Odds of a Wild Tiger Trout reaching 6”

[lycoflyfisher]

Frank, your records and willingness to share your data always has impressed me. Your insight into threads such as this is always appreciated in my opinion. I am always too focused on my surroundings and catching fish, that I could never keep tallies of individual fish like you do, however, I am now wishing I would have taking better notes for both fishing and hunting purposes over the years.

It sounds like your probability estimate is probably accurate within reason, but I know I would be interested in a detailed summary on the probability of catching a wild tiger trout after sifting through your data as mentioned above. I do have one question as how you would determine streams that have only brook trout or brown trout thus eliminating fish caught in those streams in your tally. I am sure your records are representative of the respective trout populations in each stream; however, brown trout especially seem to show up in virtually every stream that I fish. That is unless there are barriers preventing upstream movement or pH issues that are more suitable for ST.

 

[bigjohn58]

Here is my biggest wild tiger. Its about 15 inches. I've caught a few around a foot and a few around 6-7 inches. A lot depends on the size of the watershed the fish resides in. They exist. Once you catch one however after that its not that great. Those fish can't contribute to future populations.

 

[Mike]

I don’t know if the fish is wild or stocked. That apparently twisted dorsal fin (fin laid to one side from its origin) may raise questions that fish’s origin. If it was truly twisted upon closer examination than allowed by this photo, I would have said the fish was of stocked origin. The rest of what I can see in the pic suggests wild, although the anal fin looks a bit tattered along its trailing edge. Again, it is tough to distinguish these details with accuracy from a single photo/single angle and sometimes it requires extending or flaring out the fins by hand to help make the stocked vs wild determination in the field. A tattered anal fin can occur just because of landing net usage for example and that becomes clear upon close examination.

Strictly from the perspective of education, similar problems arise all of the time when anglers send a single photo from a single angle and request a fish species identification. Key identifying features se parating one similar species from another can easily be and often are obscured by an angler’s fingers, photo glare, the angle that the fish is being held, etc.

 

[bigjohn58]

Mike wrote:
I don’t know if the fish is wild or stocked. That apparently twisted dorsal fin (fin laid to one side from its origin) may raise questions that fish’s origin. If it was truly twisted upon closer examination than allowed by this photo, I would have said the fish was of stocked origin. The rest of what I can see in the pic suggests wild, although the anal fin looks a bit tattered along its trailing edge. Again, it is tough to distinguish these details with accuracy from a single photo/single angle and sometimes it requires extending or flaring out the fins by hand to help make the stocked vs wild determination in the field. A tattered anal fin can occur just because of landing net usage for example and that becomes clear upon close examination.

Strictly from the perspective of education, similar problems arise all of the time when anglers send a single photo from a single angle and request a fish species identification. Key identifying features se parating one similar species from another can easily be and often are obscured by an angler’s fingers, photo glare, the angle that the fish is being held, etc.

Fins are actually perfect on this fish. The dorsal fin is laying down but other than that its perfect. This is a class A stream that isn't stocked and this spot is fairly remote. I've caught half my tiger trout from this area.

 

[Mike]

Very helpful. Thanks for the clarification. Nice specimen!

 

[bigjohn58]

Mike wrote:
Very helpful. Thanks for the clarification. Nice specimen!

In all honesty though this is PA so who knows...people are dumb and dump fish in all sorts of spots. I don't think you can be 100% sure no matter what. I'm more like 99% on this one though that its wild. This same spot I've caught 6 and 7 inch tigers. Has a population of both native brooks and wild browns. Definitely more browns than brooks though.

 

[WildTigerTrout]

I caught 2 different wild tigers in 2008 and 09. Caught the first one twice in 08 and once in 09. 12 inches long in 08 and 14 inches in 09. What are the odds of catching the same wild tiger THREE times!! The second one I caught once in 08, it was 9 inches and then caught it again in 09 and it was 11 inches long. Took photos and did not realize they were the same fish until I examined the photo's closely. Both trout were caught in the same unstocked class A wild trout stream. I think BigJohn and I are fishing the same stream. I have not caught a wild tiger since. Quite a thrill to catch one though.

I did catch a stocked tiger in public trout water several years ago that was 18 inches long! It was stocked in May and I caught it in October so it had been in the water for awhile. Being stocked aside it was also a thrill to catch.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

lycoflyfisher wrote:
Frank, your records and willingness to share your data always has impressed me. Your insight into threads such as this is always appreciated in my opinion. I am always too focused on my surroundings and catching fish, that I could never keep tallies of individual fish like you do, however, I am now wishing I would have taking better notes for both fishing and hunting purposes over the years.

