# A First...



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I caught this fish on the A section of the Green River. A cuttbow?

I’ve only ever caught one cutty on this river and it was 17 years ago. This would be the first cuttbow I’ve caught here.


----------



## CPAjeff (Dec 20, 2014)

Looks awesome - congrats!


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

A cuttbow? PBH and W2U's favorite fish! I'm sure they will weigh in at some point but here is my take. (Nice fish regardless.)

Based on the pictures, I think this is just a nice rainbow. Rainbows can fairly frequently have some jaw "slashing" like your specimen. The rest of the fish looks like a classical rainbow to me including white tips on the pelvic and anal fins. I have caught a number of rainbows that have had as much or more slashing as is seen here and they were in situations where hybridization was unlikely.

Quotes from the DWR guidebook.

"•Any trout with cutthroat characteristics
(*not necessarily jaw slashing*) is considered to be a cutthroat trout."

and

"Rainbow trout....often lacks bright coloration under the jaws but occasionally has some color"

Nice fish nevertheless, and how was fishing generally on your trip?


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

It’s unfortunate the picture can’t do justice to how big that fish really was. I have not caught a fish with that girth on that river before. And it does not show any other cutty characteristics, you’re right. The throat slash was simply so pronounced, I was surprised. 

Overall, the fish were very healthy. No stunted, snakey fish with big heads. Lots of broad shoulders. One of the best years for quality fish I can remember. The fishing was fantastic.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

That is one beautiful Rainbow!!~>>O


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Gorgeous fish and great catch. Looks like a beautiful day on that stretch. Seems like a great autumn to be up there.

Interesting that they use the "not necessarily" language at Strawberry but not Panguitch. That's one of those grey areas that will cause confusion.

Reality is most of us will never know without sending off samples for microsatellite analysis. Probably going to be a while before broad scale genetic studies evaluate the waters of Utah like they have up north. Until then we'll fall into our camps. Given studies up north, I fall into the camp that if they can hybridize then it's probably best to assume they have hybridized. Accurate field evaluation, as measured against genetic evaluation, after the F1 generation is extremely difficult for even experts. Knowing that system, any hybridization could be well past F1 at this point.

One of the complicating factors, that I haven't researched, are when throat slashes where listed as an occasional feature of pure rainbow trout. If they were identified after potential hybridization then such physical features are a suspect claim. But I don't know when they became part of the assumed natural history of the species. All part of the complications that became reality as we translocated species outside their native range. Especially for those that we did so before the relatively recent advent of genetic sequencing, which is most.

Until then it will just be fun internet chatter 😜😁. At least it's an easy way to identify the dorks.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

backcountry said:


> Interesting that they use the "not necessarily" language at Strawberry but not Panguitch.


It is my understanding that so many otherwise "legal-to-keep" rainbows have jaw slashes at Strawberry that they were forced to add that language in order to have some level of feasible rainbow harvest there.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

I have to agree with catherder. Looking at those pictures, I see no other characteristics that say cutthroat. Even the maxilary lines up with the eye -- cutthroat maxilary extends beyond the eye (by quite a bit).

Did you check for basibranchial teeth? Rainbow trout do not have basibranchial teeth. Cutthroat trout do. Hybrids have some. If there were any at all, it could be called a hybrid.



Backcountry -- it does not take microsatellite studies, or even genetic studies to identify hybrids. You just have to know what you are looking for.


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

PBH said:


> Did you check for basibranchial teeth? Rainbow trout do not have basibranchial teeth. Cutthroat trout do. Hybrids have some. If there were any at all, it could be called a hybrid.


Did I check for WHAT?!?!?!?



PBH said:


> Backcountry -- it does not take microsatellite studies, or even genetic studies to identify hybrids. You just have to know what you are looking for.


Clearly I don't! Please refer to my statement above. :grin:


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Vanilla said:


> Did I check for WHAT?!?!?!?
> 
> ...
> 
> Clearly I don't! Please refer to my statement above. :grin:


This article has some pretty good info on what you can look for:
https://hikingandfishing.com/cut-bow-vs-rainbow-vs-cutthroat/

Basibranchial teeth are found on the tongue. Rainbows don't have them, but cutthroat do. They can be used to distinguish different kinds of cutthroat. Colorado River cutthroat have a different number range for these teeth compared to Bonneville, Yellowstone, etc. When you cross a rainbow with a cutthroat, the resulting hybrid will have _some_ basibranchial teeth.

