Vwool's AOTY Steelhead.

And the Moke is only open for hatchery trout and hatchery steelhead.

-Allen

That appears to be an intact adipose fin to me.  So if it's going to be called a steelhead (even though it looks very much like a resident trout), it's a wild fish and doesn't count for AOTY points.

+2 - that's what I thought as well.

That big 32" steelie I CVR'd on the Mad a week and a half ago had a funky adipose that looked half attached - I wasn't going to take any chances in terms of closer investigation to see if it was grown back from being partially clipped.

Without a better picture I think it could be easily argued that the fish was clipped.  I see lots of hatchery fish with most of the adipose fin present, but they are missing the caudal tip of the adipose fin.

If polepole says it's a no go, then it's a no go. The "fish" was CPR'd, my intent the whole trip was to release all fish for the day. The adipose fin to me looked short, but then again I haven't caught a "steelhead" before. Guess this means I just have to fish the moke again soon.

I think ATD brings up a good question though as to what works to ID a steelhead.  When I got home and researched the topic there wasn't much info.

Victor
Congrats on the steele/large bow!
Gotta show me how to fish the moke when I get back!
Keep rocking
Ken

That appears to be an intact adipose fin to me.  So if it's going to be called a steelhead (even though it looks very much like a resident trout), it's a wild fish and doesn't count for AOTY points.

+2 - that's what I thought as well.

That big 32" steelie I CVR'd on the Mad a week and a half ago had a funky adipose that looked half attached - I wasn't going to take any chances in terms of closer investigation to see if it was grown back from being partially clipped.

Without a better picture I think it could be easily argued that the fish was clipped.  I see lots of hatchery fish with most of the adipose fin present, but they are missing the caudal tip of the adipose fin.

Agreed, I wouldn't use the picture as firm evidence that the fish has an unclipped adipose, let alone a clipped one.  It's just that I've seen dinky adipose fins on many trout, particularly on leaner river-dwelling or spawning rainbows.  Example would be this Sac River rainbow from last February.

Dinky adipose, and the fish wasn't even in spawning dress.  Then if you have a fish in full spawning dress, dedicating a ton of energy into developing gametes and not caring much for eating out of hunger.

Vwool's fish was from a river and happened to be caught in the midst of the spawning season for rainbows.  Can't say for certain whether the fish was in actual spawning dress or not, but the fish did look lean and kinda dark.  The adipose consists of around 80 percent fatty tissue, right?  Well if the fish hasn't been eating enough to store much fat, it makes sense that we wouldn't see a very significant adipose fin.

I guess it's a moot point now since the fish in question was deemed invalid for points, but that's my take on it.  It's still a very nice fish vwool!

I couldn't see the picture... 

If the adipose fin seemed disrupted, most surveyors will call it clipped (to be safe), but I don't know about game wardens.  As ATD mentioned, clipping thousands of 30-100mm fish’s adipose fins (most likely less than a quarter of millimeter) in a day, while trying not to harm the fish, sometimes mistakes are made and end up leaving some adipose tissue.  From what it is left, the adipose will try to regenerate and as the fish mature it’s hard to determine a clipped fish from an injured or less developed.  The adipose fin is a feature & not a fat storage, so diet shouldn't matter too much on their growth.

Central Valley and San Joaquin watersheds have a very long waterway to the ocean (compared to the Russian or Klamath), so many ocean run trout actually don’t go pass the Golden Gate Bridge.  Most of them only stick around in the SF Bay-Delta, but since they left their tributary & had some saltwater influence, many people will consider them steelhead (in the Russian & Klamath people call them half pounders, even though they have few pounds on them.

It's almost impossible to determine a steelhead from a trout because they're genetically the same (trout can have ocean run offspring and vice versa).   You can run otolith micro-chemistry on them, but that's a lethal technique and still hard to tell Bay vs. Ocean.   You can put acoustic tags on them & track each individual fish but that's very costly & time consuming.  You can never go with looking at their colors (old tail).  How many people here think you’ve seen a very silver (steel like) trout in non-anadromous water, or have seen a very dark spotted looking big fish spawning in anadromous rivers?

To make things simple, from the DFG regulation viewpoint (which AOTY follows) I believe Victor's fish would be considered a steelhead (if it's over 16 inch in anadromous water), but I think it's all up to the AOTY committee and Victor to decide if it’s an AOTY fish, or not.

I didn't get to see the pic either but I trust Polepole's judgement on the matter. jim

Victor and I chatted and thought it best to just remove the entry.  He'll be back with bigger and better anyways!!!

-Allen

Victor and I chatted and thought it best to just remove the entry.  He'll be back with bigger and better anyways!!!

-Allen

I'm sure he will. He's been hitting it hard and is do for a big steely.

I couldn't see the picture... 

If the adipose fin seemed disrupted, most surveyors will call it clipped (to be safe), but I don't know about game wardens.  As ATD mentioned, clipping thousands of 30-100mm fish’s adipose fins (most likely less than a quarter of millimeter) in a day, while trying not to harm the fish, sometimes mistakes are made and end up leaving some adipose tissue.  From what it is left, the adipose will try to regenerate and as the fish mature it’s hard to determine a clipped fish from an injured or less developed.  The adipose fin is a feature & not a fat storage, so diet shouldn't matter too much on their growth.

Central Valley and San Joaquin watersheds have a very long waterway to the ocean (compared to the Russian or Klamath), so many ocean run trout actually don’t go pass the Golden Gate Bridge.  Most of them only stick around in the SF Bay-Delta, but since they left their tributary & had some saltwater influence, many people will consider them steelhead (in the Russian & Klamath people call them half pounders, even though they have few pounds on them.

It's almost impossible to determine a steelhead from a trout because they're genetically the same (trout can have ocean run offspring and vice versa).   You can run otolith micro-chemistry on them, but that's a lethal technique and still hard to tell Bay vs. Ocean.   You can put acoustic tags on them & track each individual fish but that's very costly & time consuming.  You can never go with looking at their colors (old tail).  How many people here think you’ve seen a very silver (steel like) trout in non-anadromous water, or have seen a very dark spotted looking big fish spawning in anadromous rivers?

To make things simple, from the DFG regulation viewpoint (which AOTY follows) I believe Victor's fish would be considered a steelhead (if it's over 16 inch in anadromous water), but I think it's all up to the AOTY committee and Victor to decide if it’s an AOTY fish, or not.

...
great fish Victor!
Thanks Naoaki, thats my kind of response