Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
SCOFIELD MONSTER *UPDATE!!!!!!!!!!
#21
What method did you use to catch them? Bait or something artificial? Congratulations on catching some of the biggest tigers I've ever seen posted from a lake in Utah.
Reply
#22
Those are some beauties!  There seem to be fewer and fewer tigers in Scofield.  We used to regularly catch them through the ice and from shore.  I remember catchinon getting a double on one rod one winter.  I caught an 18" tiger through the ice early last winter, but that's the first one for us in several years.  Returned him to grow up. 

I see they stocked almost 30,000 tigers in Scofield this year, average 10.64".  With all the competition from muskies and wipers, I don't think we'll see many (any?) over 20" again, let alone over 30".
__________________________
j.o.a.t.m.o.n.

jack of all tackle, master of none
Reply
#23
For all of you that did not notice, this thread was originally posted in 2013.
Reply
#24
Had me Confused also????
               O.C.F.D.
[Image: download.jpg]
Reply
#25
Yes sorry everyone, I saw the thread and posted to it even though it is a 2013 thread. 

These fish were all caught in 2013. I think at that time we had the perfect storm, a very large population, that was very small in size, of chubs. These tigers were able to thrive and had all of the food they could eat. The chubs were easy for them to consume, I noticed in the years that followed that the chubs grew to be to big for the tigers to eat and thus curbing the size of the tiger trout. Then we all know what happened and the lake got unhealthy.

Every once in awhile they gill net a big one but not like they used to have in there. At the time I wasn't aware of the catch and release state record so I ended up beating it two times unknowingly and keeping one of the fish (pictured below). 

I was using chub meat on a number 2 J-hook. 

Thanks for the kind words. Attached are some pictures of the mount. I put a pen on him for a size comparison. 

[Image: 20201116-162533.jpg]

[Image: 20201116-162447.jpg]
Reply
#26
Nice looking mount.
Reply
#27
I wonder how the meat looked
Reply
#28
(11-26-2020, 06:48 AM)TT600 Wrote: I wonder how the meat looked
The meat looked and tasted awful! I do not recommend eating these lol.
The meat was really white and very mushy, the flavor was not good either.

Maybe someone that has more knowledge than me on the issue can chime in but I think at some point when their diet goes strictly to meat theirs changed colors and taste. I have had tigers that are smaller before and they were not bad, but these older bigger fish are no good.
Reply
#29
(11-30-2020, 03:24 PM)bhallows Wrote:
(11-26-2020, 06:48 AM)TT600 Wrote: I wonder how the meat looked
The meat looked and tasted awful! I do not recommend eating these lol.
The meat was really white and very mushy, the flavor was not good either.

Maybe someone that has more knowledge than me on the issue can chime in but I think at some point when their diet goes strictly to meat theirs changed colors and taste. I have had tigers that are smaller before and they were not bad, but these older bigger fish are no good.
Diet plays a major role in the color, taste and texture of fish flesh.  In waters like Huntington (Mammoth) the tigers don't get huge and their diet is mainly invertebrates...with a few minnows thrown in for variety.  Their flesh is almost always pretty red and is delicious.  Here are a couple of pics that show that purty fish flesh.
[Image: STEP-3.jpg][Image: STEP-4.jpg]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)