Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Came across an interesting article this morning of a potential world record lake trout caught in Colorado this month. Maybe I am behind times but I have never seen anyone measured the length of a fish (as shown on you tube) especially a potential world record like this. The forked tail should be pinched together and then measured. Looks as though it has been feeding on some pretty good size white fish.

EnloeTrout_1.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)

Looks like a "triploid" fish...in other words its neither male or female. Its sterile and can't reproduce, and therefore doesn't waste any energy in making eggs or milt, or engaging in spawning behavior...it just packs on the pounds.

Just don't put the image on a can of Bud Light or Kid Rock will shoot it up....LOL 

Edited by CrowMan
  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Posted

I totally agree BillM, It isn't natural. I would call it genetic engineering, if in fact that's what this fish is. All they do is eat and grow. As I mentioned earlier I wouldn't be complaining if I was to hook one and land it.  Maybe Colorado Fish and Game conservation did stock lakes but only certain ones with these fish for experimental purposes and or for the angler. Angling is a big deal in Colorado so I would expect they know what they are doing. But it still comes down to the fact that if it isn't natural it should not be entered into the record book, and I don't expect (or hope) it will be. That's my opinion. 

  • Like 1
Posted
On 5/12/2023 at 1:26 PM, BillM said:

Triploids are eating machines and should never be considered for world records.  Just my opinion.

I whole heartedly concur Bill, while they do occasionally occur naturally in the wild if the fish in question is a potential record and is from a known body of water stocked with triploids it should be immediately ineligible for record status.

ie, Lake Diefenbaker  ;)

Posted

Howdy Kickingfrog. Long time since I've seen you post. I thought maybe you were posting a pic of that 7lb 2oz bass. Maybe  you're still after it. That's why we haven't seen much of you. LOL. 

Posted
36 minutes ago, kickingfrog said:

I'm ok with them being recognized in their own category but not against natural fish.

Absolutely Rob, naturally occurring or stocked I believe they should be recognized in a separate category, after all they existed.  ;)

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recent Topics

    Popular Topics

    Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found

×
×
  • Create New...