wild browns

[shademt]

A recent comment in another post from someone about the red Adipose fin on some browns , promted me start an open discussion.
There was a time when i thought that wild browns all possesed a red spot or tip on the adipose fin. I no longer think that. (though i could be wrong). Over the years i have caught many, many browns that in all appearance seemed to be wild, yet had no red adipose. My first indication of wild origin is not the color, but the fins...although holdover trout do indeed color up if left in the stream. They often do not have the perfect fins of a wild fish. Even a stocked trout left in the stream long enough will grow their fins out. But there is often upon close examination some abnormality.
I have also observed browns that had orange spots and i have observed browns that had spots that were clearly red.
One other thing that has been my experience. Is the fact that i have never caught a truly large brown, that possesed a red tipped adipose. A 14 to 16" is probably the biggest. Browns over 16" have never had a red adipose.....could just be my experience. I'd be curious to hear if anyone has ever caught a large one?
SO...in a nutshell....is there a fullproof way to determine wild over holdover...other than the fins. ?

 

[wildtrout2]

My two biggest wild browns (17" & 18") both had red on their adapose fins. Every wild brown trout pic I have (lots) shows at least some red on the adapose fin. I believe the "eye spot" or dark smudge on the gill plate is a big indicater of a wild fish.

 

[SkyBlue]

Here is a photo with both wild trout indicators. The Dark Spot behind the eye and the Red Adipose Fin. This fish was caught on Penns creek and a good example of a wild brown. I always use both to confirm if it's a wild fish.

 

[Fishidiot]

shademt wrote:
SO...in a nutshell....is there a fullproof way to determine wild over holdover...other than the fins. ?

No. Not perfectly fullproof.

This is a perennial topic we discuss every year and I'm on the record as skeptical of the claims made by many forum members that they can always tell wild browns from stockies due to a single thing like spots or fins. While the red adipose, clear fins, and blue spot are very good indicators, they're not full proof. I've caught many wild browns, mostly larger, that lacked these characteristics. Also, its a myth that all wild trout have perfect fins. Check out a large brown trout after spawning season and you'll often see some ragged fins and tail.

To be sure, there are trout that I'm willing to say with 99% certitude are wild, esp if they come from unstocked waters. Brown trout, once they get large, are the toughest to tell wild from stocked. I make the wild-or-stocked call based on the stream where the fish was caught and the totality of characteristics that the fish exhibits.

 

[afishinado]

Here is some info I found written by a FBC biologist on IDing wild trout:

Your question concerning the difference between stocked and wild trout has been forwarded to me for reply. During our field sampling, we are often confronted with having to identify whether a trout is wild or has been stocked. Sometimes, it can be a very difficult task indeed.

For the most part, the first thing we look at is fin wear. Recently stocked hatchery trout will have some degree of fin wear, particularly the caudal (tail), pectoral and dorsal fins. In contrast, wild fish will show very little of this type of fin wear. The difficulty in relying on fin wear for identification is that sometimes hatchery fish will come from small, low-density hatcheries such as those in our Cooperative Nursery program. Oftentimes these fish will show very little fin wear, which may lead you to believe they are wild trout. I've been stumped myself by these Cooperative Nursery trout.

Another thing to keep in mind is that worn fins will tend to "heal" on hatchery trout following stocking. Thus, differences in fin condition between stocked and wild trout become less and less distinct the longer the stocked fish has been in the wild. By late summer or early fall, it can be extremely difficult to tell a hatchery trout from a wild trout, even based on fin-wear. A few seasons ago we were sampling a stream in September and caught stocked hatchery brown trout that looked identical in every aspect to the wild brown trout that were also present in the stream. The only way we knew they were hatchery fish is that we had fin-clipped them in March prior to them being stocked. Although the clipped fin on these fish had grown back, they were altered in shape and readily identifiable.

Head size and body coloration are usually very poor indicators of hatchery or wild origin. If a proper diet is available, a stocked trout will "color up" relatively quickly. Much faster, in fact, than it would take for its fins to recover from hatchery wear. Additionally, I have sampled wild trout populations where many individuals had a very dull and drab coloration which is normally associated with hatchery fish. Head size and shape, body coloration, spotting patterns, etc... exhibit so much variation, even in wild populations, that I would be uncomfortable saying a trout was hatchery or wild based on those characteristics alone.

As you mentioned, fingerling trout can be very difficult to distinguish between hatchery and wild. One clue is that, generally, hatchery fingerlings tend to be larger in overall body size than wild fingerlings. However, this is a generalization and not a hard and fast rule. When we sample to assess the contribution of wild vs. stocked fingerlings to a population, we will fin clip the stocked fingerlings to be more easily identified after they are stocked.

