# What Fish Is This?



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

After a little convo about splake and brookies (seems to happen a lot around here, heh) I decided to throw up a pic of a fish I caught a while ago that gave me the run around for a bit trying to identify it.

I know the identity of the fish - bonus points to whoever else gets it right first! haha (paging PBH, by the way. He'll have some good info on this for sure!)


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I vote Bonneville Cutthroat


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

I caught something similar last week. I think they're the same thing. I thought it was a Dolly Varden. What is it?


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

longbow said:


> I caught something similar last week. I think they're the same thing. I thought it was a Dolly Varden. What is it?


Rainbow

.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Mr. Goob is right on both counts.


----------



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

longbow said:


> I caught something similar last week. I think they're the same thing. I thought it was a Dolly Varden. What is it?


Definitely a rainbow.

Dollys will have striking similarities to brook and trout fingerlings (they're part of the char family), and they usually maintain a lot of those into adulthood.

Here's a small dolly









Some adult Dolly Varden










Similar in first glance to brookies, but different enough to easily tell the two apart for the experienced fisherman.


----------



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

Dodger said:


> Mr. Goob is right on both counts.


Goob is right about the rainbow from Longbow, but not about my fish.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

spencerD said:


> After a little convo about splake and brookies (seems to happen a lot around here, heh) I decided to throw up a pic of a fish I caught a while ago that gave me the run around for a bit trying to identify it.
> 
> I know the identity of the fish - bonus points to whoever else gets it right first! haha (paging PBH, by the way. He'll have some good info on this for sure!)


Ok, the white tips on the pelvic and anal fins would mean it is not a cutt, but a rainbow. The only other possibility might be some of the freshly planted golden trout the DWR dumped into the Uintas lakes last year that I caught were kind of washed out and not colorful, but were similarly spotted. If the fins were quite yellowish/orange and the white on the fins extended along the fin margain, then that is a possibility if caught in one of these lakes. Otherwise, I vote rainbow.


----------



## Dunkem (May 8, 2012)

Spence,that is the rare rocky mountain spotted,big dot,rainthroaty hybrid trout.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

spencerD said:


> I know the identity of the fish - bonus points to whoever else gets it right first! haha (paging PBH, by the way. He'll have some good info on this for sure!)


Am I being tested? Called out? Sheesh...

...OK, you asked for it:



longbow said:


> I caught something similar last week. I think they're the same thing. I thought it was a Dolly Varden. What is it?


longbow -- not to embarrass you, or anything.....but rainbows / cutthroat / brown trout -- basically any _TROUT_ are VERY different than members of the Char family (brook trout, dolly varden, lake trout,etc.).

When comparing these kinds of fish (just look at the pictures in this thread) all you have to do is look at the color of the spots. Trout have dark spots against light backgrounds. Char have light spots against dark backgrounds. Easy peas'y. Lemon squeezy.

Ever wondered why a tiger trout get's those weird squiggly lines vs. spots? Because your mixing a trout (dark spots, light background) with a char (light spots, dark background). The result is a mess -- squiggly lines, etc.



Catherder said:


> The only other possibility might be some of the freshly planted ...


See -- this ^^^ is why I like Catherder. He's the smartest guy here. He's the only one that brought up stocking. Before trying to identify what the fish might be, it would be wise to find out what it _SHOULD_ be. Knowing the name of the water the fish was caught from is critical in identifying fish. What kind of fish are stocked in this water? Are there naturally occurring fish in the water? Before answering the original question, I'd want to know those two things.

did it have basibranchial teeth?


----------



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

PBH said:


> Am I being tested? Called out? Sheesh...
> 
> ...OK, you asked for it:
> 
> ...


No, I honestly wanted your input, you know your stuff. Wasn't calling you out, man. Sorry if it came across that way.

As for this fish, it has been correctly identified as a rainbow trout. I caught it from Santaquin Creek, which has long had a population of self-sustaining rainbow trout in the upper reaches, followed by a stocked population in the lower reaches.

The DWR stocks rainbows in here, but only a few to supplement the population that takes care of itself just fine. And the fish are stocked near the Tinny Flat campground. The self-sustaining population is up higher, above it.

