. It has a castable transducer that looks like a bobber, and it’s Bluetooth to an app on your phone. I tried it a few times when using my other electronics and it did well on depth and nothing else. I was very unreliable as far as showing fish or structure. Also sucked to have to use your phone, especially in sot kayaks when everything is wet.

I’m gonna use my garmin but just curious if anyone as tried any of them lately. What better place to ask than a forum full of canoe anglers that portage regular? Thanks

Are you referring to a Garmin Striker 4? If so, I’d say definitely look into converting to either 8 lithium or 10 regular AA batteries. Just before one winter trip I made an impulse purchase of a cheapo finder and it absolutely sucked. Could not even reliably tell me depth. I returned to Amazon saying it did not work at all. Got a Striker 4. Far superior.. No need to carry a bigger battery.

I’m going to take my striker 4 but I just saw those cheap portable finders while searching for batteries for the striker. Like a said above, the ibobber thing sucked back then and just curious if anyone has tried any lately.

How do you fish? Shoreline, reefs, deep water? Slow drifting or trolling? Artificials or live/dead bait?

I use a Garmin GPSmap as I do a lot of trolling on shoreline and reefs. It rarely shows fish with the transducer in the back of the canoe but when it does, the wife or I catch one. Most of the time we catch without seeing fish, just know where to put the canoe for the right depth. I use the GPS to tell me where we caught fish so we can go right back there.

I bought the "Lucky Fish Finder" on Amazon for 43 bucks, I bet that's the one you've seen online. I bought it because all ice fishing gear seems to be sold out everywhere this year, and I couldn't find a vexilar for sale at any price. Figured it was better than nothing. It seems to do just fine showing depth, any info on it regarding fish or structure is questionable at best. I've caught fish when its showing nothing, and caught nothing when the screen is lit up with fish like crazy. I'd say its just what you would expect at $43.

Get a 12V lithium battery like a Dakota or energized outdoors, fraction of the weight of a lead acid 12V can reuse for a long time can run a Garmin Striker for 30+ hours

Fish Finder is your expectation... Depth Detector is your reality.

If you’re still browsing - I can’t speak highly enough about this company https://nocqua.com/product/pro-power-kit-3/, and this battery. I called their customer care line with a bunch of questions and they helped guide me through what I needed.

I just spent the afternoon down the portable fish finder “rabbit hole”. The Striker is the only on using the CHRIP technology. I am real curious as to how the upgraded transducers would preform.

bobbernumber3: "Fish Finder is your expectation... Depth Detector is your reality."

I read this over and over, never had either but am about to so pardon my dumb question...

What exactly are you supposed to be doing with the data a depth finder provides you? I can see scanning depth and looking for changes, then dropping a line. But beyond that what is it I am watching for as I paddle by staring at the screen, how do I know what depth the fish are at until I get one?

I can see fish and bait with my X-4

Argo1: "...how do I know what depth the fish are at until I get one?"

You don't, of course, but knowing the depth beneath you and how it compares to what you just left behind and -- hopefully -- what is just ahead is a major part of fishing. Having an idea of the depths and locations they might be at from previous experiences or tips given to you can be used along with the readings you see to eliminate unproductive areas. It can keep you following a contour at a particular depth that has produced in the past. A good depth map is important here, too, in order to be one step ahead with your paddling path. It's often surprising to see the depth shown on the screen in comparison to what you might have figured it to be from looking around at your surroundings... shallow shelf next to a steep cliff, deep hole right near a flat shoreline...

schweady: "

Argo1: "...how do I know what depth the fish are at until I get one?"

You don't, of course, but knowing the depth beneath you and how it compares to what you just left behind and -- hopefully -- what is just ahead is a major part of fishing. Having an idea of the depths and locations they might be at from previous experiences or tips given to you can be used along with the readings you see to eliminate unproductive areas. It can keep you following a contour at a particular depth that has produced in the past. A good depth map is important here, too, in order to be one step ahead with your paddling path. It's often surprising to see the depth shown on the screen in comparison to what you might have figured it to be from looking around at your surroundings... shallow shelf next to a steep cliff, deep hole right near a flat shoreline...
"

very well said. You get a ton of depth information for every ounce of fish information with a sonar. Knowing how to use depths to your advantage will help you find the fish.

Frankie_Paull: "I just spent the afternoon down the portable fish finder “rabbit hole”. The Striker is the only on using the CHRIP technology. I am real curious as to how the upgraded transducers would preform. "

Lowrance units also use CHIRP technology starting with their Elite CHIRP models and carried through to the Hook, Hook2 and Reveal models. Note: Lowrance X-models do not have mapping in case that is important to you.

Don't overlook used units that can be found online on sites such as Facebook marketplace. A lot of units are being upgraded and pulled off boats this time of year. Some of them are perfect for canoe use with minor battery modifications to make them portable.

bobbernumber3: "

schweady: "

Argo1: "...how do I know what depth the fish are at until I get one?"