One final method of identifying stocked from wild trout is to take scale samples and examine them under high magnification. The growth rings, or annuli, on the scale will look very different depending on whether the fish spent time in a hatchery or not. If the scales are from a hatchery fish, you will see abnormally fast rates of growth corresponding to the time period the fish spent in the hatchery. Once the fish is stocked, its growth will slow down and appear more like a wild fish. Although the equipment needed to use this method is impractical for use by the angler, this is the method I would use if I was unsure and really needed to know if a trout originated from a hatchery or from the wild.

Mr. Martin, I hope that I have answered your questions concerning identifying hatchery vs. wild trout. Outside of comparing scales under high magnification, telling hatchery from wild trout can be quite difficult at times, particularly during the late summer. Lots of practice, and knowing the stocking history of the watershed the trout came from can also be quite helpful in your determinations!

Good Luck Trout Fishing in 2007!

Regards,

Bob Weber
Coldwater Unit
Fisheries Management Division
Pennsylvania Fish and Boat Commission

Link to source: http://www.springcreekanglers.com/stockedorwildtrout.htm

 

[brookiesRfun]

Thanks much afishanido, good information. I fish in a couple of streams that feed stocked waters and sometimes I catch browns that appear wild but just not sure. This does clear it up a bit.
Thanks,
Greg

 

[Chaz]

I disagree with the fin cliped fish statements. I've caught fin clipped fish a few years after they were clipped and they still haven't grown back, so I'm not so certain of the relyability of saying that clipped fins grow back quickly, if you asked me I'd say they don't grow back even in a few years.
I think one thing you can rely on is coloration, yes hatchery fish color up, but they always have washed out colors, meaning that even if they last one year to the next the edges of where the colors meet are always blurred or fuzzy. Not so on wild fish.

 

[PACOFRANSICO]

The blue spot behind the eye isnt agood indicator I think. I have seen alot pics of lake run brown from lake erie and ontario and most have blue spotts and there stocked.....

 

[pete41]

Lochs and Germans brought different looks-

 

[PACOFRANSICO]

There all muts...In PA I doubt there are alot of "pure" strains of wild trout intact.

 

[pete41]

so how do you really tell if native or stocked-lol
fun but rather misleading.

 

[pcray1231]

I'm with Fishidiot.

Lack of fin wear, the blue/black eye spot, red adipose, overall coloration (especially red spots), are all very good indicators of wildness in brown trout. Location is another, I'm much more likely to call an iffy fish wild if it's miles from stocked water and in a known wild brown trout population.

But no individual indicator above is foolproof. Very often, stocked fish exhibit one or more wild trout indicators, and wild trout often lack one or more wild trout indicators. Stocked trout show up in weird places too. Fish travel on their own, sometimes huge distances (dozens of stream miles). The amateur bucket brigade is active, kids and adults catch stockies and stock them somewhere else. Fish escape hatcheries, so even on the likes of unstocked streams like Spring Creek you get a fair number of stockers.

Bottom line, use a combination of the indicators. 90% of the time, you'll be able to make a fairly confident, and correct guess. 9% of the time you'll be able to make a less confident guess, and still be correct more often than not. And 1% of the time, you just throw up your arms, and anyone else claiming to know really doesn't know either.

 

[BMarx]

If they clip the bone on the fin it does not grow back. The webbing part of the fins do grow back, however trout cannot regenerate bones. A clipped adipose fin does not grow back, nor does a clipped pectoral fin. When the PFC does surveys, ie big spring, they often take a notch out of a fin to indicate they captured the fish, this is done in the webbing part. I saw them doing it and asked they say it grows back there, but fins clipped off wont grow back.

Great post though as far as the techniques are concerned. Really badly deformed fins never quite regrow perfectly and they remained quite nubby even after time.

 

[Squaretail]

Really badly deformed fins never quite regrow perfectly and they remained quite nubby even after time.

This is true. I suppose when ones cutting the fins on thousands of trout you're bound to make a bad cut here and there. I've witnessed trout that have had stumpy fins for four years after remaining in stream, while its co-fish grew back in just around one year.
Only sure way truly is the fish scale method, but once they're so wild-like in appearance that I cant tell, I just give the fish its hard earned praise and call him wild.

 

[pcray1231]

I just give the fish its hard earned praise and call him wild.

I tend to strive for accuracy, and you'll frequently see me say "probably wild" or "probably a holdover".

But I find your standpoint as perfectly valid. It doesn't really matter in the end anyway. It's a respectable fish, period.