Speck or Splake?

[akaShag]

another thread back from the dead......

That's a salmonid, and I bet it was tasty.

Doug

[smitty55]

I wasn't going to bother commenting but when it was called a Laker I just had to lol. The one main characteristic that separates Greys from other trout and hybrids is the much deeper forked tail, which that fish does not have. Nor does is have a true enough square tail to be a Speck so my vote is Splake.  Looks just like these and plenty of other pics I've seem guys post on some fb fishing groups I'm on.

 

[Old Man]

Tail makes it look like a Splake to me.

 

Edit: Didn’t realize it was a Zombie post. I really have to start checking the date.

Edited February 18, 2021 by Old Man

[Sinker]

Ok, so all you guys saying splake, you realize splake are sterile, and don't reproduce, right? 

Where would this fish come from? Its clearly not very old. 

I don't see anything pointing to speck at all. No red spots, no blue halos, no square tail. 

Hence, the reasoning it is a laker. It has many laker characteristics, and came from a body of water with natural lakers. 

I find this stuff interesting, but to say its a splake makes no sense to me. Where did it come from? 

S. 

[Spiel]

100% Brookie and it certainly appears to be a hatchery raised fish.

[dave524]

2 hours ago, Spiel said:

100% Brookie and it certainly appears to be a hatchery raised fish.

a dozen or so years ago this fish was lifted on the Credit, several Autumns in a row, has to be a Laker cause we all know there are no Specs in Lake Ontario 

[craigdritchie]

About five years ago I was at the Old Mill Dam in Toronto shooting photos of jumping salmon. A day or two later I noticed a small fish in the background of one of the photos, so I cropped in as much as I could to see what it was. To my shock, it was a brook trout.

 

Picture quality is horrible because it's enlarged like crazy, but it's still unmistakably a brookie. No doubt about it.

If they show up in Lake Ontario tributaries, then why not Georgian Bay?

 

 

Edited February 18, 2021 by craigdritchie

[akaShag]

Bear Creek is a tributary stream of the Pine River, which is a tributary of the Nottawasaga, which empties into Georgian Bay.  Bear Creek did have a natural brook trout population, don't know if that is still the case.  There were also brookies in some of the streams on the Bruce Peninsula, flowing into the Pottawatomi and Sydenham Rivers, which flow into Georgian Bay via Owen Sound.  That was back in the 80s, I have no idea if there are still specks back there or not.

 

And I'm not that sure how to spell the full name of the Pot. 😉

Doug

[porkpie]

Holy Necro post.  Anyway, could you catch an adventurous brookie in Georgian Bay?  Of course you could.  Many of the streams feeding tributaries of Georgian Bay are littered with brookies.  The bay is also littered with lakers.  A splake?  I haven’t caught one up there since probably 2001.  Back in the 90’s you’d catch them pretty regularly to the point it was sometimes a nuisance In the fall  because the float would drop and you’d be hoping for a bow and it would be a splake.  So I doubt this very old post is a pic of a splake.  Anyway, my 2 cents.

[Fisherman]

1 hour ago, akaShag said:

Bear Creek is a tributary stream of the Pine River, which is a tributary of the Nottawasaga, which empties into Georgian Bay.  Bear Creek did have a natural brook trout population, don't know if that is still the case.  There were also brookies in some of the streams on the Bruce Peninsula, flowing into the Pottawatomi and Sydenham Rivers, which flow into Georgian Bay via Owen Sound.  That was back in the 80s, I have no idea if there are still specks back there or not.

 

And I'm not that sure how to spell the full name of the Pot. 😉

Doug

A number of years ago, 5 or so, they were still catching them in the small pools just beside the north impact area.

[misfish]

Yes, have caught them in Bear. As recent as last year. They are not really big, but if there are small ones,there has to be a few big ones .

Edited February 18, 2021 by misfish

[Sinker]

On 2/18/2021 at 4:39 PM, porkpie said:

Holy Necro post.  Anyway, could you catch an adventurous brookie in Georgian Bay?  Of course you could.  Many of the streams feeding tributaries of Georgian Bay are littered with brookies.  The bay is also littered with lakers.  A splake?  I haven’t caught one up there since probably 2001.  Back in the 90’s you’d catch them pretty regularly to the point it was sometimes a nuisance In the fall  because the float would drop and you’d be hoping for a bow and it would be a splake.  So I doubt this very old post is a pic of a splake.  Anyway, my 2 cents.

I never doubted you could catch a speck there, and if that was a speck i wouldn't be surprised, but its a laker.  Show me one key ID feature of a speck on that fish....?? 

 

S. 

