Attitudes toward really big trouts

[lestrout]

By really big, I mean over 20 inches for brownies. For decades, I harbored a dislike for these guys, seeing them as cannibals. This developed as I learned that they tend to depress my favorite dry fly ffishing by intimidating and eating the smaller trouts that tend to rise more than the two footers. I saw them as nocturnal feeders (I like to see what I'm doing while ffishing, and prefer not to keep falling into the water) that preyed on their own kind. In fact, on open waters, I approved of the bait and spin anglers that targeted and kept the cannibals, in order to make room for the smaller risers.

Gradually, my sentiments changed, but my epiphany crystallized when I sat in on a presentation by a passionate defender of the specimens with the genes that favored bigness. This was at one of the PA Museum of Fly Fishing events in Boiling Springs, and he made the case that the original (albeit invasive) brown trouts that were stocked a century ago were much different than the current hatchery products that have been engineered for fast growth and high utilization of Purina Trout Chow rather than ability to survive seasonal cycles or fecundity.

It took me a few seasons to realize the differences between stockies and wild trouts, but I did know early on that hatchery fish didn't holdover through the winters very well. I also perceived that they weren't too good at making redds and reproducing.

Now I have completed the 180 and really treasure these big guys, even to the point of preferring to target the smaller fry over the hogs.

 

[Mike]

Regarding the ability of Pa’s stocked BT to reproduce, they certainly have that capability and do so if water temps are cold enough through the summer to allow for continued feeding, good physical condition, and viable gametes. A short-cut to all of this is occurs when adult BT are stocked in fall. Presumably all of the above criteria have been met. The most extreme example of how viable such fish can be is that fingerlings were found the following late spring or early summer in the fall stocked section of the E Br Perkiomen Ck in Bucks Co. This is a stream that is a solidly warm water stream (absolutely no doubt!)supporting good populations of warmwater species. Additionally, I have seen fall stocked adult BT pairing up and going into spawning behavior within a week or two after having been stocked.

 

[dryflyguy]

Looking back at my 40+ years at this sport, my fondest memories are of when and where I've caught big fish
Which admittedly, fishing only dries, has been rather rare.

But it does still happen from time to time.
I caught 2 over 20 inches in the same day - at the same spot even -
this past June.
And it was the highlight of the year for me.

I also caught several that were close to 20 inches while fishing cicadas in central PA, another very memorable event of the year too.

My evolvement as a fly fisherman has gone like this:

I used to be happy to just find rising fish, regardless of their origin or size.
And catching a pile of them all day was just super.

Then I looked to catch more wild fish.

Finally, my ultimate goal - which I'm still in right now - became to catch large wild fish.
And I plan most of my trips accordingly.

I'm now entering the autumn of my lifetime
And I remember reading from others on here in that same time frame, that they're just happy to catch anything.

I may eventually reach that point soon.
But for now, I still look for big fish.

 

[Dave_W]

Another four decades FFer here - I tend to agree with Les and DFG.

I regard a large trout in PA as mid-teens but there is a magic at 20 inches and this mark has long been one I have associated with big fish. The 20" mark is literally true as I put such a mark on all my fly rods. (It's also a magic number for smallmouth bass, which are even rarer at this size)

While I don't catch as many large trout as I used to - mainly because I fish less on limestone streams and less at nighttime than I used to - I still value and target big brown trout (big brookies are a different game).

As mainly a nymph and streamer guy, I sometimes deliberately hunt larger trout and seek them out in niche areas where I expect them to be. In the 1980s/90s you would have found me hunting big browns on the CV limestoners in winter. These days I'm a bit more enamored with the streamer game in the transition zone in warm water rivers and downstream areas of larger creeks that are too warm for trout in the summer.

Of course, big is relative and I think we all go through some evolutions in how we think about FFing and how large trout fit into that evolving practice.

 

[Bamboozle]

 

[rrt]

As one who is in the mid to late autumn of my life, I am still pretty happy when I catch a large trout. To me, this is one 18" or above, with 15 - 17" trout being very nice ones. 20" trout are special ones for me, esp. wild brown trout. Though I have caught trout up to 28", I think of a 24" wild brown I landed on 4X as my best one. This year I landed less than a handful of 20" trout.

I'm a little jaded about some things. A couple of years ago on the BFO (big, famous, overfished) River, I hooked and landed a trout on a Sulphur that turned out to be 23" long. But, when I saw him, I was extremely disappointed to see that he (actually probably a "she") was a rainbow trout. Thinking back: How could I have been disappointed by a trout that size on a dry fly? The trout could not help it that he was a rainbow. I think this points to a flaw in my character.

Anyhow, I hope to land some more big trout as I approach the winter and the end of my fly-fishing.

 

[RLeep2]

So far as where I am seasons of my angling life, I'm probably a lot like rrt. Late autumn is just about here, although if you ask me, I'll insist it is still Indian Summer...

I generally don't catch big trout, at least not as many as I probably should given the time I've been at it and the destination/geographic opportunities I've had. I doubt I've caught more than 15 or so 20"-plus trout. I believe most were wild, but certainly not all. I'm too impatient with too much of a hotfoot when I'm on the water to really bear down and put the time in it takes to do well on really large fish.

So, I choose to look at it from the standpoint of exceptional fish for the setting rather than simply large trout. I get as much of a charge out of any 10" wild brook trout out of a step-across as I do any 20" wild brown. Or any 12" or so wild brown out of a brown trout step-across.

