How would you like to catch these two amazing brook trout on 2 casts?
It was three years ago on tiny water.
I had never fished the stream before.
August 21, 2012 at 2:22 pm
#1326471
Back To Back Casts
-
August 21, 2012 at 2:33 pm #1093692
It’s even more amazing that they are the same fish!
August 21, 2012 at 2:35 pm #1093693Not the same fish. Look at the gill plates/covers. I thought the same thing, but they are completely different colors. Most brook trout look the same.
August 21, 2012 at 2:52 pm #1093699Looks like the same fish to me.. must be identical twin with the spots the exact same. Nice fish
August 21, 2012 at 2:55 pm #1093702I think they are two different fish as I look at them.
August 21, 2012 at 3:04 pm #1093706regardless of the pics being of the same fish or not, still great to catch quality fish back to back – and it makes for great memories. Nice job Len!
August 21, 2012 at 3:06 pm #1093710Quote:
I think they are two different fish as I look at them.
100 percent different fish…the second was much larger and the gill plates are the key.
August 21, 2012 at 3:40 pm #1093719Very nice fish!!
August 21, 2012 at 3:48 pm #1093720
close ups of gill plates
August 21, 2012 at 3:58 pm #1093721same fish
same scar on the upper mandible (jaw)
7-scales from red spot up to lg cream spot on both fish
same fish just lighting a little differentAugust 21, 2012 at 4:06 pm #1093726Two distinctlly different fish! In Len’s first picture, the gill plate just in front of his thumb is shaped different than the gill plate in the second picture.
August 21, 2012 at 4:12 pm #1093727Quote:
same fish
same scar on the upper mandible (jaw)
7-scales from red spot up to lg cream spot on both fish
same fish just lighting a little different
one was an inch and a half longer than the other and much heavier.
I always let my trout go downstream of where I catch them so they don’t swim back and alert the others.
August 21, 2012 at 4:52 pm #1093738One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish! Who cares!
Nice fish anyways!August 21, 2012 at 5:04 pm #1093759
August 21, 2012 at 5:24 pm #1093765from same outing
August 21, 2012 at 9:01 pm #1093841Not that it matters. I must be bored at work. The only thing different about these pics is the angle of the fish and the angle of light.
August 21, 2012 at 9:05 pm #1093845only if i had a photo of the full length it would be a mute point.
One is a full inch and then some longer.
August 21, 2012 at 9:19 pm #1093854I believe you caught two nice brook trout back to back. It is not that hard to do when you are on the right stream and from your picks you definately know the right streams. I feel however that these pics are of the same fish.
August 21, 2012 at 11:13 pm #1093868Exact same fish, no doubt about it. Like was said above just a different light angle. Too many similarities.
SAME FISH
August 21, 2012 at 11:45 pm #1093873Good work Len!
August 22, 2012 at 10:15 am #1093939I went back to the uncropped versions of the file in my photo archives.
I am some times stubborn and pigheaded,
This is the only other brookie photo from that outing.
I try to say I am reasonableAugust 22, 2012 at 5:17 pm #1094080I beleive you caught two fish back to back, but from what I see, the spot patterns/colors are exactly the same. Is that possible with two different fish? I see the difference in the gill plates but do they slide making the length different upon gill angle?
You said it was three years ago, maybe you never really took the photos or lost one?
Regardless, I enjoy your pics, keep it up.
August 22, 2012 at 8:53 pm #1094150i took the 2 originals and lined them up on a measuring grid.
Is OBVIOUS it is 2 different fish.
August 22, 2012 at 10:15 pm #1094180Measuring what?
August 22, 2012 at 10:23 pm #1094186Quote:
Measuring what?
made the eye fit in a grid and the end of the nose.
matched it on both then I measured the deepest part of the fish
and it is a no brainer.August 22, 2012 at 10:42 pm #1094192I don’t think that’s enough to acurrately determine length of the fish. It’s not that easy with this type of photo. Distance from lens and angle of the fish will distort those measurements.
Regardless, the more I look at it, the more I’m convinced that the fish are the same. All of the markings near the head are exactly the same. How can you explain that?
Plus, how did the dirt on your fingers and the dirt on the fish’s fins in both photos end up being the same? It’s become obvious to me, they are the same fish.
August 22, 2012 at 10:51 pm #1094193Quote:
Quote:
Measuring what?
deepest part of the fish
and it is a no brainer.
dirt on my fingers stayed from prior.
I caught and released first one..lifted the second trout out of water with the line.
The bigger trout is about 15 percent deeper.August 22, 2012 at 10:54 pm #1094198I went back to original files.
I remember the two fish well.
I found 4 male brookie photos from that day in sep 2009.August 22, 2012 at 11:20 pm #1094203Even if I beleived the measurements and that the dirt stayed the same on your hand between two fish (which, no offense, I don’t)
You still don’t explain why the markings are the same.
You still don’t explain how the dirt on the fish’s fins remain the same in the two photos. See my croppings.
They are the same fish.
August 22, 2012 at 11:26 pm #1094206you are arguing about a fish that some else caught 3 years ago?????
I believe it is time to lock this thread.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.