I have a book that I got from a school library that was giving away books for free. I am thinking that I got an awesome deal from what ive heard on the internet. It is titled The Fishes of Ohio, written by Milton B. Trautman. It is a big book, almost 800 pages, and is hardcover. the cover is green with 2 shad and a catfish on it. I was unable to find this on google images. The book has 2-3 pages on every species, and it seems awesome, but is this info still valid, or does its age prevent it from being useful? Im sure it is fine, and it is useful for iding fish even though it is black and white
Is this book still helpful? (The fishes of Ohio, 1981)
Started by
Guest_fishfray_*
, Jun 02 2013 04:21 PM
9 replies to this topic
#2
Guest_EricaWieser_*
Guest_EricaWieser_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 June 2013 - 04:37 PM
The information about the species themselves is probably still valid. Which species are still there can be confirmed using a modern reference, such as http://www.dnr.state...13/Default.aspx
#3
Michael Wolfe
-
- Board of Directors
-
- North Georgia, Oconee River Drainage
Posted 02 June 2013 - 04:38 PM
I have this one and think it is great (I bought it when I lived in Ohio back around the turn of the century). Yes, much if the information is very much valid and correct, most in fact. Sure there are some splits (species I mean that have been split into more than one) that are not shown. But the habitat and biology data is great... and don't totally dismiss a nice black and white line drawing with nice scale counts and ray counts and such.
Either write something worth reading or do something worth writing. - Benjamin Franklin
#4
Guest_Skipjack_*
Guest_Skipjack_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 June 2013 - 07:08 PM
Yes, it is useful. Things have changed to a degree, but not always drastically. Brian Zimmerman is working on updating the distribution of fishes in Ohio. If there is a specific question, Brian is always helpful, and knows where things are currently, better than anyone else in the state.
#5
Guest_fishfray_*
Guest_fishfray_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 June 2013 - 07:38 PM
Yeah, thanks, and this is what I was hoping for. The only change ive noticed is that redfin shiner is listed as Noptropis instead of Lythrurus
#6
Guest_Skipjack_*
Guest_Skipjack_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 June 2013 - 07:49 PM
And it is now split. L. umbratilus, and L. fasciolaris. Redfin, and Scarlet.
#7
Guest_fishfray_*
Guest_fishfray_*
-
- Guests
Posted 02 June 2013 - 07:54 PM
Are those the only 2 Lythrurus species? I have always found minnows boring until just recently...
#9
Guest_jblaylock_*
Guest_jblaylock_*
-
- Guests
Posted 03 June 2013 - 09:33 AM
I agree, even older books are still very helpful. I still use my KY Distributional Atlas from 86.
#10
littlen
-
- NANFA Member
- Washington, D.C.
Posted 03 June 2013 - 09:41 AM
fishfray, I have that same book except mine has a copyright date of 1957'. The B&W line drawings are great. I came across this particular book as our vet clinic was cleaning out it's little library in the back. The book is in rough shape. I decided to cut out, mat, and frame some of the pictures. It gives a very, "fishing cabin on the water feel" to my man-cave.
Nick L.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
NANFA Youtube Channel 
