Cutthroat Sizes

[Paula]

Thank you! Yes i know i am wearing the brightest color possible but i have never had a problem with spooking fish if i stay low and behind them. Im pretty sneaky lol

[firefrog]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons. Don't mean to offend you, but what are you trying to accomplish here? Having a little fun with us? That's OK. Good sense of humor.

Cheers.

[RedBeard]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons. Don't mean to offend you, but what are you trying to accomplish here? Having a little fun with us? That's OK. Good sense of humor.

Cheers.

 

Name said reasons...

[Hawgstoppah]

there was a cutty in that picture? I didn't see it.

[DaveJensen]

I love forums. I need to get my own.

Paula - nice fish. Good on you. Nice aperture on that photo.

Nice that you are wearing color. Truth be told, you seldom have to worry about clothing color when fishing, regardless what your quarry. Approach is king.

I suspect someone has an issue with an attractive gal, happy as can be, holding a nice fish in a well composed photo. The negative response might be because girls can't fish. Dang, I guess I have to stop fishing with Amelia.

[Roast]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons. Don't mean to offend you, but what are you trying to accomplish here? Having a little fun with us? That's OK. Good sense of humor.

Cheers.

 

Calling BS and not meaning to offend? These types of posts are unnecessary and can discourage people from posting.

 

I'm with Dave, all I see is someone who looks like they are having fun on the river:)

[Jayhad]

I can't imagine what is wrong with that pic. THe contrasting colours are not what we as anglers are used to but I think it looks awesome

[reevesr1]

I have a couple of pink shirts, but no pink jacket or matching toque. Now that I see what is possible, I'm going to ask for one for Christmas.

 

Have no idea what anyone could find wrong with that pic. Focus is on the fish, losing focus as you step away. Almost like they wanted the fish to be the focal point of the picture, not the angler or background. Heretics.

 

Nice fish Paula. And you don't hide behind a anonymous name.

[jasonvilly]

Holy Jebus that thing is huge. Awesome fish Paula, and such an amazing picture.

[DaveJensen]

Oh, and you might want to check this link out... Sweet As! Now we know she has caught at least two fish. But she was only standing on a paddle board for one of them. Remember, gals can't fish. Right?

[Guest 420FLYFISHIN]

wow bud, its ok to call BS on something but if you dont back it up with anything it just makes you look bad. Great fish and untill them great conversation.

[Flytyer]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons. Don't mean to offend you, but what are you trying to accomplish here? Having a little fun with us? That's OK. Good sense of humor.

Cheers.

 

Care to explain yourself......and while your at it you should read the forum rules

[Paula]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons. Don't mean to offend you, but what are you trying to accomplish here? Having a little fun with us? That's OK. Good sense of humor.

Cheers.

 

I am a bit confused by this response , I honestly don't know what ur talking about but please feel free explain to me what you mean. (Next time i will crop my face out that way there is no confusion)

 

I agree with you Dave i don't think hes used to Women fishing and if that is so then I guess i can understand why he would say something like that. But on that note I am fortunate to fish with some incredible Female anglers so there are a lot more of us then you think. If you bump into me on the river firefrog feel free to say hello! Firefrog I will also add that the purpose of posting the photo was to show that there are a few good size and healthy cutthroats out there... you just have to look for them.

[SteveM]

Huh? Sorry, but I'm calling BS on that photo for several reasons.

 

I have to agree with the burning amphibian on this matter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B.S. is short for "Beautiful Slab", right?

[Taco]

Anyone see a Flamin'Amphibia sneakin' around? What's the sayin'? Never let your alligator mouth overload your anal sphincter?

[firefrog]

Ok

First of all this has absolutely NOTHING to due with anyone's gender. Were this a photo of a 68 year-old snaggle-toothed curmudgeon under otherwise identical circumstances I would have had the same reaction.

Paula doesn't owe anyone an explanation or justification.

I purposely left the context open to see if any other members noticed any incongruences. I asked my question because I have doubts about the photo and the information associated with.

Specifically:

- The fish in the photo is bigger than 19"

- The photo appears to be altered

- The poster doesn't specifically state that the fish was caught on a dry fly, who caught it, where, or even if it was caught by angling (don't see a hook, line, or rod). Yes, this is all irrelevant, but when I don't see any such information, I get suspicious. My problem, not anyone else's.

- All we can see for sure is a person holding a large fish. This is, after all, the internet. Despite claims for or against, there is no actual way to prove anything.

- Any one of these points could easily be shrugged, but all toled, makes a skeptic like me, well, more skeptical.

So I'm skeptical - no excuse for my accusitory tone. Didn't mean to come across so harsh and I didn't realize this until after I posted and came back to the thread.

Cheeers.

[shredneck]

Ok

First of all this has absolutely NOTHING to due with anyone's gender. Were this a photo of a 68 year-old snaggle-toothed curmudgeon under otherwise identical circumstances I would have had the same reaction.

Paula doesn't owe anyone an explanation or justification.

I purposely left the context open to see if any other members noticed any incongruences. I asked my question because I have doubts about the photo and the information associated with.