It sounds like your probability estimate is probably accurate within reason, but I know I would be interested in a detailed summary on the probability of catching a wild tiger trout after sifting through your data as mentioned above. I do have one question as how you would determine streams that have only brook trout or brown trout thus eliminating fish caught in those streams in your tally. I am sure your records are representative of the respective trout populations in each stream; however, brown trout especially seem to show up in virtually every stream that I fish. That is unless there are barriers preventing upstream movement or pH issues that are more suitable for ST.

Hi lycoflyfisher,

Fair question. I'm sure other anglers are wondering the same thing.

I know of only a few streams that hold native brook trout and no wild brown trout. I determine this by noticing in my statistics that I have never caught a wild brown trout there. As RLeep2, a member of this board who lives, dispositionally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf once said many years ago, spinner fishing is the closest thing there is to electro-shocking. If I've fished a stream many times and have never caught a wild brown trout there I feel pretty certain no wild brown trout live there. Technically though, I admit it is possible that some wild brown trout live in these creeks.

With this said, all of the native-brookie-only (NBO) streams that I can think of off the top of my head all have physical barriers that prevent wild brown trout from migrating there. I also probably should note that I know of streams that have physical barriers but still have wild brown trout. One of the NBO streams that I fish has yielded thousands of brookies over the last 35 years that I've fished it, the largest being 15.5".

Ruling out trout caught (from my original denominator of 315,258 trout) in streams I feel are brown-trout-only is a little more subjective. I'm sure it will come as no surprise to anyone that I backed out all trout caught in Spring Creek (Centre County), the Little Juniata River, and Penns Creek. We all know that these streams are wild brown trout fisheries, but yet it is possible that an angler could catch a wild tiger trout in any of these three streams.

Spring Creek has native brook trout in at least three headwater streams as well as a couple UNT's, so it is possible that a wild tiger trout could hatch there and migrate down to Spring Creek. Theoretically, a wild tiger trout could even migrate into the lower end of Spring Creek via Bald Eagle Creek, which has tributaries containing both species. However, I consider this all unlikely, thus I backed out all trout caught in Spring Creek.

I once caught a tiger trout (maybe 7" - 8") in the LJR within 100 yards of the mouth of a feeder stream that holds both native brook and wild brown trout. I did NOT count it as a wild tiger trout because I just felt it was highly unlikely for there to be a wild tiger trout in the LJR, though it looked very similar to other wild ones I've caught. The main reason I didn't count it is because it was spongy to the touch (much like most PFBC stocked brook trout). Healthy wild trout are typically very muscular. Realistically, I think it is proper to back out all trout caught in the LJR.

Like many of the anglers on this site, I've caught quite a few native brookies in Penns Creek, not to mention that many of its tributaries hold a mix of brookies and browns. I once caught about a dozen native brookies in succession in one short riffle about a quarter mile above the mouth of Cherry Run (at the first curve against the mountain - below the Blue Rock Pool). Despite this I still feel it is proper to back out all trout caught in Penns Creek.

I also backed out all trout caught on a bunch of small limestone streams that are clearly wild brown trout fisheries. However, when I think of each of these streams I would have to agree that it is possible that a wild tiger trout could gain access to any one of them.

Technically speaking, there could be a wild tiger trout in any stream, even NBO water. Heck, a minnow fisherman could have a wild tiger trout mixed in with the minnows he illegally trapped in a wild trout stream and then discard his leftover minnows at the end of the day in NBO water.

When I subtracted trout from my denominator I was just trying to make an adjustment so that my ratio would show approximately how many native brookies and wild brown trout an angler would have to catch on average before he would luck into a wild tiger trout in streams where wild tiger trout were hatched. I don't consider my calculation to be scientific; I was just trying to narrow it down to a reasonable expectation.

 

[wildtrout2]

The brookie stream I caught my tiger in is an unstocked Class A, that is very remote. Unstocked is a funny term. I fished this stream for years before I ever caught a wild brown. It had always just been natives.

 

[KenU]

Frank - I was just being facetious with the comment about the treble hook. I caught my tiger trout on 8/21/2015, two days before you caught it (assuming it was the same fish). I don’t think so. Maybe we are not talking about the same stream and I’m not about to name it. Anyway, I caught it two days before you caught that 6.5 inch tiger trout.Mine was 7.5 inches long and I‘m sure it didn’t shrink an inch before you caught it.

Browns are pretty rare in this and the stream it flows into, but their numbers have been increasing during the last few years. This concerns me. Until the last 10 years or so this trib and the stream it flows into have been allopatric brook trout waters. I’d like to keep it that way.

