Fishing Forum

http://www.examiner.com/x-19210-Fly-Fish...fied-trout
[signature]

that is the ugliest thing i've ever seen. i hope those never see utah waters. and our other genetic mutant freak (tiger trout) should be removed as well.
[signature]

looks like frankenfish!
[signature]

That fish does not look like it should have been concieved!! They say it was a success, Wow! imagine what the failures looked like.
[signature]

that makes a chub look pritty.
[signature]

I'd still fish for it. With all that muscle I'll bet it makes the Kamloops seem wimpy. I don't really see what's wrong with tiger trout. They're pretty, they fight hard, and they hammer streamers pretty hard. Works for me.
[signature]

Just curious... If you want to get rid of tiger trout since they're a "genetic mutant freak", why stop there? There are splake, tiger muskie, wiper, ect. that fit the same criteria as a tiger trout. Again, I just want to better undertand your stance.

i'll preface this by saying that i'm neither an ecologist nor an ichthyologist, so please excuse and point out any inaccuracies in my argument if you really know better. my stance is that i'm mostly pro-native fish. utah's ecosystems evolved with species like the bonneville cutt, colorado cutt, and the mountain whitefish. it is a general ecological rule that ecosystems remain healthier if they include more native species from the top to the bottom of the food-chain. sometimes the introduction of non-native species is devastating (ie the bufo marinus toad in Australia), and sometimes the impact of the introduction is more subtle (ie brown trout in the provo river) ,but only rarely (if ever) is the introduction of the non-native species a beneficial thing for the health of the ecosystem. as you would assume, i also favor reintroduction of other native species like the river otter and the salmonfly. i do think that there are exceptions to this rule if one is to think realistically. i'm fine with rainbow trout in heavily fished ponds and reservoirs, as they are easy to breed and they grow quickly. i'm also ok with fish like brown trout in heavily fished rivers that experience mostly catch and release, as these fish are hardier than native species like the bonneville cutt, and they can better handle the angler abuse they are bound to experience. again, i recognize the place that non-native fish have in utah's fisheries, and i could probably name another dozen instances where non-native fish are appropriate. two things bug me about tiger trout especially. first, they are primarily piscivorous (read: they eat other fish) from an early age. that makes it difficult for other species of fish to coexist in their presence over a long period of time. second, of the several dozen tiger trout i have caught, a very high percentage of them have had some kind of physical deformation. removing my fly from a fish with a displaced jaw and scoliosis just isn't quite as appealing as removing it from a healthy native fish. one could argue that tiger trout are a good fish to introduce because they eat the chubs that can overwhelm lakes and reservoirs. i would counter that argument by saying that the native bonneville cutt is just as adept at that task. they are also relatively resistant to whirling disease, but i don't think we're at the point in utah where populations of native fish cannot handle the whirling disease epidemic. sterility is the one good thing about tigers, and at least they will they will die off quickly if they prove to cause a significant problem in a river system.

i don't know of any studies regarding the long term impact of tiger trout, and this info. is off the top of my head. if you know of any scientific studies regarding tiger trout, please share.
[signature]

[#0000bf]Deleted[/#0000bf]....thats one of the ugliest fish ive ever seen...
[signature]

Very nicely put AG.

Ugly...yes...but we might need to go this way with all the invasive things around today. No Tiger Muskies, whirling ...so on.
[signature]

I'm with you AG, that is one repulsive looking fish. I think it's shocking looking because trout fishing is an asthetic activity for me. Trout are beautiful and live in beautiful places. I'm put off by Tigers for the same reason; the high percentage of deformities. I'd expect that thing in the picture to be caught out of a drainage ditch next to the freeway.

I happily fish for the non-natives and hybrids too, so feel free to shout "hypocrite". But f they're going to present us with new hybrids, for heaven's sake please make it species that are decent looking!
[signature]

That is one ugly fish!

I know that these fish are being breed as an aquaculture only breed -- a high percentage meat fish, but I think it would be really irresponsible to have them anywhere that they could escape.

All that they would have to do is live in the wild long enough to breed once and it would be a horrible mess!

Fish are not as easy to keep confined as cattle.
[signature]

Like previously posted, I am not an expert. Splake, Wipers, Tiger musky and Tiger trout can all natuarally happen in nature, right? It is a cross of the sperm and eggs. Therefore those species are true hybrids. This fish is genetically engineered to be this way not using "natural" resourses. This thing looks like it was in a pond next to a nuclear plant.
[signature]

To quote one Homer Simpson:

Burn it! Burn it! Send it to Hell!!!
[signature]

They spent all that time and money when we already have one like it here in Utah, called the Humpback Chub, affectionately known as the " humpy". ( sorry I don't have a pic). I am sure that the final result will be aesthetically better.

first thing that came to my mind was damn i bet it would give ya a good fight!
[signature]

Me too. That thing looks all muscle! And if it's attitude matches it's looks....WOOOOO!
[signature]

That thing belongs in a tank at area 51. The fact that it can cross breed in the wild and probably no one has any idea what long term, physical side effects this tampering will cause; I say stick with the aliens and forget it.
[signature]

definitely the ugliest rainbow I have ever seen. These fish and their gene pools should be destroyed. As we mess with nature and its DNA, we also need to know when we have created a monster and when it should be destroyed.
[signature]

AG not to hash on your post but your argument is based purely on emotion. Your two reason for not liking Tigers are. 1- they are piscivorous but all trout are this way at a certain size. Is this really a biological reason to exclude Tigers from Utah waters? Do you have the same opinion with Pike, Lake Trout or Burbot?
2- They are highly deformed. I don't see a abnormal rate of deformations in Tiger trout more then any other hatchery pet. I see a higher rate of abnormalities from damage caused by anglers not genetics.

You say your pro-native but there are exceptions in certain waters. Maybe I'm just confusing myself but where is the biological reason in any of your post to be so anti Tiger.
[signature]