Inland vs GL Lake Trout

[chunkytrout]

Can anyone explain the true differences between inland Lake trout and Great Lakes variety. Is there a sub species difference or are all differences due to habitat?

chunky

[troutman]

One is a sub-species of the other and I think it is the inland variety that is the sub-species.They do not grow as large as the GL variety,they are less oily and much better eating.(in my opinion)Mike

[Lowe]

There are two subspecies of lake trout in the Great Lakes, the redfin and the siscowet. The siscowet is the "fat" laker, the redfin the leaner, better tasting trout. Both are native and inhabit varying depths, but the siscowet will generally live in deeper water. Most of the inland trout are redfins and are identical to the redfins in Lake Superior.

[chunkytrout]

Amazing! 600+ feet down. I would think the fish would die before you even got it to the surface. Wonder what the oxygen content difference is between say 80ft and 600ft. What forage do they find that deep?

chunky

[Renneberg]

I think one of the difference from Lake Superior or Great lakes, lake trout is from inland lake trout is the size they can grow to and the fact that in the case of Lake Superior's Lake Trout, they can spawn hundreds of feet down.

I do know that there are two kinds of lake trout in Lake Superior. One lives at deeps of 250 feet and shallower, while the other lives from 250 down to 600+ or deeper. I say deeper because there was a study done to see how deep they lived and the net's only went to 600 feet. They kept netting lakers down to 600 feet.

One interesting note about the lakers that live down to 600+ feet. As the nets went deeper the lakers got bigger. It's belived that that huge 65lb (if I remember right) laker caught and released a few years ago was one of ones that can live as deep as 600+.

That population of lakers is largely over looked because of the depth they live at. So if you think about it there is a population of huge lakers that can top out at 65 lbs living in lake superior with only a few anglers who have ever caught one.

Hope this was helpfull Chunkytrout.

------------------
"Study to be quite"

[Renneberg]

Chunkytrout, my guess would be whitefish and other lake trout.

Remember if you hook a Lake trout in deep water you should bring it up slow, so it can let the air out of it's swim bladder. Otherwise the swim bladder will blow up and kill the trout.

------------------
"Study to be quite"

[chunkytrout]

Yep, I figured that. I remember that the next time I'm trolling 600ft down.

chunky

[Renneberg]

Chunkytrout, your going to need a big reel to hold all that line!

Good luck fishing that deep. Let us know if you ever catch anything that deep.

------------------
"Study to be quite"

[black max]

I was just reading some articles about this topic this winter and have been itching to try for the siscowet lakers although my cannons only go down to 300 ft. I am going to give it a try probally out of silver bay this summer since it is so deep up there.

[Steve Foss]

Plenty of siscowets are caught in relatively shallow water (remember, 150 feet is relatively shallow water on Lake Superior, and they have to come relatively shallow to spawn, don't they?) Because you can catch them 600 feet down doesn't meant you have to fish for them that deep.

According to my reading Lowe is right on the two basic subspecies. I've read articles that also separate the lean subspecies into two categories, a lean (redfin) that tends to run deeper and a lean (redfin) that tends to feed closer in shallow water.

But all species vary the depths they feed and live at, and it's hard to pin it down finer than to say one TENDS to be this way and one that.

At any rate, all the lakers I've caught so far have been leans, because by all accounts the siscowets are greaseballs suitable only for smoking, and my lakers have been SWEEEET!

------------------
"Worry less, fish more."
Steve Foss
[email protected]

[This message has been edited by stfcatfish (edited 05-31-2003).]