we were very successful catching Walleye and SMB last year but struck out targeting LT. I have a fish finder that has side imaging that I'm considering taking off my boat and bringing this year to help better find LT. I'm curious if anyone has been successful in using side imaging in the BWCA?

I am sure I am in the minority on this but I find the technological advances in fishing disheartening and removes a good amount of the sport of it. Went fishing with a guy last year who used some state of the art side imaging. Literally boated around looking for trophy sized fish.

Made me appreciate the boundary waters even more. Sad to hear that will soon no longer be a refuge either. Not sure where to draw the line on technological assistance but it seems like we are teetering. Are we going to start using drones for locating deer to hunt?

I understand where you're coming from but I'm spending lots of money on these trips and driving over 20 hours round trip. Unless you're using a cane pole and homemade lures you're using some level of technology. With so much time and money invested in these trips, I want to make the most of them. I'm not a trophy fisherman and I only keep what fish I eat each day and nothing more.

You don't need to apologize or justify your use of fishing technology. All that matters is that you stay within the law and that you are personally comfortable with the ethics of your decisions.

Getting to your specific question. I have had SI on my BWCA boat for the past 3 years, I have primarily targeted lake trout during that time period, and I have very rarely used SI. I have caught fish every trip, ranging from dinks to eaters to giants. Having a fish finder is a huge help, but basic 2d sonar with mapping and GPS is the way to go in my opinion. Depending on what you have on your boat, you might be able to just buy a basic 2d compatible transducer and power cable and make it really easy to swap between canoe and boat.

There are a couple of issues that make SI less than ideal for use in the BWCA: 1) Transducer size, shape, and function. These things can get unruly in size, creating drag and making them difficult/awkward to mount. And because they shoot to the side and not downward, you can't mount them in the canoe and shoot through the hull. 2) Power and weight. To see the nitty gritty details that make SI valuable, you need at LEAST a 7" screen, preferably a 9" screen, and the brightness/contrast need to be dialed in for maximum visibility. (Trust me, I've had a 5" unit with SI and it was basically useless). On a multi-day wilderness trip this means you're either bringing several cheap but heavy 12v SLA batteries, or perhaps 1 or 2 expensive but much lighter weight lithium batteries.

Simply put -- it's doubtful that SI is the silver bullet that is going to get you over the top on your quest for lake trout. If you let us know your timeframe and general lakes on your route, I bet several folks will chime in with LT advice that will be helpful to you.

Lake trout are arguably the toughest "Grand Slam" species to catch for folks inexperienced with the species. IMHO, success on lake trout is less about fancy technology and more about fishing skill/knowledge. No offense, but it sounds like you don't know how to catch lake trout and this has nothing to do with your lack of a side-imaging fish finder.

I have spent >100 days fishing in the Boundary Waters/Quetico and have never brought a depth finder (similar philosophy to RatherBeDuffing). Yet I have no trouble "finding" lake trout (likely because they are fairly widely distributed/scattered in their ideal habitat and water temperature). I catch lake trout pretty much every day that I fish for them, and often in profusion. Between a simple paper map and looking at the habitat/shoreline once I arrive at a known lake trout lake, I can estimate pretty much where I will be catching them.

IMHO, you would be better off leaving the depth finder at home and instead invest some time/effort learning where, when, and how to catch lake trout. It took me a few trips to really get dialed in on them and likely you will have to put in your time as well, fish finder or not. YMMV...

corc08: "we were very successful catching Walleye and SMB last year but struck out targeting LT. I have a fish finder that has side imaging that I'm considering taking off my boat and bringing this year to help better find LT. I'm curious if anyone has been successful in using side imaging in the BWCA? "

Since I am totally pro-sonar and won't discourage you from using it in the BW, I figured I would jump in and help out. In my opinion, a simple sonar is best for locating Lake Trout, side imaging is best for locating Lake Trout structure/habitat (both are valuable in their own ways).

As Lake Trout are generally deep/suspended (and larger than your average fish), they are fairly easy to locate with a simple sonar/fish finder. They move quickly and generally do not hunt or travel in schools, so finding one may or may not even be useful information to the lake trout fisherperson. What I look for is trends and mark those on gps as I explore a new lake. As I troll around, I will mark every fish that I see suspended out over deep water, or hugging structure deep enough to assume you're looking at a lake trout (30+ feet). As I work a lake over, hopefully trends will start to emerge and you can concentrate on those areas you've marked fish.

I think for lake trout fishing it is easier to locate the best structure on the lake and work that over to increase your odds of running into more fish. Lake Trout lakes are generally very large and have a massive volume of water due to their depth. yes, you can catch lake trout trolling around aimlessly, but if you're looking to get into serious fish you have to find the structure. I also find that the larger lake trout tend to feed on or near bottom near or on top of structure, so getting their attention trolling can be tricky.

