Brook or Rainbow?
#1 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 11:06 AM
trout.jpg 77.11KB 6 downloads
Upon initial inspection, I was thinking brookie. Then we talked to some of the people who lived there and they told us that the DNR had stocked rainbows 20 years ago in an adjoining lake and someone recently caught a 16" fish. That made me think more toward rainbow, but it just wasn't much more than brook trout habitat. Then I was looking at the new Ontario book (which is awesome, I'll describe in a mini-review later today) and I am really thinking this is a brookie.
Crappy pic, I apologize. I think Lance will have much better photos. I was really kickin' myself for having killed the DSLR.
Thanks!
Todd
#2 Guest_mikez_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 03:44 PM
Don't know if that's scientific but I've never seen a rainbow without spots on the tail.
Problem is it doesn't look brookie to me either. Here's a couple 2 or 3 inchers from central maine that show the char pattern of dark background with light spots within the parr marks. The whole body will be colored like that later. Both fish show vermiculation on the head already as well.
Brown and rainbow are light background with dark spots.
#3 Guest_nativeplanter_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 04:50 PM
http://ucce.ucdavis....urveynumber=241
Linnk is for brook trout. Click on "California fish species" on the left, and you can select other trout. Not all of the fishes profiled have photos of fry, but these do.
From the looks of it, it looks more like a brook than any of the other trout.
#4 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 05:17 PM
http://www.dnr.state...ions/salfon.pdf
vs.
http://www.dnr.state...ions/oncmyk.pdf
I think the combination of the patch on the jaw, the clear anal fin, those white stripes and the black border on the adipose all combine to say brook trout. I'm looking forward to seeing some of Lance's pictures.
This was in Michigan, so it's not a threatened species, as it would be in Ohio. But still, it was in the Maumee. Now the really big question that will be certainly difficult to answer - was it introduced? In either case, it's going to have years, if not 1,000's of years of isolation, which will theoretically will produce a loss of genes... That may explain the changes in the basic coloration. I think they're pretty variable across the range.
Thanks again, I'd love to hear any other input.
Todd
#5 Guest_mikez_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 06:07 PM
Brookies were dumped all over the country in any water remotely suitable and plenty that were not.
Even the generic, standard hatchery brookies sometimes take hold and reproduce when conditions are adequate.
#6 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 07:37 PM
On the other hand, this is a cold spring run that's about 400 meters long, that flows into a warm, eutrophic kettle lake (ie hypoxic conditions in the hypolimnion). I doubt even the most boneheaded of stockers would have wasted fish on a series of springs that isolated for brookies, because there is no continuous habitat beyond these few spring runs. There are as far as I can tell, 3 other spring runs that come down the tills on what appears to be a bedrock "cliffs" about 40 meters higher than the lake's level. Be some neat waterfalls if all that till wasn't in the way
Todd
#7 Guest_mikez_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 08:07 PM
The brook the two trout in my pics came from is often no more than two feet wide and a few inches deep. Doesn't even look like any minnows could live there. Only brookies and sculpins live in it.
#8 Guest_natureman187_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 09:06 PM
Attached Files
#9 Guest_blakemarkwell_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 09:13 PM
Todd, I hope by killing your DSLR you mean batteries drained because that was a nice camera!
Blake
#10 Guest_natureman187_*
Posted 20 July 2009 - 10:19 PM
Lance driving over 80 miles? Man, must of been a special occasion with the family or something. Awesome stuff, keep the photos coming!
Kinda, you're mom said she was going.
If there are springs, they might just be native. You'd be surprised how small an area brookies will breed in if they can get running water water cold enough.
The brook the two trout in my pics came from is often no more than two feet wide and a few inches deep. Doesn't even look like any minnows could live there. Only brookies and sculpins live in it.
This spring is about the same description, ice cold with only trout and iowas.
Attached Files
#11 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 21 July 2009 - 07:31 AM
Mike, I know they'll live in the smallest of water, but what blows my mind is that the largest individual we caught was not much more than 5 cm, and there's so far as I know, no "downstream" habitat for any adults to live. The lake probably stratifies, but I'm going to guess that the hypolimnion becomes hypoxic. Will they actually spawn at 5 cm? Amazing. Or maybe it's a multi-year kind of thing where there's 4 or 5 left, and they get the next batch off. Even more amazing. That should be so prone to extirpation, it's not even funny.
Blake, I did what they always tell you to never do... I changed lenses AND the flash card with the camera on. Let this be my $300 lesson to you all. Don't do it. Even if you THINK you have a good reason to be in a big danged hurry, 'coz you still may not get the shot.
Todd
#12 Guest_creekcrawler_*
Posted 21 July 2009 - 07:54 AM
This here's a lil rainbow (technically a steelhead, or are they not steelhead til they leave their stream for the lake?....)
#13 Guest_farmertodd_*
Posted 21 July 2009 - 11:19 AM
Thanks again for your thoughts and photos!
Todd
Edited by farmertodd, 21 July 2009 - 11:20 AM.
#14 Guest_ashtonmj_*
Posted 21 July 2009 - 02:31 PM
#15 Guest_smbass_*
Posted 08 August 2009 - 11:22 AM
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users