[smitty55]

8 minutes ago, Sinker said:

I never doubted you could catch a speck there, and if that was a speck i wouldn't be surprised, but its a laker.  Show me one key ID feature of a speck on that fish....?? 

 

S. 

I've caught more Lakers than all other trout combined and I've never seen one ever that had a tail like that with so little fork in the tail. Hence why I say it's not a Laker.

 

[porkpie]

9 minutes ago, Sinker said:

I never doubted you could catch a speck there, and if that was a speck i wouldn't be surprised, but its a laker.  Show me one key ID feature of a speck on that fish....?? 

 

S. 

??  I don’t know what it is man.  Just saying it’s probably not a splake. Happy Saturday!

[dave524]

3 minutes ago, smitty55 said:

I've caught more Lakers than all other trout combined and I've never seen one ever that had a tail like that with so little fork in the tail. Hence why I say it's not a Laker.

 

exactly 

[Sinker]

2 hours ago, porkpie said:

??  I don’t know what it is man.  Just saying it’s probably not a splake. Happy Saturday!

Sorry, not directed at you, personally....lol. 

 

[Sinker]

2 hours ago, smitty55 said:

I've caught more Lakers than all other trout combined and I've never seen one ever that had a tail like that with so little fork in the tail. Hence why I say it's not a Laker.

 

Ok, so what speck features do you see? I see a lot more laker than speck. I don't see any speck at all. No square tail, no red spots, no blue halos, no black mouth.....?? 

Looks like a stocked laker thats been in a pen for a while and rounded off its tail to me. 

 

S. 

[Sinker]

2 hours ago, dave524 said:

exactly 

Beleive me, I've caught tons of lakers, and specks. TONS. Why do you think thats a speck? It doesn't even have a square tail. No spots, no halos, no black mouth. I'm not arguing, just find it weird that everyone says speck, when its nothing like a speck to me. 

S. 

[Sinker]

[dave524]

1 hour ago, Sinker said:

Beleive me, I've caught tons of lakers, and specks. TONS. Why do you think thats a speck? It doesn't even have a square tail. No spots, no halos, no black mouth. I'm not arguing, just find it weird that everyone says speck, when its nothing like a speck to me. 

S. 

Caught all 4 too, Lakers both L. Ontario and the Haliburton strain , even a difference there. Lots of Specs and when the stocking programs in Haliburton went to Splake, them too, during the change, both in the same lake at times, even a ton of those Laker backcross Splake in the Bighead and Beaver during the 80's/90's. The tail doesn't look perfectly square drooped over the rock but isn't near as forked as a full blooded Laker and I find most Lakers have a somewhat laterally compressed head compared to a Spec and the jawline does extend as far back as a Laker, Lakers have a pretty big yap on them compared to a Spec. Doesn't look Laker to me, early spring Specs are not nearly as colourful as later.

[smitty55]

7 hours ago, Sinker said:

Beleive me, I've caught tons of lakers, and specks. TONS. Why do you think thats a speck? It doesn't even have a square tail. No spots, no halos, no black mouth. I'm not arguing, just find it weird that everyone says speck, when its nothing like a speck to me. 

S. 

Sinker there's an awful lot of variation among Splake, they can look more like Specks or more like Lakers or a combination of both. None of them have a forked tail like a Laker. Also male and female look different and the age of the fish makes a difference as well. I agree that's not a Speck or a Laker, which is why I say Splake.

[Sinker]

16 hours ago, smitty55 said:

Sinker there's an awful lot of variation among Splake, they can look more like Specks or more like Lakers or a combination of both. None of them have a forked tail like a Laker. Also male and female look different and the age of the fish makes a difference as well. I agree that's not a Speck or a Laker, which is why I say Splake.

So, where did the splake come from? They haven't been stocked in there for decades. 

 

Its a laker boys. A young one. 

 

S. 

[Chuck Enwinde]

15 hours ago, Sinker said:

So, where did the splake come from? They haven't been stocked in there for decades. 

 

Its a laker boys. A young one. 

 

S. 

Splake can occur in the wild just like tiger trout or tiger muskies.  They are infertile so the don't propagate but they can occur.  

As for the fish pictured - my guess is a female spring brook trout.  They hardly have any markings a lot of the time, and they have that little crease in the middle of the tail that can make it look slightly forked.   

  

Here's a big female from last spring.

 

[Fisherman]

What is it,  a frankenstein of human meddling by no other words.

Edited February 22, 2021 by Fisherman

[Spiel]

18 hours ago, Sinker said:

So, where did the splake come from? They haven't been stocked in there for decades. 

 

Its a laker boys. A young one. 

 

S. 

The markings in the tail and dorsal fin don't agree with your assessment.
Also juvenile Lake Trout have a very noticeable forked tail.