Side imaging is great for locating rock piles, offshore reefs, steep inclines/declines and the bottom structure lake trout tend to like to hunt (sandy/pebble bottoms, medium sized rocks/boulders interspersed, big rock piles, etc). Once you start to put together patterns on a specific lake, you will start to find fish.

For me, the most important tool of my sonar (humminbird helix 5) is the autochart feature. Most of the lakes up here have very little, none or very inaccurate lake topography available so it is important to me to be able to map these areas to find the key structure I like to fish (offshore reefs, sunken islands, flat areas adjacent very deep water, etc.)

Once you locate the key bottom features/locations on a lake that trout tend to feed, you won't need to fish any other area of the lake.

So...long story short...#1 for me is autochart....#2 basic sonar features...#3 side imaging (which I chose not to invest in for my BWCA sonar because it decreases battery life and requires a larger transducer).

I hope this helps! Don't get discouraged, lake trout fishing is really tough when you start, but only gets easier as you learn :)

Here's a link to a video I put together talking about how I work over an unfamiliar lake using my sonar to locate the trout. On this particular trip, the fish were not holding to structure, oddly enough, so I spent most of my time trolling near shorelines and caught plenty of fish.

Trolling Spoons Using Sonar To Locate Trout

Thanks for your comments. I've actually watched many of your videos!

You're allowed one SI unit AND one cane pole. Anything more will upset the fish gods and surely curse your efforts.

While trolling for Lakers, my fishing buddy and I scan the surface for clues. We can see much further than side view sonar.

Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your input!

Thanks for your comment. I appreciate your input!

jlw034: "You're allowed one SI unit AND one cane pole. Anything more will upset the fish gods and surely curse your efforts.
"

LOL.

This thread and the difference of opinions is interesting to me.

Of ~10,000 lakes in MN, some people seek out the few lakes with restrictions on motors (a technology which has been around for > 100 years) yet insist on bringing along the latest & greatest electronics to try to catch an additional few fish over what they could otherwise catch with a little knowledge and experience...

To each his own, it's a free country, no judgment. But to me, lugging along a bunch of electronics to catch a few extra fish seems like overkill and would detract from my overall meditative experience in the wilderness - just like I don't bring my alarm clock, smartphone, or watch; and the same reason I bring my canoe instead of my motorized bass boat and electric trolling motor. YMMV...

But people bring GPS devices now for mapping, PLB, and plenty of other technology.

Should we only be allowed cameras with film? No digital cameras! Only aluminum canoes....no composites of any sort! Carbon paddle?? Way too techy :)

I love to use SI on boats but I'm not sure it would have a huge return for lakers. I've got a Garmin 93sv with down, side, and live scope as well as a Helix 7 w/ mega SI/DI. I can see all sorts of stuff that I never knew was there before. Have I ever taken anything like that to the BW? Nope, until now I never felt like the juice was worth the squeeze. But I'm fine with people that do want to. Now that I've got a nice lithium battery for my Garmin I'd think about using that and my Helix. The transducer size between SI and non-SI isn't much at all.

I'm bringing a 93sv for the first time this year. Everyone has different goals for their BWCA trip. One of mine is to catch as many fish as possible. We'll see if the extra bulk (which is substantial) is worth it. Head, ducer, mounts, two batteries, solar charger.

I'm a bit of a map nerd, so the ability to see and save what's beneath me is pretty cool.

Fishing unmapped waters in Canada has shown me the incredible value of SI.

As long as the B-dub is kept pristine, go nuts!

cyclones30: "But people bring GPS devices now for mapping, PLB, and plenty of other technology.


Should we only be allowed cameras with film? No digital cameras! Only aluminum canoes....no composites of any sort! Carbon paddle?? Way too techy :)


I love to use SI on boats but I'm not sure it would have a huge return for lakers. I've got a Garmin 93sv with down, side, and live scope as well as a Helix 7 w/ mega SI/DI. I can see all sorts of stuff that I never knew was there before. Have I ever taken anything like that to the BW? Nope, until now I never felt like the juice was worth the squeeze. But I'm fine with people that do want to. Now that I've got a nice lithium battery for my Garmin I'd think about using that and my Helix. The transducer size between SI and non-SI isn't much at all. "

Fishing is not a video game!

taoeatoat: "Fishing is not a video game!"

I catch less fish thru the ice when the locator is in the hole... I miss what is happening to my rod. But it is great for checking the previous holes when deciding which to try again.

Related to laker fishing, a locator gives me depth which helps me avoid the shallows.