I have heard rumors of brook trout in the highest reaches, but this is a rainbow stream.

It just has a very interesting spotting pattern, similar to cutthroat, which is why I posted it here. However, as has been noted, the white tips on the fins are the giveaway here. Also, knowing that rainbow are stocked here and sustain themselves helps.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

spencerD said:


> I caught it from Santaquin Creek, which has long had a population of self-sustaining rainbow trout in the upper reaches, followed by a stocked population in the lower reaches.


I vote rainbow trout!



spencerD said:


> No, I honestly wanted your input, you know your stuff. Wasn't calling you out, man. Sorry if it came across that way.
> 
> It just has a very interesting spotting pattern, similar to cutthroat, which is why I posted it here. However, as has been noted, the white tips on the fins are the giveaway here. Also, knowing that rainbow are stocked here and sustain themselves helps.


no worries on calling me out -- It did not come across negatively at all. 

spotting -- It's hard to say from the picture for certain, but it appears to me that the fish has a few spots on it's head. maybe even one on the nose between it's eyes. These are very good indications of rainbow trout, even in cases where spotting increases towards the tail like this particular rainbow.

I know this was simply a test for us all -- but when out fishing a very good rule that you can remember is this:
If cutthroat (or any other kind of fish) are not found in the water you are fishing, then the fish you just caught probably isn't a cutthroat!


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Ok, then it's a cutbow based on where you caught it (information that would have been useful before you wanted everyone to guess). It's definitely not a pure rainbow, IMO.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

PBH said:


> I know this was simply a test for us all -- but when out fishing a very good rule that you can remember is this:
> If cutthroat (or any other kind of fish) are not found in the water you are fishing, then the fish you just caught probably isn't a cutthroat!


I think that's generally right. But, historically, if a creek had fish in it, they were cutthroats around here. We didn't have rainbows until man put them here (in Utah at least). So at some point, cutthroats probably were found in that creek, especially if it hooks up to Utah Lake.

Weird things happen - Alvord cutts, Greenback cutts, maybe a possibility of some yellowfin cutts hanging out somewhere in France? A cuttbow in Santaquin creek has a lot better odds than anything that's happened to the Alvords or Greenbacks over the years.

White tips on the fins look rainbow-y. A spot or two on the head, that says rainbow to me too. But the concentration of spots towards the tail, that looks all cutthroat.

Bottom line, without dissecting it and counting pyloric cacea, there's no way to know for sure and we may not even know then.


----------



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

PBH said:


> I vote rainbow trout!
> 
> no worries on calling me out -- It did not come across negatively at all.
> 
> ...


Cool, glad it didn't come across that way!

It's definitely one of the most interesting rainbows I've ever caught. Just looks so cutthroat like! There are other pictures I have, where spots are visible on the head.


----------



## spencerD (Jan 14, 2014)

Dodger said:


> I think that's generally right. But, historically, if a creek had fish in it, they were cutthroats around here. We didn't have rainbows until man put them here (in Utah at least). So at some point, cutthroats probably were found in that creek, especially if it hooks up to Utah Lake.
> 
> Weird things happen - Alvord cutts, Greenback cutts, maybe a possibility of some yellowfin cutts hanging out somewhere in France? A cuttbow in Santaquin creek has a lot better odds than anything that's happened to the Alvords or Greenbacks over the years.
> 
> ...


I'm sure it flowed in Utah Lake at some point, but its primarily used for irrigation and the last couple miles are barely more than a trickle of water an inch deep before its diverted into irrigation tubes.

Maybe when the town was settled the creek connected to Utah Lake, but it doesn't now. And that's a long way for it to travel without a remnant creek bed somewhere, but with all the growth lately it could very well have been covered over.

As for fish in there historically, cutts would be the thing. But here's the thing - I fish that creek more than anyone else I know. I hold the record for the largest fish from it, and I know all the holes like the back of my hand. most people don't even think there's fish in it!

Not once have I pulled a cutthroat from the creek - the fish have been clearly rainbows.

It's entirely possible that some rainbows were planted into the creek when cutts still lived there, interbred, and now we have a very rainbow-dominant cuttbow because only rainbow trout have been stocked, according to DWR reports.

