My buddy caught this looks alot like a natural tiger trout they are super hella rare crazy fish. Can anybody confirm this im 90% on a tigerhttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/21/qymuny2y.jpg
Printable View
My buddy caught this looks alot like a natural tiger trout they are super hella rare crazy fish. Can anybody confirm this im 90% on a tigerhttp://img.tapatalk.com/d/14/05/21/qymuny2y.jpg
Could it be a hatchery brookie with worn or bitten off fins? I've seen lots if stocked fish with stubby pec fins. From the pics I googled tiger trout have more stripes than spots.
that's a Brook trout or Speck ( my opinion ) and have been catching them for 40+ years. but a nice plump one.
I have never heard of a tiger trout? It looks like a speckle.
OK I looked up tiger trout and yes I guess they exist, but I highly doubt that is one doesn't look anything like the pictures I find.
http://www.unb.ca/research/institute...igertrout.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TigerTrout3.jpg
Looks like a well fed speckle to me.....probably about 2 1/2 yrs old.
Yup, IMO not a tiger... Straight up speckle, but a good one:)
Fished plenty of pools that hold both spec and browns, but never caught a tiger, yet...
The pectoral fins are orange tho like a brown no red and white flanked like the back ones. Its defineatly not a stocker and its a juvinile. I know my trout or "char" in a brookies case just never seen one like this i have caught zillions of specks
Bahhh who knows maybe its a freak
I don't know I have caught many speckles that looked by that one if it is a tiger trout than there not even close to be rare.
Looks like a Brookie to me.
Now I know you won't reveal Bryan, but it might help. A certain stream/river is known to have produced the odd tiger
The #1 rule of fish ID is NEVER use colour as an ID point.Quote:
Originally Posted by BryanG
It looks like a brookie to me as well.
It's 100% a brook trout (speckle). Tigers have more of the brown trout hue (golden brown) to them and the vermiculations (worm like squiggles) that pattern the back of brookies carries all the way down the sides which gives the appearances of stripes, hence tiger.
Cool looking hybrid, extremely aggressive. It would be extremely rare to catch one in Ontario, because of their aggressive nature they have never been stocked here, so it would have to happen naturally. There are a few places in the states where they stock them, I think Utah has the best Tiger opportunities.
Okay it seems its a speckie just wierd looking
I believe the reason it doesn't happen that much is most fish don't fertilize other speacies nests, they eat their eggs... Lol
Both browns and specs do spawn in fall. It would be neat if they made them in a lab like splake and stocked them on a few lakes.
They do, just not in Ontario.
Quote:
Originally Posted by intothedeep
Also they may not use exactly the same spawning areas, unless spawning habitat is limited.Quote:
Originally Posted by intothedeep
Cross breeding is exceptionally rare because its two different species. They're freaks of nature. Brown trout and brook trout arent really similar at all. Brook and lakers are much closer related and thus easier to cross.Quote:
Originally Posted by intothedeep
Looks like a speckle to me . I don't see anything unusual about it either . Fatty and congrats .
TD
Id bet a little money Mr Baraz could name a babbling brook or two, where a Tiger has been brought to hand
;)
The old rule of hybridization everyone learns in school is two animals of the same species produce fertile offspring, two species of the same genus produce infertile offspring, and two species of different genera cannot produce offspring. This justifies brook trout and lake trout (two species of the genus Salvelinus) producing infertile offspring (splake). If the rule held fast 100% of the time, tiger trout wouldn't exist, since brookies and browns are of different genera - Salvelinus (char) and Salmo (Atlantic trout/salmon), but on rare occasion freaky things happen. So it's really more a biological barrier to more tiger trout existing than a behavioural or ecological one, and it would probably not be possible to reliably create this freak occurrance in a hatchery.
Anyway I agree with the others that the pic is a brookie.
its a small brookie doesn't even look like a tiger lol.
Nunyer Creek is one I could name for sure Mr. B!Quote:
Originally Posted by JBen
did know one say splake? slightly forked tail might suggest that???
Its a brookie...Quote:
Originally Posted by fishslayer
agreed
I'm going to add my two cents... I say splake... Fork in the tail seals the deal for me brookies I've caught have a distinct square tail... But again I'm probably wrong haha
Either way I can guarantee 100% that it would taste great fried up on a camp fire! Nice looking fish!
It's a plump wild creek spec. No splake in southern O creeks... Some specs have a little fork.
I stand corrected lolQuote:
Originally Posted by intothedeep
8 to 10 inch Speck
It's a speckle for sure, I could barely make out the light and dark vertical bars in the picture which are typical of a juvenile speckle. They lose the bars as they age. It's usually more pronounced on the smaller ones, from what I read years ago, they disappear when the fish hits sexual maturity.
Roe+
People think that natural hybridization doesn't occur. I catch tiger muskie quite often and we definitely don't have a stocking program for them here.
But yeah thats a speck haha
Nope it's a Brookie.
Natural hybridization obviously occurs, its just far more prevalent in some fish (like muskie/pike) then others (salmonids). Part of the reason is that brook trout arent actually a trout, they're a char, and not all that closely related to true trout.Quote:
Originally Posted by blumpkinturlet
It is a speckle have been fishing all over Ontario for well over fifty years