Identify this fish.

Discussion in 'Fly Fishing Forum' started by Gregg H, Nov 30, 2009.

  1. dryflylarry

    dryflylarry "Chasing Riseforms"

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,127
    Media:
    203
    Likes Received:
    595
    Location:
    Near the Fjord
    Compare a couple of attached web pics....
     
  2. Ed Call

    Ed Call Mumbling Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    17,859
    Media:
    283
    Likes Received:
    1,671
    Location:
    Kitsap Peninsula
    Let's just say it is a fine looking salmon, bycatch bonus of the day. Nice fish.
     
  3. Ray

    Ray Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2007
    Messages:
    346
    Likes Received:
    26
    Location:
    Post Falls, ID
    Well, it's not a carp.
     
  4. dryflylarry

    dryflylarry "Chasing Riseforms"

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,127
    Media:
    203
    Likes Received:
    595
    Location:
    Near the Fjord
    Well.....you would be surprised what someone will try to tell you on here... :D
     
  5. BDD

    BDD Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    286
    Location:
    Ellensburg, WA
    Home Page:
    Looks to me like in your first quote, you mention you can ID it by looking at the tail underwater, then in the second quote, you dismiss another opinion because of looking at the fish underwater.

    :hmmm:
     
  6. Keith Hixson

    Keith Hixson Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,517
    Likes Received:
    58
    Location:
    College Place, Washington
    Its a King with white lipstick. :) rolf
     
  7. dryflylarry

    dryflylarry "Chasing Riseforms"

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2003
    Messages:
    4,127
    Media:
    203
    Likes Received:
    595
    Location:
    Near the Fjord
    :rofl::rofl: Good one Keith! Like I said, you would be surprised what some people will try to tell others on here! Crack me up. :)
     
  8. hap

    hap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    Obviously you have not spent much time looking for cohos in schools of humpies or reds, particularly in marginal viewing conditions. Coho tails are very dark at the trailing edge. They disappear. If the trailing edge is light you are not looking at a coho.

    There is absolute proof in the first photos the fish is an Atlantic, period. The tail is just a lagniappe that eliminates coho... The gums eliminated chinook, but neither is needed to prove it is an Atlantic.

    It IS an Atlantic, period. Oh, I have sport and commercial fished and guided in AK for over 40 years... But that makes zero difference.
    art
     
  9. fishbadger

    fishbadger Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2009
    Messages:
    198
    Likes Received:
    6
    Location:
    Gig Harbor, WA
    looks like a king to me,

    fb
     
  10. hap

    hap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    You are not alone among the uninformed...
     
  11. g_smolt

    g_smolt Recreational User

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    933
    Media:
    79
    Likes Received:
    188
    Location:
    58°19'59 N, 134°29'49 W

    Yet another testament to your ignorance and willingness to prove the same.
     
  12. Jake Dogfish

    Jake Dogfish New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2007
    Messages:
    26
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Des Moines
    Chinook. I think some like to over think things. Oddly enough, the fish is what it looks like. I have seen the gum argument proven wrong many times.
     
  13. hap

    hap Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Anchorage, Alaska
    So are you saying Mecklenburg is wrong, or my interpretation of same is wrong?
     
  14. alpinetrout

    alpinetrout Banned or Parked

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2004
    Messages:
    3,906
    Media:
    294
    Likes Received:
    73
    Location:
    Hiding in your closet
    This whole thread is comedy.
     
  15. JesseC

    JesseC Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2009
    Messages:
    2,142
    Media:
    5
    Likes Received:
    881
    Location:
    seattle, wa
    I'm pretty damn certain that's a Striper. yeaaaah, that's the ticket. It's a striper/rockfish that somehow escaped. Damned thing probably came up off of someone's dirty felt shoes! Wash your damn felt people or you're gonna have parasitic intrusions like this to deal with.

    How do I know it's a Striper? Well, because I grew up fishing for em, 20 something years! I know one when I see one! And, yeah, I checked with this biologist friend of mine. He said for sure, Striper! You can tell from the smell!

    Then I checked an encyclopedia on the interwebs - yeah, that's it. Wikipedia!
     
  16. NomDeTrout

    NomDeTrout Fly Guy Eat Pie

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2009
    Messages:
    472
    Media:
    4
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Seattle,WA
    squawfish. when it doubt, just call it squawfish.

    in all seriousness, are we really arguing about identifying a fish that we can't thoroughly even see? Its a damn picture and logically speaking, nobody knows for damn sure so to keep stating that its a "_______ salmon. PERIOD" is foolish.

    we're all just speculating here.
     
  17. Nate Dutton

    Nate Dutton I'm a teacher, I fish to eat!

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2007
    Messages:
    790
    Media:
    11
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Kiana, AK
    well if speculation is the name of the game count me in...I would say the fish in questions is approximately 32 inches long...with a girth of 18 inches and by my weight calculation it would be a 13.378064516128033 pound beautifully fresh King Salmon who has brushed her teeth very well... Give her a week and she will be just another chubby black gummed girl...my fav! But i would go with king because nothing else makes sense imho.
     
  18. g_smolt

    g_smolt Recreational User

    Joined:
    Dec 16, 2005
    Messages:
    933
    Media:
    79
    Likes Received:
    188
    Location:
    58°19'59 N, 134°29'49 W
    Citing a single reference not germane to the geographical area is wrong.

    Claiming species ID without verified classic characteristics (Fin ray count, gill raker count, Lateral line scale count, etc) in cases of obscured or absent evidence is a rookie mistake, something that anyone with any formal ichthyological training has had drilled into them from day one to avoid.

    As my late Ichthyology Prof used to say all the time (though not, thankfully, to me)..."That's just dumb."

    Yup.
     
  19. TexBC

    TexBC Fly Addict

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2008
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    9
    Location:
    Vancouver, B.C.
    This is a great example of why we shouldn't be so quick to jump all over those who are unsure what type of fish they caught. LOL

    My opinion? Body and head scream "Chinook" to me, but the gums really throw me off and hint at "Coho". I have no personal familiarity with Atlantics, having never caught one, but from pictures I've studied in the past, the spots are typically right up onto their cheeks, aren't they?

    Anyhow, it's a beauty fish. Congrats on the catch.
    :D
    Tex
     
  20. WaFlyCaster

    WaFlyCaster Tricoptera

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    464
    Media:
    79
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Fife, WA
    its a chinook with photoshopped gums. :thumb:
     

Share This Page