WV record Golden trout caught

[Johnsfolly]

https://www.wvnews.com/news/wvnews/buckhannon-teen-sets-west-virginia-record-with-golden-rainbow-trout-catch/article_53481c31-9578-441f-ad72-052f79a4b493.html

This was a great catch on the gear that he was using. The issue that I have with this is that the fish was likely a released broodstock fish. If they wanted, the fisheries folks could release an even larger one for next year's Golden trout events. To me that diminishes the "record". 

Like I said at first this was a great catch.

[WestCentralFisher]

Very impressive catch. But yeah, I guess I just don't fully get the golden rainbow thing. They look like what I'd expect trout to mutate into after the nuclear apocalypse. Now actual golden trout on the other hand...

[Daryk Campbell Sr]

I agree,  it kind of muddies the water of what counts as a record when its controlled by stocking.   The skill and patience of landing an 11 pound fish on 4 pound line is definitely something the kid should be proud of.  

[WestCentralFisher]

Yeah, technically speaking, the two biggest  trout I've ever caught were almost certainly brood stock fish, on on the catch and release creek at Montauk (likely), and one from a winter pond (certainly).

But I struggle to fully count either one. I still consider the 22" brown I caught on the Niangua several miles below the designated trout water to be the largest trout I've ever caught, even though it was a full two inches shorter than the two aforementioned fish. A stocked fish still to be sure, but after likely 12 inches and several years of growth. The difference in how it fought from the brood stock fish was night and day. 

[tjm]

I consider all Mo. trout, all brown trout in the USA,  and all rainbow trout outside the Pacific Northwest, to be stocked, the alternative is invasive species. Seriously, how can you know without doing DNA studies? Does it really matter if the fish was stocked as fingerling or as a 15 pounder? or it's great-grandmother was the actual hatchery raised stocker? One is just as wild as the other, if you don't think so, call the tame one up and pet it. The difference in color and fight depends on time in the stream more than where it lived as an egg. 

If you caught and landed the fish, regardless of it's origins, it had to first take your bait/lure/fly- which means your skill at finding the feeding station and presenting the "bait" has been demonstrated, and if you land the fish, your skill at line management and fish fighting has been demonstrated. 

Keeping records and setting up events like this are all about encouraging new anglers, or anglers that aren't just "fishing to be fishing", to keep at it and buy more permits and tackle. Give the kid (and yourself) full credit for a job well done.

I have no more than a general idea what my largest fish of any species has been and I put just as much value on the catching of stream hatched fingerling brown trout, ugly sculpin (I do wish I could say the sculpin were deliberate) , or the exceptional chub,  as I do the 4+ pound game fishes that have snagged my flies. I generally only measure fish that I intend to eat, and then only for legal size, although I did weigh a really good LMB about 1980. Ate  it too. 

[ollie]

I have to agree with others. Hard for me to count a released trophy that had grown all of its life in a controlled environment like a large trout. My PB brown I know for a fact was stocked, but as a smaller fish about 8-9" in length. It did grow in the stream and eventually got to the size it was, but even then I know it was a stocked fish at some point. Give me the big smallies any day! Or a large striper or largemouth. 

[WestCentralFisher]

Yeah, I mean all of this is completely subjective. But I get more satisfaction from catching a fish that has been a stream resident for at least awhile than a fresh from the truck hatchery fish. And a little more satisfaction yet if the fish is stream-born.

To wit, last week, I fished the whole continuum, ranging from fresh stockers at Montauk to resident stocked trout in the upper Current and stream born rainbows, well, somewhere else. They all fought well and were fun to catch, but the resident fish on the Current felt like they fought little harder.

That part might have been in my head, but the stream-born fish in the other creek definitely jumped a lot more, and I also think they fought a lot harder. And the feeling of satisfaction I got when I caught them was much greater. That might be silly, but that's how it is.

Now, one could take this to a logical extreme, and say there is no objective difference between those stockers at Montauk and anything short of a native trout in its original watershed. But I guess I don't care to live in a world where I can't view the cutthroat I caught in a mountain stream (or even those stream-born Missouri rainbows) as special, because they're the wrong strain in the wrong watershed, or hell, the wrong state. It's possible to set your definition of "good enough" so high it's impossible to be happy, and that's a bad business.

All I really know is the longer they've been in the stream, the more I like catching them, and I'd rather be fishing for any of them, even a neon-yellow monstrosity, than sitting here typing this.