Wild or stocked?

[dc410]

I was digging through some of my photos from earlier this year and came across this photo of a brownie that I caught and remember taking a second look and wondering before the release. What do you think - is it stocked, wild or maybe a holdover fish? I can see certain attributes of both. I wish the photo was of better quality (not so grainy) and I know there are parts of the fish that you really can't see very well. I also realize this question has been asked many times on the forum, just looking for some feedback. Thanks.

 

[PatrickC]

Stocker

 

[tulenkot]

Wild. Fins I do see look good.

 

[Brownie101]

Looks like a stocker to me, there is little or no red on the adipose fin and the fish has mostly drab colors. Did you catch it in a ATW or a tributary to one?

 

[boychick]

Wild... white edges on the fins, par marks and it looks too skiny to be a stocker. Stockers don't usually look like they have to fight for every meal.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

The fins are in good shape, that would be the only attribute that makes me think it could be wild. My guess is a young stocking. Par marks aren't an indication of wild, it's an indication of age. Dense spots and no red on the fins leads me to believe it's stocked.

 

[Chaz]

Stocked, colors aren't what I'd expect from a wild brown in PA, it's just all washed out. It has good fins but I can't see them real well to tell for sure.

 

[wgmiller]

I'm leaning towards stocked as well. Clear, crisp fins aren't always a good indicator of a wild fish as holdovers can have fins that "clean up nicely". The lack of red in the fish (adipose fin, spots, etc.) leads me to believe that its origins are from a hatchery.

As was already asked, what stream/watershed? That may help resolving the question.

 

[SBecker]

Wild holdover fingerling.

 

[whheff]

Wild.

 

[Swattie87]

On strictly looks...65/35 lean in favor of Stocker for me. Main feature for me in favor of wild is that I think I see an eye spot. But the absence of red, the spot pattern, and general coloration tip the scale to Stocker. Fins look good, but tough to get a real good look from that pic...I'd like a better view of the tail to say the fins look wild.

 

[krayfish]

Stocker and does it really matter? If you had fun catching him, that's all that matters.

 

[pcray1231]

I could go either way, but lean wild. I can't see the fins well enough to be sure, but their color looks right. And it has a pretty strong blue eye spot.

Overall colors don't pop out but I've caught plenty of wild ones that way. Same with the red.

Would not at all be surprised to find out it's a grown up fingerling.

 

[Maurice]

Stocked....from the susquehanna drainage. j/k :-D

No doubt about it. Probably from a co-op nursery. don't look like a state stockie in our area.

 

[djs12354]

krayfish wrote:
Stocker and does it really matter? If you had fun catching him, that's all that matters.

Not knowledgeable enough to chime in as to "stocked vs wild", but have to add a +1 to the second part of Kray's reply.

Aside from having a self-sustaining wild population being a "good thing" and important, what's the real difference? You have fun catching a fish. Hell, I enjoy just having time on the water and look on hooking up as a bonus.

 

[PatrickC]

dc410 wrote:
I also realize this question has been asked many times on the forum, just looking for some feedback. Thanks.

I think people just want to know from a curiosity standpoint. They are trying to learn and there are some fish with blended characteristics. I DON'T think most people are being elitist about it.

Now, you might see Geo, Shane, and me jokingly busting each other's nuts about whether a fish is a stocker, but we are just being goofs. Geo asked me last night if an Arctic Char I caught was a stocker....that's just us.

I do prefer to fish for wild fish, but that is primarily because of the locations where wild fish are found and because they are quite spectacular in their coloration. That being said, I take my kids for stocker trout, because they are in locations easy for the kids to get to and easier for them to catch.

 

[troutbert]

krayfish wrote:
Stocker and does it really matter?

It's about understanding streams and their fish populations.

If you are able to distinguish wild from stocked trout, you can start understanding what the situation is in the streams you fish.

It has practical uses in fishing, and importance in fisheries management, conservation and restoration.

 

[Gorosaurus]

When on the fence, lean stocker. For my money, I wouldn't think twice about labeling it such.

 

[krayfish]

Dwight,

Feel free to point out one fisheries biologist participating in the thread. The wild or stocked thing is a very tired subject line. Typically based on a bad photo and every Tom, Dock & Harry will chime in with there "expertise" on fish identification.

If he labeled the thread "Hey Mike, I think I caught a wild trout in XYZ watershed. Can you confirm, provide information or you opinion?". That might have been better.

 

[Swattie87]

In all seriousness I don't think Mike (or any fisheries biologist) could be appreciably more accurate than many of the "amateur" posters here…assuming the same set of facts: The same picture, and assuming both know and have firsthand experience with the watershed in question. If you're just working off a picture with no watershed info, even less so.

The point to be taken from these questionable wild/stockie threads is that it's really impossible to tell for sure without killing the fish and testing and comparing its genetics to known wild fish from that watershed and known stockers from that watershed. And even then you can end up with questions if more than one entity is stocking the same species in that watershed and getting their fish from different sources. There are many credible, knowledgeable anglers in these threads that often take very different positions from the same set of information…no way to be 100% accurate. It's nothing more than a best guess scenario in nearly all of these cases. Whether or not you enjoy the debate and discussion is a separate matter I guess.