You don't, of course, but knowing the depth beneath you and how it compares to what you just left behind and -- hopefully -- what is just ahead is a major part of fishing. Having an idea of the depths and locations they might be at from previous experiences or tips given to you can be used along with the readings you see to eliminate unproductive areas. It can keep you following a contour at a particular depth that has produced in the past. A good depth map is important here, too, in order to be one step ahead with your paddling path. It's often surprising to see the depth shown on the screen in comparison to what you might have figured it to be from looking around at your surroundings... shallow shelf next to a steep cliff, deep hole right near a flat shoreline...
"

very well said. You get a ton of depth information for every ounce of fish information with a sonar. Knowing how to use depths to your advantage will help you find the fish."

There is a sound argument for outlawing fish-finders in the BWCA-I would be in favor of such a ban. Someone should take up this discussion.

How did my dad and I ever catch so many fish without sonar???

WishinIwasFishin17: "If you’re still browsing - I can’t speak highly enough about this company https://nocqua.com/product/pro-power-kit-3/, and this battery. I called their customer care line with a bunch of questions and they helped guide me through what I needed. "

So I picked up 2 of their 4.4 ah batteries. Looks like you got the 10 ah. They were clearance I suspected they were marked wrong by Cabelas... I’ve used them for ice fishing for a few hours and they worked well for a short period time. I wonder how well they would work on a portable depth finder in the BWCAW? Anyone know how much time I’d get I assume quite a bit less than a 10 ah...

T

outsidethebox: "

bobbernumber3: "

schweady: "

Argo1: "...how do I know what depth the fish are at until I get one?"

You don't, of course, but knowing the depth beneath you and how it compares to what you just left behind and -- hopefully -- what is just ahead is a major part of fishing. Having an idea of the depths and locations they might be at from previous experiences or tips given to you can be used along with the readings you see to eliminate unproductive areas. It can keep you following a contour at a particular depth that has produced in the past. A good depth map is important here, too, in order to be one step ahead with your paddling path. It's often surprising to see the depth shown on the screen in comparison to what you might have figured it to be from looking around at your surroundings... shallow shelf next to a steep cliff, deep hole right near a flat shoreline...
"

very well said. You get a ton of depth information for every ounce of fish information with a sonar. Knowing how to use depths to your advantage will help you find the fish."

There is a sound argument for outlawing fish-finders in the BWCA-I would be in favor of such a ban. Someone should take up this discussion.


How did my dad and I ever catch so many fish without sonar???
"

It is just a gadget that gives you information. If you know how to use it, you can catch more fish, but for most people I would guess a depth finder doesn’t matter that much. Therefore the DNR or FS this appears to be a fight not worth fighting. There is no advantage to the ban except make old school anti-technology people happy :) A ban by all accounts wouldn’t make the fishery better, small electronics are allowed (radios, GPS, Sat phones, cell phones...etc...), and it would literally take an act of Congress to change the BWCAW rules. What matters more for fishing is catch and release, limits, releasing bigger fish with size limits... which are already in place per MN fishing guidelines. A ban wouldn’t stop me from going but it just isn’t going to realistically happen.

timatkn: "

WishinIwasFishin17: "If you’re still browsing - I can’t speak highly enough about this company https://nocqua.com/product/pro-power-kit-3/, and this battery. I called their customer care line with a bunch of questions and they helped guide me through what I needed. "

So I picked up 2 of their 4.4 ah batteries. Looks like you got the 10 ah. They were clearance I suspected they were marked wrong by Cabelas... I’ve used them for ice fishing for a few hours and they worked well for a short period time. I wonder how well they would work on a portable depth finder in the BWCAW? Anyone know how much time I’d get I assume quite a bit less than a 10 ah...


T"

Great question. This guy seems to have gotten 35 hours out of it, but I imagine there’s variables that will impact the total time. I purchased the goal zero adapter from them as well and hope to be able to top off the battery while in the BWCA to get it to last the whole week.

- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L3r9oSCZbeM

I brought a Nocqua 10ah on a trip last year. It powered my Striker Plus 4CV, which draws more power than the 4. I can’t speak to how long the battery will last in the field because mine easily made it through a five day trip of 2-3 hours fishing per day. But I tested it at home before we left to get a baseline and my recollection is that I got around 30 hours. I had questions when initially setting it up and the company was extremely helpful. This is heavier than a bunch of AAs but I thought it was well worth the weight.

StLouisPaddler: "... Nocqua 10ah ...Striker Plus 4CV...tested it at home before we left to get a baseline and my recollection is that I got around 30 hours..."

I recently looked into fish finders and batteries pretty intensively, and that pretty well matches what I calculated for that combination.