Or, to be truthful, any 10"-plus bluegill when they are bedded and prone to rising affects me the same way.

More and more these days, its all just fishing to me...

 

[krayfish2]

I really don't spend much time chasing small trout anymore. If I catch one, it doesn't bother me and they are treated with the same respect as a 22" fish. I just see the larger fish as smarter, stronger, more wary and a rare treasure to be enjoyed. A a 13" fish in an impossible feeding lane can be more rewarding than a 21" lazy fish out in the open. I remember hooking 2 nice fish in the Yough with DaveS. They were in a 6" wide feeding lane between the bank and a branch in the water. Just getting the eat was enough but landing it after I realized it wasn't 12-14" was super rewarding.

 

[wbranch]

I have virtually zero interest to fish anywhere that has little likelihood of catching trout 19" or more inches. I get bored and often sit on the bank looking at birds or chatting with other fly fishers. There needs to be enough large trout that there is a very good chance I could hook one every time I go out.

I know I'm spoiled to own a place on a famous wild trout river. I just can't rationalize fishing Penns or the LJ which are both at least 2.5 hours away from where I live in York. If I drive another hour I will be at my cabin with all the comforts of home plus a drift boat.

 

[goose54cdd]

I like catching big trout like anyone else, but on the other hand, at 67 years old I just thank God I get to enjoy being out one more time.

 

[pcray1231]

For me big is very, very relative to where it comes from. It's about rarity, not size.

I say relative. You go to Erie and catch a 24" football of a fish, and it's eh, average one. An 18 incher is "just a jack". You gotta get close to 30 to be excited.

On Penns for example, the high teens are somewhat common, in that you can expect to catch one here and there, and you catch them and say, very nice fish, but not a true monster. 20" is the "monster" mark there. They exist, but they're rare.

On a nice (non limestone) brookie stream. 12" is the monster mark. And there are some streams where 8 or 9 inches is truly phenomenal.

The "trophy" level is about rarity for the place it is caught, not absolute size. A 12" brookie from some tiny step across stream can be a bigger trophy than a 20 incher from the Delaware. Which one is rarer? I think you'll find people who enjoy fishing a variety of water take this approach. I fish little streams, medium streams, big streams, and rivers. Every single place I fish has small fish, average fish, "good fish", "big fish", and monsters. Those are the categories. But assigning size to those categories is very relative.

 

[Swattie87]

My thoughts will play well in follow up to a pcray post…

“I like them.”

 

[wildtrout2]

Big really is relative to where you're fishing. My hefty 11" native this summer was a monster for the small stream I was fishing. To me, any small freestone wild brown 18" or bigger is a monster.

 

[csoult]

I like big fish and I cannot lie.

 

[Acristickid]

I’d prefer big fish over small fish but not too fussy about it. There was a time when I would try and target them but that rare anymore.

I’d rather catch a native cutthroat than a big invasive. I care less and less about catching invasives. If you go into the wilderness the fishing is usually easy- the hard part is just getting there. That to me is real fishing.

I’d rather sit on the bank and BS rather than nymph most of the time and take in the scenes around me.

 

[wbranch]

I agree that "Large" is a relative term in the context of fly fishing. It is cool that some guys love fishing wild brook trout waters and a 12" is a monster. A grayling of virtually any size caught in the lower 48 is really a trophy. I can't go traipsing up mountains to catch wild brook trout and I can't physically walk miles to get to primitive waters with really big brookies (north west Maine) or up western mountains to catch true goldens or west slope cutties. So I guess my age and physicality
contributes significantly to my pursuit of 20" and bigger wild trout.

 

[pcray1231]

Numbers is relative too..

I have lots of "50 or bust" streams. Even one "100 or bust" one.. And other places where avoiding the skunk is considered a successful outing. And everything in between. Even conditions, if I'm fishing in bad conditions my expectation is different than optimal conditions. 1 stream stretch may have entirely different expectations in February, May, and August.

How many and how big do I expect to catch? How many and how big did I actually catch. Thats how I measure my fishing success.

Fishing is about where it takes you. Thats the draw. There is enjoyment and fishing success, they effect each other but are separate categories. It is possible to enjoy a skunking or be miserable but successful. I do keep score more or less on the fishung success side, running an approximate count and size of the larger ones. But thats to compare only against myself and my own expectations.

 

[JeffK]

Large is relative! My first trip to Pyramid Lake I caught 28" cutthroat and was staring at it when all the locals said to put the "skaker" back. With the original strain back many guys don't get excited unless a Pyramid Lake cutthroat is 15 lbs or more.

 

[Prospector]

I make it a point to fish the Lake Ontario tribs for large browns, but I don’t target large trout in our PA streams. I rarely catch a PA 20” trout (once every 7-8 years). There are streams like the Allegheny River where I have access to large browns up to 27”-28” but that’s sort of like muskie fishing. Low percentage but very nice reward. I prefer action over quality.

I do however respect those of you that target large fish and go the great lengths to make it happen. I sort of view it like climbing Mt Everest. I appreciate the effort and dedication it takes to be successful but it’s just not something I aspire to do.

 

[Brown71]

We are so very fortunate to live in a state with the size of trout we do, if that’s your cup of tea. Been our passion for many years. People travel all over the country to catch fish we have right here.

But if numbers/action is your thing, I get that too. To each their own.