I caught the tiger trout just upstream from the camp. It was the first trout I caught that day. Although definitely legal size, I released it since it cannot reproduce. Caught a fair number of other fish after that - 9 bk and 1 bn. I am not the fishing machine you and Mark are. I do pinch down the barbs on my hooks, however. It is much easier to release fish, especially if they are hooked in the maxillary. I catch a fair number of trout every year with torn or missing maxillaries. It’s really tough to get a barbed hook out of the maxillary. Trout need them to keep food in their mouths.

 

[RLeep2]

.>> As RLeep2, a member of this board who lives, dispositionally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf once said many years ago, spinner fishing is the closest thing there is to electro-shocking.>>

Hi Frank..

I kind of wish I had copyrighted that electrofishing thing. By now, I'd have enough saved to get a power perch scaler or maybe even be part way towards funding a week of smallmouth chasing in Whiteshell Prov. Park in Manitoba.

But I didn't, so here I am fishing Lake LeBoeuf for crappie.. That's OK, it's home.

I got my wild PA tiger out of Ketchum Run in the 'Sock drainage during Reagan's second term. Little over 6". I got another 4 or 5 out in Wisconsin. They were somewhat larger, maxing out around 9", IIRC.

Hope all is well with you..

 

[Swattie87]

Ketchum is a stream with a physical barrier (several of them actually) preventing upstream migration of Brown Trout. There’s a point below which there are Browns and Brookies, and above which there are just Brookies.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

RLeep2 wrote:
.>> As RLeep2, a member of this board who lives, dispositionally, one mile south of Lake LeBoeuf once said many years ago, spinner fishing is the closest thing there is to electro-shocking.>>

Hi Frank..

I kind of wish I had copyrighted that electrofishing thing. By now, I'd have enough saved to get a power perch scaler or maybe even be part way towards funding a week of smallmouth chasing in Whiteshell Prov. Park in Manitoba.

But I didn't, so here I am fishing Lake LeBoeuf for crappie.. That's OK, it's home.

I got my wild PA tiger out of Ketchum Run in the 'Sock drainage during Reagan's second term. Little over 6". I got another 4 or 5 out in Wisconsin. They were somewhat larger, maxing out around 9", IIRC.

Hope all is well with you..

Hi RLeep2,

I like to give you credit for your original thought about the electro-shocking comment. I would never have thought of it. I use that line when I do my "Spin Fishing for Trout" seminars.

I hope you thought it was funny when I wrote where you live, which was totally irrelevant to the discussion. I thought it was hilarious.

I'm doing well. I've been retired for almost five years now. Time sure flies. The trout wish I were still working.

I hope all is well with you, too.

 

[FrankTroutAngler]

KenU wrote:
Frank - I was just being facetious with the comment about the treble hook. I caught my tiger trout on 8/21/2015, two days before you caught it (assuming it was the same fish). I don’t think so. Maybe we are not talking about the same stream and I’m not about to name it. Anyway, I caught it two days before you caught that 6.5 inch tiger trout.Mine was 7.5 inches long and I‘m sure it didn’t shrink an inch before you caught it.

Browns are pretty rare in this and the stream it flows into, but their numbers have been increasing during the last few years. This concerns me. Until the last 10 years or so this trib and the stream it flows into have been allopatric brook trout waters. I’d like to keep it that way.

I caught the tiger trout just upstream from the camp. It was the first trout I caught that day. Although definitely legal size, I released it since it cannot reproduce. Caught a fair number of other fish after that - 9 bk and 1 bn. I am not the fishing machine you and Mark are. I do pinch down the barbs on my hooks, however. It is much easier to release fish, especially if they are hooked in the maxillary. I catch a fair number of trout every year with torn or missing maxillaries. It’s really tough to get a barbed hook out of the maxillary. Trout need them to keep food in their mouths.

Hi KenU,

Can I assume you have a typo with your 8/21/15 date? Did you mean 5/21/15?

I caught mine in the exact same area as you caught yours. I'm sure we are talking the same stream.

I round the size of my trout down when they are short of any half-inch increment. Mine may have been just a hair under 7". There's a photo of mine in the link I shared in my first post in this topic. It's on page 2, post #29, of the linked discussion. It would be neat if you took a photo of yours???

 

[silverfox]

Slightly off-topic, but it seems we're already down a few rabbit holes, I hate seeing wild tiger trout. They represent a loss of brook trout to me. I care far more about brook trout than brown trout. Whether the fish actively spawned or the spawning of the two species happened to overlap to where browns invaded a brookie redd, the net result is the same. A loss of pure-blooded brook trout.

