Ok folks, it’s time to test your fishing knowledge with a ‘Pop Quiz’ to correctly identify the fish species in the below photograph.
There are two answers I will accept, but one is more correct than the other (& will garner a larger prize package)
This question ties-in with an article feature I wrote for Outdoor Canada Magazine, to appear in their spring issue.
The first person to send me the correct identification of this fish will win a selection of fishing tackle courtesy of Brecks – makers of the famous Williams and Mooselook wobblers!
Now, I am not expecting the scientific name, but will accept it. It is the common name I am looking for, and will allow one guess per person in my comment section.
Good luck and good fishing!
Outdoorsguy
The most common name for this beauty would be a brook trout or speckled trout . nice one !
oh ya by the way i for got to tell you i’m one of the bent hooks !
Hey Paul, I remember you well but thought you only fished muskie?
I am sorry to tell you, though, you are incorrect.
Outdoorsguy
Oh well i don’t fish for that type trout or any as a matter of fact , i think i’ll stick to pickerel or muskie ,but thanks for the excellent reading .
The fish in the photo is a brook trout. I hope I am the first entry because I could use some fishing tackle!!
Thank you.
Sorry Amanda, we’ve had that guess already and it is wrong..
You don’t think I would make it that easy, do you?
Thanks for reading!
Outdoorsguy
brown !
Sorry Paul, only one guess per person.
Outdoorsguy
Gid’ay Mr. Morrison,
First of all love your articles. Secondly I do believe you are holding a Coaster Brook Trout. Hop it is right, can always use new tackle.
Cheers
Gary
Hey Gary, thanks for the kind words.
What a great answer btw, I’m sure not many people know what that is….but I’m sorry that is not right.
Regards,
Outdoorsguy
Salvelinus namaycush X Salvelinus fontinalis (splake)
This certainly looks like a Brook Trout.
Yes, it certainly does..but its not!
Outdoorsguy
Would this be a Rainbow
Hi Jeff i think it is a lake trout. or splake.
i will choose lake trout.
Sorry Denis, not a rainbow!
Outdoorsguy
Could this be a Bull Trout?
Jeff,
I’ll gues that it’s a Splake. Was it caught around Manitoulin Island?
Chessy, great use of the scientific terms..you sound like a real University student..but sorry, its NOT a splake!
Outdoorsguy
Sorry, Oldhunter it is not a lake trout either.
Outdoorsguy
GPG, you only get one try, although, your second guess was pretty good!
Still wrong though!
Outdoorsguy
You said:
Chessy, great use of the scientific terms..you sound like a real University student..but sorry, its NOT a splake!
Outdoorsguy
I thought my name was Alain. Did Chessy guess Splake before me . Sorry i didn’t see it in the answers.
Does this mean I get another guess….Just kidding! Nicelooking trout btw.
it was fun playing!
Ah well, I guess I should have read the comments before posting a Brook. I did find a number of new web sites with good fishing info with the quick web research though. Thanks!
although only one guess.. you must have taken that in alaska…. is it a dolly varden….. not to many trout left to choose from ….
Has this question been answered yet?
the suspense is killing me! Can we get a second try? LOL
Quebec Red
Bob, not one person has answered this correctly..I will give it till noon and if noone gets it,
I will provide a hint or two, and allow everyone a second kick at the can!
Outdoorsguy
I would say a Lake Trout.
HOLY CRAP..Iggy has it right!!!
Congratulations Iggy, you are the first person to correctly identify the Quebec Red Trout…which, as of 1974, was for scientific simplicity categorized along with the Arctic Char…however, remains a distinct and completely ‘land-locked’ species of char/trout. There are still found in a handful of NW, Central and NE Quebec lakes.
My first clue was going to be that the fish was caught in NW Quebec..
Although they are very difficult to tell apart from the brook trout, QC reds have a slightly forked tail..less of a black leading edge along the anal and pelvic fins..and have spots with no distinct ‘blue halo’ as with the brookie.
They have been called by many as the hard-fighting fish – pound for pound – in North America..and I would agree!
Congrats Iggy..you win the Brecks prize package!
Thanks to everyone who participated
Outdoorsguy
Jeff,
Thanks it was fun
Congrats Doug!
Is there a French name for it>? What do they call it in the French Community? Truite rouge?
Yes Alain..they’re also known as Truite Rouge de Quebec!!
Outdoorsguy
Probably the closest answer before Iggy was Gary with Coaster trout…a type of migratory brook trout of Lake Superior. The QC Red Trout on the other hand, although a remnant population of Arctic Char are no longer anadromous and do not migrate to spawn
There are still lakes in the province of Quebec with populations of both brook trout and QC red trout.
Outdoorsguy
would that be the same as an aurora trout in ontario. just wondering.
Actually, I had also looked at a char, the white-spotted char. Good contest. Congrats Iggy
No, actually the Aurora I believe is a recognized subspecies of the brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis timagamiensis)..found in various parts of the province..
The QC Red is more closely related to the Arctic Char..salvelinus alpinus
Outdoorsguy
Hey, 37 Comments in under 4 hours, that must be some sort of record!