Also, as mentioned, look at the maxillary -- the corner of the mouth. Rainbows typically line up with the posterior end of the eye, while cutthroat maxillary extend past the posterior of the eye.

Of course, also look at other characteristics: white tips of fins, spotting patterns, etc.

When identifying a hybrid, look at all of the characteristics -- not only 1. A hybrid will have a mix of all the characteristics.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

PBH said:


> I have to agree with catherder. Looking at those pictures, I see no other characteristics that say cutthroat. Even the maxilary lines up with the eye -- cutthroat maxilary extends beyond the eye (by quite a bit).
> 
> Did you check for basibranchial teeth? Rainbow trout do not have basibranchial teeth. Cutthroat trout do. Hybrids have some. If there were any at all, it could be called a hybrid.
> 
> Backcountry -- it does not take microsatellite studies, or even genetic studies to identify hybrids . You just have to know what you are looking for.


The studies I am aware show failure rates upward of 40% (maximum I'm aware of, not mean) by biologist using field identifications when accurately identifying hybrids. I'd have to dig them up again but genetic analysis displays significantly more hybridization than most field biologist recognize. Which only makes sense when we look at how early we stocked rainbows in American history. Even Benhke talks about the difficulty of truly understanding pure rainbow stock from such variables.

Add in another 40+ years of natural reproduction of rainbow trout in historic cutthroat waters and field identification is pretty fubar. It works for enforcing basic state rules but not for systematics. Post-F1 populations of hybrids can run the gammut of physical features. A system like the upper/mid -Green with generations of cutthroats and rainbows interacting means there are likely plenty of hybrids being misidentified. And no one set of dichotomous keys manages to count hybrids as accurately as they do pure strains. Experts tend to undercount cutbows more than they do rainbows or cutthroats. Basibranchial teeth help but can be absent or present on hybrids which make them a better tool for assessing "pure" rainbow stock. There is actually reason to hypothesize that the gradient in hybrid morphology tends to bias towards rainbows but that's largely untested at this point.

It all comes down to the level of error we accept. For day to day fishing it doesn't matter for either camp. I just treat any fish with any cutthroat characteristics (anywhere I am) as such out of an abundance of caution. But my readings into the genetics make me highly suspicious of confidence in field identification accuracy for just about all of us. If trained professionals undercount hybrids even with quality dichotomous keys that leads me to believe most of us do so even more often. And in a system like the Green in which both species have had ample time to naturally reproduce than I am guessing the many post-F1 generations of fish have more than enough morphological diversity/plasticity to be messing with all of us.

I would think Strawberry could be a prime candidate for continued genetic studies if an unusual amount of fish are showing throat slashes but no other cutthroat features. My assumption is that a change in policy may indicate that factor. If there is natural reproduction there than that is a good reason to be concerned about hybridization.

Your mileage may vary. Like I said, there are several well justified camps when it comes to this unresolved issue. And it's all pure avocational dorkiness if we aren't professionals working to stop rainbow trout introgression.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

backcountry said:


> It all comes down to the level of error we accept. For day to day fishing it doesn't matter for either camp.
> 
> I would think Strawberry could be a prime candidate for continued genetic studies if an unusual amount of fish are showing throat slashes but no other cutthroat features.


The truth is that in most rainbow trout stocking applications, the issue if the stocked bows are 100% pure or 96% is utterly irrelevant. Using Strawberry as an example, since the stocked bows are pre sterilized so they don't breed with the Bear lake cutts, genetic questions simply don't matter. What does matter is that a high percentage of them have jaw slashes and thus present a regulatory problem if your language states that a jaw slash is a "cutthroat" sign. Rainbows destined for the local community pond or really almost all of our "bow" fisheries where no reproduction takes place probably are in about the same category.

The only exception I could think of is for native trout restoration projects. In that case, you would want as pure of stock as is possible.