The population of fish in the river have never once caused me to question if they were rainbow trout - they all bear the typical rainbow trout markings. Except the one in this thread, obviously. The point is, even if a cuttbow hybrid existed at some point (which it probably did) years and years of stocking rainbows may have "bred out" the cutthroat portion of these fishes' DNA, which might be possible with this self-sustaining population of rainbow trout.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Good thread.



Dodger said:


> Ok, then it's a cutbow based on where you caught it (information that would have been useful before you wanted everyone to guess). It's definitely not a pure rainbow, IMO.


It certainly is possible that Spencers bows are hybridized with cutts from long ago if they are a longstanding population. No question. However, just for discussion sake, I assume you make this pronouncement above based solely on the fishes spots? I humbly disagree. Look at any 10 purebred trout from the same species or subspecies. I will submit that you will see considerable variation among them. Again, here in the thread below were several pure Bear Lake cutts caught within 3 hours of each other that have radically differing spotting patterns. If you were just going by spots, you'd think you had several subspecies caught, but they all were good old Bear Lake cutts.

http://utahwildlife.net/forum/7-fishing-trip-reports/78537-tiger-brown-3.html

In the fish spencerD pictured, every other trait screamed rainbow but the spots were slightly different than "average". IMO, this just represents the standard variation within a species and not something one can use to pronounce that it is something different.


----------



## longbow (Mar 31, 2009)

PBH said:


> longbow -- not to embarrass you, or anything.....but rainbows / cutthroat / brown trout -- basically any _TROUT_ are VERY different than members of the Char family (brook trout, dolly varden, lake trout,etc.).


I actually appreciate that. I was told we had rainbows and Dollys in our lake so when I caught something that had purple splotches on it's sides I assumed it was a Dolly. I work with some of the best agriculturalist in the world. If I had showed them my "Dolly" I would have been laughed out of our hatchery.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

A few more pics.

These 2 decent browns were caught minutes apart on the LoPro this spring. The spotting on these is radically different, but I doubt we would be quick to call them different strains. (One is Loch Leven and one German, even though they both are splashing around in the same redds in the fall? Uh, no.)





Now, here is another one for you all. What are these?


----------



## .45 (Sep 21, 2007)

Catherder (ouch) just knows stuff !:O||:


----------



## wyogoob (Sep 7, 2007)

I never even seen the white on the pelvic and anal fin.

Geesh, never go first on these "what is it things" :grin:


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

It's to small to matter. Let it grow out of nymphal stage where we can start seeing what it decides to be.


----------



## Springville Shooter (Oct 15, 2010)

Whatever it is, if you stick it on a hook to catch a bigger fish you are breaking the law.:grin:-------SS


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

spencerD said:


> No, I honestly wanted your input, you know your stuff. Wasn't calling you out, man. Sorry if it came across that way.
> 
> As for this fish, it has been correctly identified as a rainbow trout. I caught it from Santaquin Creek, which has long had a population of self-sustaining rainbow trout in the upper reaches, followed by a stocked population in the lower reaches.
> 
> ...


Looks exactly like a few I caught in a tiny canyon up here 2 years ago, couldn't tell if it was a regular rainbow or not at the time, but when they are that small it can be harder to tell. By the way, when you move closer I will have to show you a few spots up north.


----------



## 30-06-hunter (Sep 22, 2013)

PBH said:


> I know this was simply a test for us all -- but when out fishing a very good rule that you can remember is this:
> If cutthroat (or any other kind of fish) are not found in the water you are fishing, then the fish you just caught probably isn't a cutthroat!


A few years back I was fishing a stream around late August that had never been stocked with Kokanee in either the lake above or below it, but lo and behold there was a lone Kokanee in the stream in full colors, they are unmistakable during the spawn and this must have been one lonely fish. I called the DWR biologist for that area and he said that occasionally the fish will jump tanks or get dumped in the wrong tanks at the hatchery and end up in an area.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

30-06-hunter said:


> A few years back I was fishing a stream around late August that had never been stocked with Kokanee in either the lake above or below it, but lo and behold there was a lone Kokanee in the stream in full colors, they are unmistakable during the spawn and this must have been one lonely fish. I called the DWR biologist for that area and he said that occasionally the fish will jump tanks or get dumped in the wrong tanks at the hatchery and end up in an area.


i simply stated that if the fish are NOT found in the water, then it won't be them.

