Knowing I'm out of commision for ice fishing, my buddies continue to send ice fishing photos, just to tempt me to get back on the ice.
The last batch included these two photos which I assume are of a tiger trout. The fish was about 20" and caught and released in the Salamander Bay area.
Can anyone confirm the species and has anyone caught these at the Berry?
[signature]
That is not a tiger trout. It looks to be a cuthroat or a cuthroat hybrid of some sorts. It has some distinct cuthroat markings on it. My bet would be a cutbow, but that is funny looking cutbow. Also could be a cuthroat/brown trout hybrid which would be extremely rare in the wild. Probably an accident at the hatchery. That is my best guess.
[signature]
Man those Cuts have NO self-respect. Looks like some poor ol' Burbot got a little to close.. [laugh]
Its a Hybred...
[signature]
That's a beautiful fish. TubeDude: we need a ruling over here about the species.
[signature]
That's a Green Sunfish. [angelic]
[signature]
LOL...
I don't see any characteristics of a brown at all, but it defenitely has cutt in him... Either a unique cutt, or a cuttbow I would think. [
]
[signature]
[cool][#4040ff]Mighty purty fishy. I forwarded copies of your pictures to a couple of the DWR folks. Alan Ward responded with this input:[/#4040ff]
[#4040ff][/#4040ff]
Cool fish! I have seen a few that look similar to that before at Strawberry. Other than the atypical spotting pattern, it sure looks like a cutt with the orange fins, general coloration, and head shape. I have seen a tiger in Strawberry, but that does not look like one. The spotting pattern and other characteristics do not look like the typical rainbow/cutthroat hybrid either. My guess is it is cutthroat with a strange spotting pattern. Their spotting patterns are generally very similar, but we do see some wide variations on occasion.
[#4040ff]My opinion: Definitely NOT a green sunfish.[/#4040ff]
[signature]
Awesome looking fish! I have never seen a fish so spotted that it had spots on its pectoral and anal fins!
My guess is that this cutt is the equivelent of a freckled faced red headed step child! [
]
[signature]
What about the spotting on the lower lips? Don't know if I've ever seen spotting like that before. That's too cool.
Gaetz
[signature]
The head doesn't seem to match the body. Some murmering of photoshop has been suggested (just look closely at the head compared to the body -- you can actually see a line...).
so, the real question is, what are the two fish used to make this picture?
[signature]
That's weird! Looking at the pattern of the color, it has definite characteristics of a Splake, Lake trout, or Tiger. I have never seen a trout with the maze pattern instead of distinguished spots other that the above mentioned. I would have to agree that it was a hatchery mix up or possibly just a retardation of color.
[signature]
[font "Comic Sans MS"][black][size 3]PBH, you bring up a good point. If you zoom in on picture #1 look at the jaw of the fish. It does look like a photo shop deal....but WHY!?[/size][/black][/font]
[signature]
not only the jaw -- but look at how clean the transition from jaw to background. Nice clean line. Then, look at the rest of the picture (or any other picture) and look at similar transitions. They aren't as clean-cut.
The snow-background on the top of the head isn't nearly as clean as the lower section.
You can follow the "cut" from the gill-plate right down through the pectoral fin.
definate photoshop job. Good photoshop job, but fake none-the-less.
Congrats on getting Alan Ward to identify it as a cutt! Maybe we can get a regulation change to include this fish in the slot?
[signature]
I think you might be on to something here.
[signature]
Totally a hack job with photoshop. I'm surprised the "experts" here didn't pick up on it faster...
[signature]
To all of you photo shop experts...
The images were cropped & enlarged to show detail. The images are slightly pixelated but I can assure you photoshop was not used to create these photos.
Believe what you want but the pics are real.
Dave
Attached are the original photos
[signature]
Pretty cool lookin cutt if you ask me. I'm sure it is genuine. All humans sure don't look alike, so I don't know why people think animals all have to look the same when they are the same species. People called BS and Photochop when they saw the first pics of the new state record elk, then when it was confirmed they all seemed to vanish into the woodwork. I've used photoshop, and you have to be pretty darned good with the program to get it to realistically enhance photos like has been suggested here.
[signature]
[cool][#0000ff]Don't sweat it bro. No matter what topic we post up there are "experts" who take a contrarian approach.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]You can always tell the experts...but you can't tell them much.[/#0000ff]
[#0000ff][/#0000ff]
[#0000ff]I work a lot with photos too and all I can see is a very nice fish with some unusual coloration.[/#0000ff]
[signature]
Thats a sweet looking fish. All those experts are just jealous[
]. Thanks for the pics
[signature]