Wild Fish? What do you think?

[BowmansBum]

Hey Folks,

First time posting here. Caught this fish on Bowman's Creek last night. The creek has been really hammered by the flooding so I was enthused to see a lot of activity. Question - does this look like a wild Brown? This creek is known for more stock than wild fish but this guy looks like the Browns I catch on the Delaware. Thanks!

 

[pcray1231]

Tough one.

My gut says stocked, but in the stream a while. Lack of red coloring anywhere. Fins are decent but not perfect.

It has the blue eye spot, and the fins are semi-transparant, which are the wild markers it posesses.

I honestly could go either way on it. Goin with holdover....

For others: Bowmans not on the natural repro list. However, multiple tribs are.

 

[The_Sasquatch]

My gut reaction, looking at the picture blown up, is that its wild. It could be a hold over too. I know, you're getting lots of help here aren't you!?

Its a nice fish either way. Wouldn't mind catching it myself.

 

[Swattie87]

Not that this will help any either but colored up Browns with lots of spots are the toughest to tell IMO. This fish has characteristics of both wild and stocked fish as the previous posts have mentioned. Based solely on looks it's a true fence sitter. Throw in the location where you caught it and I'll go 60/40 holdover. Nice fish either way and welcome to the site.

 

[KenU]

I really do wish the PFBC would start adipose fin clipping all hatchery trout at an early age. Oregon does this and has different creel limits for wild and hatchery fish. It's a lot of trouble, but makes distinguishing hatchery from wild fish easy for anglers and biologists as well. I think the knowledge gained would be worth it.

 

[StaggerLee]

That's a really nice fish! I'm with the others in saying it's probably just a nice hold over thick stockie. But nothing wrong with that in my book. So how did she fight?

 

[MKern]

My only hols-up calling this a stock is the blue eye spot. All other characteristics lead me to believe it's a stockie/holdover.

The adipose fins does a lot for fish stabilization while holding in faster water. While it's a good way to distinguish between wild and stocked; it's not the best thing for the fish.

 

[Fishidiot]

It's a beautiful brown.
If I had to hazard a guess....I'd vote wild.

 

[PatrickC]

pcray1231 wrote:
Tough one.

My gut says stocked, but in the stream a while. Lack of red coloring anywhere. Fins are decent but not perfect.

It has the blue eye spot, and the fins are semi-transparant, which are the wild markers it posesses.

I honestly could go either way on it. Goin with holdover....

For others: Bowmans not on the natural repro list. However, multiple tribs are.

DITTO, the other Patrick C hit all the points I was thinking. I think it is a nice hold-over.

 

[BowmansBum]

Thanks for all the input guys. The blue coloration behind the eye is what had me thinking maybe wild. Either way it was a fun fish to land, made a couple good runs dragging out line.

 

[Swattie87]

I agree...the eyespot was the big hangup for me too. If not for the eyespot I woulda been pretty certain it was a holdover. No way to tell for sure on this one.

 

[pcray1231]

Yeah, definitely a nice fish anyway you cut it. Doubt we'll get consensus on that one. You can tell with relative certainty 95% of the time. This is an example of the remaining 5%.

 

[PatrickC]

Swattie87 wrote:
I agree...the eyespot was the big hangup for me too. If not for the eyespot I woulda been pretty certain it was a holdover. No way to tell for sure on this one.

All of the OH brown trout streams are stocked with fingerlings. Almost all of the fish I catch have the blue spot. Those fish are technically hatchery fish that are hold-overs. That is the main reason I stopped using the blue spot as the main consideration. I still think the blue spot has something to do with a wild diet and that hold-overs develop it over time for that reason. I have no proof for that theory...just a theory.

 

[csoult]

I say wild, red adipose and blue spot makes me think so.

 

[tomgamber]

Its a really nice hold over....no red spots. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Let me ask you though...when you landed it did you go "is it wild?" right away? Or did you say, "nice F@#$ing fish!" first?

The only difference it really makes is whether you were considering eating or mounting it or not.

 

[BowmansBum]

Tom - that is funny! First thoughts has Holy $%@# this fish is pulling MUCH harder than the usual fish in this creek. I lost my net a few weeks ago so landing him was difficult and only thought was to work quick to unhook, get a photo and get him back in the current. I don't ever keep em. Started wondering if he was wild or not as I was taking the Clouser out of his lip.

 

[zenherper]

Fishidiot wrote:
It's a beautiful brown.
If I had to hazard a guess....I'd vote wild.

+1, but I don't know much. However, I do know I would enjoy catching it.

 

[tomitrout]

I'll vote wild..nice red trim on the adipose, blue spot and there's probably more red in those lower spots than the exposure lets on. Nice clean fins for a fish of that age and kinda has that pissed off wild look in its eye...sounds like it didn't fight like most of those boring dishrag stockers do either.

Nice catch regardless.

 

[Maurice]

I say stocked and held over more than a year. Perhaps stocked by a club at a very young/small age which is why it developed the eyespot.

The excessive black spots and lack of true red ones leans me toward stocked more than wild. And some of the black spots are taking on redish tones, indicative of stocked trout that have held over. We see this alot in our watershed in the fall. Without the eyespot of course.

Fins are still a little pasty too.

 

[teacreekfreak]

it is a great looking fish either way, however, i never catch wild fish with that MANY spots, especially close to the back like the one in question, anyone have pics with definite wild fish with that many spots???

But it does have other wild 'indicators' that are listed throughout the thread.

Just a question to all..... I use all the usual traits listed here to determine or guess whether a fish is wild (red adipose, color of spots, fin condition, blue eye spot, spot patterns, etc..), but are these just personal observations or is there scientific literature to back these 'wild' traits, if so, where can i find this information????