A chance mystery fish

MarkW

Regular member
Joined
Jul 30, 2011
Messages
1,262
I once had a fun conversation with the then head of EA Fisheries when I told him that as seatrout and brown trout are one and the same there was no legal justification for needing a migratory licence to fish for seatrout. "Ah", he said, "you can tell seatrout from brown trout by testing for caesium isotopes which indicates they've been to sea". "Easy to do this test on the bank?", I replied. "And define 'been to sea', as slob trout which are estuarine only live in the tidal reaches, and legally how much caesium would have to be present as none of this is defined in law". At which point he admitted that it was just a money raising exercise based on dodgy science....
 

Sam Vimes

Regular member
Site Supporter
Joined
Apr 27, 2009
Messages
6,002
I would err on the side of caution and suggest brown trout. I have two good reasons for doing this. The first is that brownies are much more prevalent. The second is that coarse anglers/angling clubs need to be very wary of shouting too loudly about the presence of sea trout. Many landowners are absolutely itching to hear of the presence of migratory salmonids. You can see the pound signs in their eyes. I've known the landowner of one of my regular river stretches for nearly forty years. Every time he sees me he asks whether I've caught or seen any salmon or sea trout. They certainly exist, but not in any real numbers. If that situation changes, I doubt I'll get to fish there any more.
 

Ausho

Member
Site Supporter
Joined
Jul 11, 2021
Messages
17
The fish was caught a couple of years ago, conditions at the time were slightly coloured hence why I couldn’t assess the depth. But it puzzled me at the time, happy to go with Brownie, I change my mind as often as my socks.
 
Top