Next, it sounds like you are under the assumption that jaw slashing is an exclusively cutthroat trait in the pure state. I do not believe this to be the case.

One last word on the genetics issue. There is even controversy about what constitutes a pure strain fish by genetic analysis. Look at the debate about the greenback cutt. Genetic analysis determined that what was thought to be the truly "pure" greenbacks were not, except for one population found away from the main historic range. Dr Behnke hotly debated this conslusion before he died, claiming "his" pure headwater populations had very little chance of being hybridized. He may have been right or wrong, but relying only on genetic markers is not without pitfalls and differences in opinion. 
(FWIW, I hope Behnke was right because I caught one of his greenies in Colorado and I don't want to erase it from my life list. )


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

100%. Systematics isn't remotely settled. We don't even have consensus on the definition of "species". 

I definitely don't believe slashes are only in cutthroats. They are definitely referenced in rainbows, increasingly in modern literature. As I said in a previous post, I'm actually curious as to when they became part of the rainbow's official morphology. I can't find anything earlier than Benhke's 1979 USFS manuscript and he specifically mentioned it's likelihood of indicating earlier hybridization. But that's a curiosity and maybe one addressed elsewhere that I haven't stumbled upon yet. Sadly without institutional access anymore I'm pretty kneecapped by paywalls.

Genetics isn't the end all but it offers a "better" empirical control compared to field assessment. But ultimately it's just another tool. And it has built in assumptions that can't be ignored. 

My skepticism is more ultimate than proximate. We've watched multiple times in our lifetimes how previous confidence in scientific understanding has been upturned. "Currently" we've seen plenty of scientific research that calls into question the accuracy of field identification. It's good enough for most situations but once we start pealing back assessment of individual trout like this one it gets murkier. Hence the perennial internet debates. Hence my default.

Good to know that about strawberry. I'm not as familiar with Strawberry as I've never fished there. Did their historic poisonings successfully eradicate all previous genetic lines of rainbows? I assume so from your statement so it sounds like you answered the question on ability to naturally reproduce there 😬😆 

PBH and others explained to me why Panguitch was a poor candidate for hybridization given its natural and human history. That fish I wondered about years ago was clearly a stocker given the fin damage. Given the complexity of the Green system I'm less convinced such hybridization is rare. But maybe I'm missing information.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

To get back to the Green after my misdirection with the Strawberry:

Looks like studies have shown about 10% wild stock of rainbows and cutthroats. That was 20 years ago. Has there been a full treatment in that section to eliminate wild stock? If not, given studies, how can we expect to identify hybrids accurately and consistently, given the years of potential crosses? 

Good chance/bet Vanilla's fish is a rainbow but I have yet to see a key that eliminates a fair chance of misidentifying a hybrid as a pure strain. Just so many mutable characteristics after 20+ years of hybridization.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

backcountry said:


> Good to know that about strawberry. I'm not as familiar with Strawberry as I've never fished there. Did their historic poisonings successfully eradicate all previous genetic lines of rainbows?


Besides the documented and implemented management plan for Strawberry, the finding was based on a 10-11 year old personal conversation with a DWR biologist working at Strawberry. At the time, there had only been one fertile and jizzing male rainbow come through the egg collection stations up there in the years since the treatment. That specimen was promptly, uh, taken out of the gene pool and harvested. Whether that fish represented a sterilization fail or a survivor was unknown but I inferred they thought the former. I am unaware that anything has changed up there.

The number of bows I've caught up there with at least faint slashing is so high that it far exceeds what could conceivably be expected from extremely rare (if any) natural rainbow reproduction that would occur there.


----------



## AF CYN (Mar 19, 2009)

I don't know anything about cutbow identification, so I'll just compliment your beautiful fish. Well done. Great looking trout!


----------



## Vanilla (Dec 11, 2009)

I keep trying to post more pics from the day. There were some beautiful fish caught. But it keeps giving me an error code saying it couldn’t upload the pics saying a security token is missing. Sorry, I’ve tried.


----------



## backcountry (May 19, 2016)

Hope you get it figured out as I need some vicarious experiences. I've got a solo trip in the bank and may just need to go up there. Need to cash in well before our due date.

How many days did you get to play?


----------