They're the end of the line for that year class from that clutch. The resulting hybrids don't contribute anything to the ecology. They simply take up space, consume food that will result in no furtherance of either species, and are likely more aggressive than a pure fish of either species. They're also a reminder of why mixing species is a bad idea.

 

[jifigz]

silverfox wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but it seems we're already down a few rabbit holes, I hate seeing wild tiger trout. They represent a loss of brook trout to me. I care far more about brook trout than brown trout. Whether the fish actively spawned or the spawning of the two species happened to overlap to where browns invaded a brookie redd, the net result is the same. A loss of pure-blooded brook trout.

They're the end of the line for that year class from that clutch. The resulting hybrids don't contribute anything to the ecology. They simply take up space, consume food that will result in no furtherance of either species, and are likely more aggressive than a pure fish of either species. They're also a reminder of why mixing species is a bad idea.

I can agree with this. I have never caught not have I ever seen a wild tiger trout. The majority of the streams I fish are basically either dominated by wild browns or dominated by wild brookies. Tiger trout certainly don't help either population of wild trout as they are, as you stated, just sucking up resources with no chance of progeny. They are neat looking and a rarity but they are not bettering the populations of wild trout.

 

[Prospector]

silverfox wrote:
Slightly off-topic, but it seems we're already down a few rabbit holes, I hate seeing wild tiger trout. They represent a loss of brook trout to me. I care far more about brook trout than brown trout. Whether the fish actively spawned or the spawning of the two species happened to overlap to where browns invaded a brookie redd, the net result is the same. A loss of pure-blooded brook trout.

They're the end of the line for that year class from that clutch. The resulting hybrids don't contribute anything to the ecology. They simply take up space, consume food that will result in no furtherance of either species, and are likely more aggressive than a pure fish of either species. They're also a reminder of why mixing species is a bad idea.

Actually I think in a unique twist your ultimate goal is actually being carried out here. Remember it’s the hen brown laying the eggs. If she finds a male brown to fertilize the eggs then brown trout will be perpetuated and browns will gain a greater hold. If a brook trout fertilizes the eggs then a much smaller portion will hatch (5%) and the resulting 1 or 2 trout that actually survive will be unable to mate. So you end up with a unicorn of a fish (that will make some angler’s day) with no ability further any species. It’s sort of like birth control for Browns.

 

[silverfox]

Prospector wrote:
Actually I think in a unique twist your ultimate goal is actually being carried out here. Remember it’s the hen brown laying the eggs. If she finds a male brown to fertilize the eggs then brown trout will be perpetuated and browns will gain a greater hold. If a brook trout fertilizes the eggs then a much smaller portion will hatch (5%) and the resulting 1 or 2 trout that actually survive will be unable to mate. So you end up with a unicorn of a fish (that will make some angler’s day) with no ability further any species. It’s sort of like birth control for Browns.

I get that. The flip side is that the brook trout wasted it's time with the brown trout. Assuming it's due to overlap in spawning and the brookie didn't do "double duty" and was able to also fertilize brookie eggs after "messing up" the brown's year.

 

[sarce]

Down here in MD a surprising number of tigers show up in baltimore county and I know of one that was found in Harford county a few years ago. They've been turning up in streams where brook trout are on the verge of extirpation but where browns do just fine. I think it's because the brook trout numbers in some of these small streams are so low that some years they do not find another brook trout to mate with. I know of at least 6 that have been found by electrofishing since 2018. In these scenarios I see the tigers showing up as a precursor to the brookies disappearing from that stream.

I've caught one in MD, but in a Frederick county stream with lots of small brook trout and where I've never caught a brown before, which fits the description of what other posters said about tigers showing up in predominantly brook trout streams. That fish was a YOY about 4" long.

 

[Prospector]

silverfox wrote:

I get that. The flip side is that the brook trout wasted it's time with the brown trout. Assuming it's due to overlap in spawning and the brookie didn't do "double duty" and was able to also fertilize brookie eggs after "messing up" the brown's year.

Just by what I’ve read, a female trout has a large batch of eggs and a few days after laying has a second ovulation that is much smaller than the first. I think this small batch of eggs is not always laid. Once a male trout releases his milt, the replenishment process takes 3-7 days until he has enough milt to get on another Redd. I’m not sure what breaks this cycle since male trout don’t carry milt all year long. I guess it could be a length of day or a temperature trigger that seem to be common in nature. So the male Brookie is not a one woman man.