Originally posted by parker:
Ya know, if half of you actually just went out fishing and *actually* caught something, you too might know the difference between a coho and a king.
A coho. You guys sleigh me!
Actually, I think it was a chum. That makes just about as much sense. :rolleyes:
Actually Parker, I think that one is still a tough call. From the dorsal forward, it sure looks like a coho... especially the cardinal sign of having a light gumline. Kings should have black lips/gums. The spots are also uncharacteristically small for a king.
I will agree with smalma that the wrist looks a little skinny for a silver that size. The anal fin margin also looks too broad for a silver, and it lacks the coho's characteristic "point" from the leading edge of the anal fin. So from the dorsal back, I'll concede it looks more like a chinook.
(Damn, with all that double-speak, I'm starting to sound like John Kerry.... quick, somebody shoot me!)
There's probably a good reason that you have never seen a tributary "king" that was so chrome in all your years of fishing. It could well be a hybrid co-nook (or is that chilver?)... these crosses have been well documented. You might recall a huge 30-plus "coho" caught in SW WA last fall (may have actually been the Lewis) that's still sitting in a WDFW freezer waiting for a definitive DNA analysis on whether it is really a king or a silver.
_________________________
"Let every angler who loves to fish think what it would mean to him to find the fish were gone." (Zane Grey)
"If you don't kill them, they will spawn." (Carcassman)
The Keen Eye MDLong Live the Kings!