You found a kokanee. Obviously it was one!


----------



## LostLouisianian (Oct 11, 2010)

Where I come from we refer to fish that size as catfish bait...


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Catherder said:


> Now, here is another one for you all. What are these?


Where were they caught? 

You're turn:



















and.....1 more for good measure:


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> Where were they caught?
> 
> You're turn:
> 
> ...


For mine; High Uintas.

For yours; Where were they caught?;-)

But pending that information, 1 and 2 look like rainbows, #3 looks like a female pink salmon.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

Cath -- caught in British Columbia.

You are technically correct. 1 & 2 are rainbows. Steelhead smolt, to be specific.

#3 is not a pink. The size is throwing you off. Also, the pic does not show the tail well enough to determine the spot shape (round vs. oval), but spot size should help...

(i have a very bad pic of a coastal cutt -- but the quality just wasn't good enough to mix it in with those steelhead)


----------



## johnnycake (Jul 19, 2011)

That spot pattern looks like a Chinook


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

PBH said:


> Cath -- caught in British Columbia.
> 
> You are technically correct. 1 & 2 are rainbows. Steelhead smolt, to be specific.
> 
> ...


Ok, I'm intrigued by #3. I was thinking a jack chinook also, but I'd love to see the shadowed body as well. The tail spotting (and body spot shape) rules out silver and the spotting and body color would rule out chum and sockeye. The other alternative would be a steelhead with large spots.?


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Got home from work and have a better monitor here. Doubt it's a steellhead, so that basically leaves either a jack chinook or a hen pink as far a I can tell. Anxious to hear what it is. :grin:


Nobody wants to take a crack at the Uintas fish? It isn't much of a trick question. If one needs another clue, Murdock basin.


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

PBH, is the last one a silver? Perhaps a baby chinook?


----------



## brookieguy1 (Oct 14, 2008)

Catherder said:


> Got home from work and have a better monitor here. Doubt it's a steellhead, so that basically leaves either a jack chinook or a hen pink as far a I can tell. Anxious to hear what it is. :grin:
> 
> Nobody wants to take a crack at the Uintas fish? It isn't much of a trick question. If one needs another clue, Murdock basin.


Must be juvenile golden trout.


----------



## Tagthefisherman (Apr 6, 2014)

These fish both came from santaquin canyon. One is from above tinny flats and the other is from below. I assume they are wild rainbows but you can see that the fish spencer caught has less spots that are more defined.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

yes -- pic #3 is just a jack spring (chinook). Tail spots are round and much smaller than the spots of a pink.



I really don't know anything about the Murdock basin on the Uintah's. Isn't that an area that get's some golden trout? They certainly have some characteristics of golden's (spotting pattern increasing toward the tail), and they do have par marks, but I can't quit tell the # (9 - 10?). The coloration is not brilliant, but that might just be characteristic of Murdock Basin golden's? White tipped anal and dorsal....


you tell us. What are they?


----------



## LOAH (Sep 29, 2007)

Catherder's fish are goldens, though they're very washed out. Fresh from the hatchery. They need more time in that high elevation water with natural forage to color up properly.

I've seen some pics of them from this year and they've gotten much more vibrant.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Correct, they are goldens. They were washed out because they were only 5 weeks removed at the time from the hatchery truck when I caught them. As LOAH noted, word is they have colored up quite a bit and now look like what one would expect from a golden. 

Going along with the discussion on the thread, I caught a bunch of them that day and was surprised at how variable the spotting was on them. Some had almost none, to a few with spots around the tail as is "typical" for a golden, to the one in the first picture that had quite a few spots widely distributed. That spotted one had a red belly and the other characteristics of goldens so I doubt it was a "tank hopper" bow from the hatchery.


----------



## PBH (Nov 7, 2007)

OK. Last one. Identify this fish:










(if you answered: "the BIG ONE", then you are correct!!)


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

Just a quick follow-up on those pale goldens I posted pictures of on this thread. I paid them a visit yesterday and it appears they look more "themselves".









Now I wish that they would put on a little weight. :|


----------