Outdoorsguy
HA ! does fish count ! this was a great contest !, now lets have one that we can do some fishing in .
Thanks for the congrats, and thanks to Jeff for the fun contest
To bad I did not see this earlier. I seem to remember seeing that photo some where. It was in relation to a fishing trip you made. It mentioned the great Red Trout fishing and the ad in the magazine.
And knowing you as well as I do it would have been a no brainer to guess Red Trout even if I had not seen the picture before.
Next time keep one for mounting or I could do a replica mount of one from the picture for you if you eat them.
Hey Rick, maybe you could do a replica of me holding the prize
Hey Rick…I might just do that, it would look nice right beside my big buck.
I will give you the heads-up next time there is a contest. Perhaps I’ll make it about wildlife this time, of course
that wouldn’t be fair to the rest, as we all know you would win!
Hey Iggy, where should I send that lure?
Outdoorsguy
I think this trout is actually a brook trout. Maybe it was caught in a lake with red’s in it but the red trout characteristics would show much greater than in that pic. Red trout are known to be “colourful with a red belly”. I’ve caught brookies that were more red that the one shown.
Congrats Iggy, but what will you do with fishing gear, you’ve never fished a day in your life.
Mag, the characteristic red colour of the Quebec red trout only occurs during the fall spawn..that’s when they really turn on the colours!
How come you never participated?
Outdoorsuy
Mag, I’ve caught more fish than you’ve eaten
Jeff, you could send it to my house if you want, I can PM you the address if you want
if you look carefully at the tail, you can tell it’s a bit different than a speckle trout.
Mag didn’t participate because he was asleep in his office
Actually Jeff, I’d be surprised if it were a Quebec Red (landlocked Arctic char). Besides which, the furthest west they occur naturally is in the Outouais north of Ottawa according to “Freshwater fishes of Canada”. Lots of Quebec outfitters stock with Brook trout and splake and call them Quebec reds. They just get more tourism for the buck that way. Have you counted the pyloric caeca? 25-34 for Brook trout. 33-46 for Quebec reds. No other way to tell really. Get back to us on that. Looks like a splake to me.
And actually Paul, Reds were recognised as Arctic char WAY before 1974. Linnaeus called it Salmo alpinus in 1758!
Hello Grant..thanks for contributing and for the information.
I am quite confident that it is a Quebec Red.. although I never did say the exact location, they are not any further west than the Outaouais, north of Ottawa. The waters we fish are also not part of any Outfitting operation, and are location on Crown Land (terrritoire libre)
The 1974 reference was me, actually, as my research uncovered that, prior to that date they were classified with a distinct scientific name Salvelinus Marstoni and after that date were lumped-in with the Arctic Char or Salvelinus alpinus.
I will check the pylotic caeca though, thanks for that hint. I suppose it is something like checking the submandibular pores on Northern Pike (Esox lucius) to differentiate from muskie (Esox maskinonge) Pike have 10 pores, while muskie usually have 12-14
Thanks again and I will check that this spring when I’m up there again. I can tell you that these fish are, for sure, not splake and I am quite confident that are not brookies(salvelinis fontinalis) either as they are very diff in appearance and behaviour than brook trout found in the surrounding bodies of water.
Regards
Outdoorsguy
Jeff.
Thanks for supplying your info on this. I am kind of a crusader about Quebec Reds. Just love the fish and it’s history.
The 1758 date of the type collection by Linnaeus was from Lapland. Landlocked Arctic char are circumpolar in distribution, and are much more abundant in the Old World than here, then and now. In old nomenclature, when world-wide comparisons were extremely difficult, taxonomic names were applied with relative abandon and very little merit. So there were over 18 scientifically published names for Arctic char before 1887. It was in 1896 that they were first called Salvelinus alpinus, the current official name, including those landlocked in Quebec. The Russian taxonomist Vladykov mistakenly applied the name Salvelinus Marstonii to Quebec Reds in 1954, although most of the scientific world was not in agreement, and continued with the alpinus specific label. Yes there are politics in science too. It has been used to denote it’s distinctness as a species. What you are referring to in 1974 may be a denouncement by the International Committee on Nomenclature of Fishes, of the specific Marstonii appellation only, not the nomenclature. Quebec Reds were always Arctic char. Common history through the early 20th century documents it well. PS. Native Quebec reds in western Quebec go north of Ottawa ONLY as far as Val des Monts/Denholm.
Hey Grant…thanks for the backgrounder..I agree, they are indeed an interesting fish with an even more distinguished history than I had imagined…
See, I face a double edged sword here..since the lake we catch these mysterious reds in is certainly north of Val des Monts..I could examine them more closely this spring and document the features which I believe will prove to be arctic char in origin..but on the other hand, it is a lake that only we fish year after year…as I am convinced that no one else ever casts a line into it besides us…so do I really want to bring undue attention to our ‘Lac Perdue’..the pet name for the special body of water we never talk about…I’m sure you understand..
We have caught many reds there over 5 pounds, but only take out a handful of fish each year..you could say we manage it for our own long-term benefit..
Thanks again and tight lines from one trout nut to another!
Outdoorsguy