Specifically:

- The fish in the photo is bigger than 19"

- The photo appears to be altered

- The poster doesn't specifically state that the fish was caught on a dry fly, who caught it, where, or even if it was caught by angling (don't see a hook, line, or rod). Yes, this is all irrelevant, but when I don't see any such information, I get suspicious. My problem, not anyone else's.

- All we can see for sure is a person holding a large fish. This is, after all, the internet. Despite claims for or against, there is no actual way to prove anything.

- Any one of these points could easily be shrugged, but all toled, makes a skeptic like me, well, more skeptical.

So I'm skeptical - no excuse for my accusitory tone. Didn't mean to come across so harsh and I didn't realize this until after I posted and came back to the thread.

Cheeers.

 

Looks like a 19 incher to me (It's amazing what a tape measure does to most anglers estimates )

This is an excellent photo. Maybe the vivid colors and sharpness of the photo have triggered your scepticism? The trout is in focus as it is the main subject of the photo... IMO the fish is normally the main focus of any great fish photo.

 

What is there to be skeptical about? Who cares where it's caught? Alberta is where the topic is about so lets assume it's caught somewhere in this vast province.

Who cares if its dry or not?

Caught by angling????.. really?.. you think she speared it? or electroshocked it? or better yet some else speared it and handed it to her so she could pose for pic with someone else's fish?

If she was holding a shark and claiming it was from Alberta, I'd be with you on the skeptic train BUT this is a cutty, Alberta has a few of these. I hope it stays that way, I like the little buggers.

[trailhead]

Congratulations, nice fish and it's interesting the assumptions people make. Could it be that fish was caught in a lake? Oh and why can't my fishing partners look like that, all I seem to get are grizzled old farts. But then birds of a feather....

[Chadillac]

super nice fish!

[darrinhurst]

Awesome fish Paula!

 

And that paddle boarding didn't look like fun at all......

[Paula]

Ok

First of all this has absolutely NOTHING to due with anyone's gender. Were this a photo of a 68 year-old snaggle-toothed curmudgeon under otherwise identical circumstances I would have had the same reaction.

Paula doesn't owe anyone an explanation or justification.

I purposely left the context open to see if any other members noticed any incongruences. I asked my question because I have doubts about the photo and the information associated with.

Specifically:

- The fish in the photo is bigger than 19"

- The photo appears to be altered

- The poster doesn't specifically state that the fish was caught on a dry fly, who caught it, where, or even if it was caught by angling (don't see a hook, line, or rod). Yes, this is all irrelevant, but when I don't see any such information, I get suspicious. My problem, not anyone else's.

- All we can see for sure is a person holding a large fish. This is, after all, the internet. Despite claims for or against, there is no actual way to prove anything.

- Any one of these points could easily be shrugged, but all toled, makes a skeptic like me, well, more skeptical.

So I'm skeptical - no excuse for my accusitory tone. Didn't mean to come across so harsh and I didn't realize this until after I posted and came back to the thread.

Cheeers.

 

Thank you Firefrog i found this post very comical!

This fish is 19" I use a tape measure not an est. There is no true way to judge a size of a fish in a photo as u do not know the size of the subject who is holding the object. I have seen small fish posed in a way that make it look much bigger. The reason u dont see the rod is because the photo is up close. I can assure u that this fish was caught on a dry with 6x tippet on a popular Alberta river, there wouldn't be a reason for me to say otherwise .. I will even give u a tip! Terrestrial flies can be very productive when there isn't much of a hatch happening.

I didn't know a simple photo would cause u so much confusion .. But As you said .. Your a Skeptic and there isn't anything i can say to change that.

 

Thanks again everyone, my friend takes amazing photos! I hope to head back down there again before it closes if this weather decides to be a little more cooperating!

Paula

[dryfly]

Great fish Paula and a nice photo. Thanks for posting.

 

Please excuse the crap IQ on the old scanned prints below.

 

Firedog. In one way I agree with you in that there is a ton o' BS regarding fish sizes in this board and in streams and lakes. Paula's fish looks about right to me. But unless a fish is taped (as Paula's was), then sizes are usually out by 10+%. 20-inch trout are instantly 22 inches unless taped. (In the case of Paula's fish it might seem larger than 19 inches.)

 

But it is also not a good idea to question photos. (Well okay these days maybe every photo should be questioned! ) Sure they can be manipulated, but even unadjusted they can also be deceiving.

 

Years ago, I showed the photo on the left to an old-time salmon angler who placed the size at close to 20 pounds...remember it is a coho. Well it was not 20 pounds by far. But my question to you Firedog is what is the size of the two fish in these photos? (Both the man and woman are about the same height.)

 

Clive

 

 

[Guest 420FLYFISHIN]

the only way to setle this is to measure paula's finger width and do the math.....but i have a real life out side of chair casting lol

 

firefrog - a question to your post is why does it matter if it was pulled in by fly,spoon, or electro shock? if its just a basic biology question about how big they get why does this matter? not trying to flame, just curious.

 

dryfly - i think its a trick question (is that the same fish?)! but if i had to i would assume its a 2x10 second from the bottom so i must guess he is 2-3 ft from the railing so that must be scalled up and them use that measurement to find the fish size as all people are different making them a invalid measuring tool.