Trout- Part One

[Brian K. Shaffer]

I never link music - but if you listen to these guys... these Michigan guys whose band is named 'Troll for Trout', you will understand how it is infectious.

This song just kills it. With talks of rods and waders.. duns and daces... "its kinda nice to fish in fleece".

These guys really fly fish.

" One thing that I try to understand and figure out, is why we get so excited by a six inch rainbow trout. "

https://myspace.com/trollfortrout/music/song/river-song-70830718-77976162

[joeD]

Oy. I give up.

F****** trout.

PS: Watching the Montauk river gauge more actively.

F++++++ trout in Missouri.

PS: I love catching big fish.

[Mark]

I had always heard of trout fishing and knew it was a $25 meal in a fancy restaurant but never had the chance to fish for trout until 15 years ago. And it was exciting catching good fighters and trout are a beautiful fish. However, I never understood what all the fuss was about eating them. I would much rather eat crappie or bluegill. But I have fished predominantly for trout for the past 15 years, and I began to lose my enthusiasm in the past couple of years and only continue to trout fish because that is what my friends prefer. Though I realize the trout we are catching were placed there recently, were raised in a hatchery without natural predators, and were not natural or native species. I consider trout parks to be amusement parks for the same reasons, but at least river fishing for trout is sporty. My friends like to argue that some of the fish we are catching are stream born by natural reproduction, by reasoning that the meat is darker and no fins have been clipped, while I'm not always convinced of their theories. I think the vast majority are stockers and, as such, I have starting believing there is some fraudulent aspect to trout fishing in Missouri. It sort of reminds me of people who pay to have birds like pheasant released so they can shoot them.

So I am starting to take more of an interest in smallmouth fishing. I am relatively new to it, and have had a few successes, but still haven't had trips to produce the kinds of number of fish that I have had on trout trips. But still, there is something more natural about smallmouth fishing. They are native fish, were born in the exact waters where they can be caught, have had to live and learn about predators from the first day of life, and they are a blast to catch with a helluva fight much more so than a trout. Still it's hard to get my friends to fish smallmouth waters. I am perfectly content with float fishing for smallmouth all day and if I catch 6 or 8, then that was a fun day. More often, I have caught less. There is a learning cure learning to use artificial baits. And I will always get the argument of how we could have catch more fish in our familiar trout waters and why waste time trying new waters and, God forbid, we don't have a great day with numbers of fish caught.

But I have switched my preference to smallmouth fishing - at least I know they weren't planted there. Just seems more natural in Missouri to me.

[ozark trout fisher]

What is it about trout that sends us over the moon?

Why is so much energy and photography and writing expended chronicling the catching of a 6 inch colorful minnow (in a net, no less!).

It's one of those things.

You either already know or me explaining it won't help. I have tried, with my writing, to do so, but in the end it's pretty useless. Either you love chasing after shiny 5 inch minnows or you don't. I guess there is no right or wrong answer. But I have a pretty good idea which is more fun.

But I get it. I basically don't post fishing reports anymore, because frankly, no one cares if I catch a bunch of 5" trout or smallies and I can understand that.

[Terrierman]

Where they live has a lot to do with it.

I was going to say much the same thing, and a few more.

They live in some of the most fun places to visit on the planet.

They're pretty.

They're catchable, but not too easy to make it boring.

You can often see them bite, which is really cool.

They're fun to catch (put up a decent fight).

Gearheads love any excuse to have another set of gear.

They're just plain fun.

But they don't taste all that good compared to a lot of other fish.

[ozark trout fisher]

But they don't taste all that good compared to a lot of other fish.

Now that depends. A hatchery rainbow is only alright. But a brookie from a high mountain stream in Montana......few things are better.

[bfishn]

Oy. I give up. ...

You don't get off that easy...

"Part 1" harbors the implied promise of a Part 2. Lay it out there man, you know you want to. (you do remember what it was, don't you?)

:-)

[ness]

Now that depends. A hatchery rainbow is only alright. But a brookie from a high mountain stream in Montana......few things are better.

A native cutthroat would be better than a ferel brookie in Montana. A native brookie in Labrador would be better than brookie in Montana. It gets complicated. May need a flow chart.

[ozark trout fisher]

A native cutthroat would be better than a ferel brookie in Montana. A native brookie in Labrador would be better than brookie in Montana. It gets complicated. May need a flow chart.

But you're pointing out precisely what I was getting at. You probably wouldn't want to eat a cuttie out west, because they are native. And certainly not a brookie out east, which are doing even worse in their home range. That's why western brookies are so good-they come pretty much guilt free, one of few such fish this side of bluegill.

[405z06]

True story, I have never caught a trout. I've only actually seen one live, it was caught on a jerkbait while fishing for smallies on the Susquehanna in PA.

One time I was wetting a line at the low-water bridge at Scott's Ford before a float and had something on that I think might have been a trout.