I saw one review video test where the Nocqua battery only delivered 8.6Ah, not the full 10Ah that is advertised. I knocked off a bit more (~15%) because you can't get the full capacity of the battery before the voltage drops too low to be usable, and ended up with an estimate of about 31 hrs for that combination.

The Plus 4CV draws .4A, which is a lot compared to some other units. For comparison a Plus 4 unit draws .23A. An older black & white Lowrance X4 Pro draws .17A.

outsidethebox: "
There is a sound argument for outlawing fish-finders in the BWCA-I would be in favor of such a ban. Someone should take up this discussion.
"

What would be "a sound argument" for outlawing sonar? Just curious.

After breakfast edit: what would be a sound argument to allow sonar?

I bought the Deeper Chirp last summer and really liked it. The price tag was high but for the weight and features it was perfect for the BWCA.

It sends a wireless signal to your phone and you view the depth/fish on phone. The software was a bit flaky to get working sometimes. After a firmware update it seemed to connect better. The biggest complaint is you need a solar and/or battery pack to keep it and your phone charged. The app and wifi drain your phone VERY fast. Overall, I really like it though.

I also got the mount for the canoe which can be a bit awkward depending on canoe

bobbernumber3: "

outsidethebox: "
There is a sound argument for outlawing fish-finders in the BWCA-I would be in favor of such a ban. Someone should take up this discussion.
"

What would be "a sound argument" for outlawing sonar? Just curious.

After breakfast edit: what would be a sound argument to allow sonar?"

The BWCA is about preserving nature and offering people a more wholistic interaction/experience that transports us back in time. It would be disingenuous to contend that fish-finders do not put the fish at a significant disadvantage-to the human.

Electronics related to personal safety are one thing-electronics related to putting nature/fish at a (significant) disadvantage is quite another. I would prefer the "playing-field" be more level-requiring the human to employ more innate skills. Such a ban would certainly align philosophically with the motor ban.

outsidethebox: "

bobbernumber3: "

outsidethebox: "
There is a sound argument for outlawing fish-finders in the BWCA-I would be in favor of such a ban. Someone should take up this discussion.
"

What would be "a sound argument" for outlawing sonar? Just curious.
After breakfast edit: what would be a sound argument to allow sonar?"

The BWCA is about preserving nature and offering people a more wholistic interaction/experience that transports us back in time. It would be disingenuous to contend that fish-finders do not put the fish at a significant disadvantage-to the human.

Electronics related to personal safety are one thing-electronics related to putting nature/fish at a (significant) disadvantage is quite another. I would prefer the "playing-field" be more level-requiring the human to employ more innate skills. Such a ban would certainly align philosophically with the motor ban. "

I think you are confusing personal opinion and bias with facts...

“ Such a ban would certainly align philosophically with the motor ban.”
The motor ban is part of a ban on Mechanized travel. Ya know, snowmobiles, sailboats, wheels, motors... It specifically addresses travel inside the BWCAW. A “fish finder” has nothing to do with travel. Maybe you think the BWCAW is about banning technology? There isn’t anything in the BWCAW act that bans technology. There is nothing in the act that describes using “innate” skills—-that’s a personal bias/feeling.

“ It would be disingenuous to contend that fish-finders do not put the fish at a significant disadvantage-to the human. ”
So maybe your argument is it fits in to the preservation of resources part of the BWCAW act?
Depth finders do not negatively affect the fishery. Do you remember the 70’s when the green box came out? It was the first depth finder. People were scared all the fish would be caught. Never happened...Then cameras came out...the same group...all the fish will be caught...never happened.
I am not sure you have ever used a “fish finder” I say that because you keep calling it a “fish finder”instead of a depth finder. I know that is how they are marketed, that doesn’t mean they really find fish with consistency. I could argue for many fisherman it reduces their catch rate—-if you have seen a lot of people use them you know what I mean. For others yes of course they may have more success. There is no research or history to support any theory depth finders hurt a fishery. So banning them wouldn’t help preservation...

What hurts fish populations is harvesting larger fish, harvesting too many fish. This is managed by limits and length limits. For example in the BWCAW you can only keep one walleye over 20”, in Quetico you can only keep one over 46 cm (18.11 inches). I think these rules are broken all the time...I’ve seen the pics on this website even...if you are for preservation push this part and education than banning devices. The most harm ever done to our fisheries was prior to the invention of depth finders when people kept the biggest fish they caught.

Finally the BWCAW and it’s rules were formed by an act of Congress. To arbitrarily ban a device that was not addressed in the act would take another act of Congress. I guess you can write your congressman to bring it up? But what solid argument...other than opinion...are you going to put in your request? I doubt anyone in Congress wants to waste their time on this to be honest.

Now if you want my personal opinion. I think it would be cool to have the area be completely devoid of technology advancements. Only Wood canoes, no gps, no depth finders, no satellite phones, personal beacons—-just us and nature and our own skills...But that is impossible and largely impractical now.

T