Arkansas Cutthroat Genetics

[basska]

13 hours ago, Al Agnew said:

I think that the cutthroat stocked in Arkansas come from the state fish hatchery at Mammoth Spring.  Like you, I can find nothing about what strain they originally were.  Looking at photos, they don't particularly look like any of the distinct strains from various parts of the West.  I suspect that these fish are mongrels, coming from brood stock from several different original sources and bred in the hatchery until they are like hatchery rainbows...not any particular strain.  It's interesting and perhaps telling that Arkansas Game and Fish doesn't seem to make a big deal out of which strain they came from.

I've fished a lot of the West, and have caught several different strains, including coastal, westslope, Snake River fine-spotted, Yellowstone, and Colorado cutthroats.  Interestingly, the cutthroat strain that made me a bunch of money and some notoriety, the Lahontan cutthroat, is one I've never caught.  I entered and won Nevada's first trout stamp contest with a Lahontan cutthroat, but my reference was some good photos that a friend of mine in MDC procured from somebody he knew in Nevada Fish and Game department.

Awesome stamp! I just watched Fargo a few nights ago... I wish I were a better artist so I could enter some stamp contests. 

In defense of the Trout, you are probably right that the majority of the original Cutthroat are Rocky Mountain strain mongrels, and I agree that AGFC not trying to build their cutthroat up as a super unique fishing opportunity may be the best evidence. However, the article BilletHead linked above did show stocking of true Bonnevilles. I won't lie though, I have major trouble distinguishing a Bonneville and a Colorado River, or really most strains of the Rocky Mountain subspecies. Yellowstones I notice take on more of a gold color. 

The Fine-Spotted though -  @netboy's picture was pretty convincing to me. Fine-Spotted and gold. In contrast, I always think of the "average" Cutthroat as a tannish gray color, and a strong crimson streak running from the gills all through the belly area. Sizeable black spots sparse towards the front of the body, and numerous towards the tail. That fish appeared unique to me.

At this point, Arkansas Cutthroat may just be a bit of mystery, and one I would love to see solved by a study of some sort, whether by a university or by the state.

[netboy]

Here is a pic of one of the prettiest fine spots that I have caught. This guy was caught on the White River in early summer during the caddis hatch. 

 

[basska]

9 minutes ago, netboy said:

Here is a pic of one of the prettiest fine spots that I have caught. This guy was caught on the White River in early summer during the caddis hatch. 

 

Jeez what a beauty. Big too.

[tjm]

I think that any trout in the USA has "Hatchery" genetics, even the "wild" trout in their native range have been repeatedly diluted with stocked trout and it 's obvious that any trout outside it's native range came from hatchery stock even if it's been naturalized for a hundred years like some Mo. rainbows.  We've been moving and stocking fish since the early 1880s and for the majority of that time no one thought  anything about preservation of native stocks. There still those who think bass should be stocked in Ozark reservoirs to insure any native bass are mixed with hatchery genetics.

[bfishn]

50 minutes ago, tjm said:

...We've been moving and stocking fish since the early 1880s and for the majority of that time no one thought  anything about preservation of native stocks...

Bingo! And since gene testing wasn't invented till the '50s, and wasn't widely available (affordable) to fisheries departments until the ~'90s, we will never be able to positively identify specific 'native' strains and variants.

[BilletHead]

27 minutes ago, bfishn said:

Bingo! And since gene testing wasn't invented till the '50s, and wasn't widely available (affordable) to fisheries departments until the ~'90s, we will never be able to positively identify specific 'native' strains and variants.

                             NO But there are specimens in places that were taken well before fish were hybridized from non-native species. The DNA is still viable, and this is how many fisheries in various states determine the purity of newly discovered pockets of natives. Yes, they are still out there. 

[netboy]

I could care less about a trout's genetics. They are just a fun fish to pursue.

[BilletHead]

42 minutes ago, netboy said:

I could care less about a trout's genetics. They are just a fun fish to pursue.

            Yes they are but wouldn't it of be neat to fish this country before it was changed? I'm talking BC (before carp) 😁

[BilletHead]

             Some light reading material who are wearing the tinfoil hat and guessing instead of investigating.  There are answers out there in species collected before Things were changed. 

Mining museums’ genomic treasures - Ars Technica

Genetic Analysis of West Desert Bonneville Cutthroat Trout (U.S. National Park Service)

[basska]

1 hour ago, netboy said:

I could care less about a trout's genetics. They are just a fun fish to pursue.

It's not about the genetics itself, but I love fishing, love the fish I catch, and I am a geek. If I can learn a ton about why a fish looks the way it does, I would sure like to. Now this doesn't mean I will be strongly opinionated about past stocking experiments - what is done is done. This topic is about the beauty of these fish.