Talk:Cutthroat trout

Untitled

LOL http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_2497722.html?menu=news.quirkies

--Sonjaaa 05:14, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Proposed merger

I propose that the content of Coastal cutthroat trout be merged into this article. The result would be a more comprehensive, less fragmented experience for the reader and would simplify article maintenance and monitoring. Please discuss, here. — Dave (Talk | contribs) 20:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I am very against that as the Coastal Cutthroat represents one of the four major subspecies of cutthroat trout and should retain a page with information about it. Gary

I'm not suggesting removing any information, merely relocating it from that page to this one. I really sort of figured that it would be a lot easier to maintain the article if the type subspecies was discussed on the species page although I can also see some sense in having each of the subspecies with their own page. That's why I posted this proposal -- to get as many points of view as possible. Cheers! — Dave (Talk | contribs) 14:58, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

IMO all subspecies should be treated together, there is also Greenback cutthroat trout that should be merged if merge there is. Pro bug catcher (talk • contribs). 20:17, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

• Strongly oppose merger. This subspecies is important for its conservation status and limited range and I agree with Gary that this subspecies deserves its own page. Lets not dumb down wikipedia. Cdcdoc (talk) 17:19, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and drink Tagging

This article talk page was automatically added with {{WikiProject Food and drink}} banner as it falls under Category:Food or one of its subcategories. If you find this addition an error, Kindly undo the changes and update the inappropriate categories if needed. The bot was instructed to tagg these articles upon consenus from WikiProject Food and drink. You can find the related request for tagging here . Maximum and careful attention was done to avoid any wrongly tagging any categories , but mistakes may happen... If you have concerns , please inform on the project talk page -- TinucherianBot (talk) 02:52, 4 July 2008 (UTC) hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.154.65.71 (talk) 02:07, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Preparing article for GAN

In preparing the article for a Good Article nomination, I've removed this content (while incorporating relevant aspects in other text). Since the article is not about the Beaver, this content, although well sourced is more relevant to the Beaver article, especially the second half. Beaver (Castor canadensis) appear to be beneficial to cutthroat trout populations. During periods of drought beaver ponds may provide important refugia for cutthroat trout. In areas where winter ice may kill fish, deep water provided by beaver ponds provides critical over-wintering habitat where cutthroat may aggregate in large numbers. In a meta-review of studies claiming that beaver dams act as fish passage barriers Kemp et al. found that 78% of these claims were not supported by any data. In a 2013 study of passive inductive transponder (PIT)-tagged Bonneville cutthroat trout (O. c. utah) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in Utah, both of these fish species crossed beaver dams in both directions, including dams up to 2 metres (6.6 ft) high.

--Mike Cline (talk) 16:22, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cutthroat trout/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sasata (talk · contribs) 18:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I'll review this article. Will probably take a few days to get some comments up. Sasata (talk) 18:43, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Much appreciated. I'll be home for the next 3 weeks with my library so I should be able to address any concerns rapidly. --Mike Cline (talk) 18:50, 25 December 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I appreciate this article much, but I noticed these trifles:

• Y Do we need brackets for the subspecies names in the line Two subspecies, (O. c. alvordensis) and (O. c. macdonaldi) are considered extinct ? (Lead)
• No source for

• Y This type specimen was most likely the coastal cutthroat subspecies (Taxonomy)
• Y Lake resident cutthroat trout are usually ... gravelly bottomed streams to be self-sustaining (Life cycle)
• Y Ranges of some subspecies... non-native species (Range and Habitat)
• Y The coastal cutthroat trout (O. c. clarki)... can tolerate saline or alkaline water (Habitat)
• Y Within the range of the bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) the cutthroat is a major forage fish for the piscivorous bull trout (Habitat)

Confirmed that cutthroat are a forage fish for bull trout, removed word "major" as sources could not confirm that and it was legacy text from pre-GA version. --Mike Cline (talk) 17:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

• Y Cutthroat trout co-exist with lake trout... gets little angling pressure (Decline of the Yellowstone cutthroat)
• Y Their propensity to feed on aquatic and terrestrial insects make them an ideal quarry for the fly angler (Angling)

• Y Duplicate links : Columbia (in Subspecies) and gravel (in Habitat).

You have put excellent efforts in this article, Mike, and with Sasata to help you, this has to be a success. Good luck! Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 13:54, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

All issues addressed

I think I've got to all the issues raised. Thanks for all the help. Let me know if anything additional is required. --Mike Cline (talk) 23:14, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Rest is fine. I have no more comments to make. Let Sasata do the review, and I will be coming here often. Hope it becomes a GA soon! Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 06:04, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

Comments by Sasata

• Y I think that perhaps tributaries, spawn, and subspecies might be good links to have in the lead, but links to North America and Pacific Ocean are not needed
• Y "As a member of the genus Oncorhynchus it is one of the Pacific trouts which include the widely distributed rainbow trout." suggest "As a member of the genus Oncorhynchus it is one of the Pacific trouts, a group that includes the widely distributed rainbow trout."
• Y "typical tributaries of the Pacific basin" What is the Pacific basin? Is it different than the Pacific Ocean (based on a redirect, the terms seem to be considered synonymous on Wikipedia)

• Actually the terms are not synonymous, despite the redirect in Wikipedia. The Pacific Ocean is actually part of the Pacific basin (basin being defined as Drainage basin). As an example, the Columbia River and all its tributaries are part of the Pacific basin as they drain into the Pacific Ocean. --Mike Cline (talk) 18:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y link confluence, morphological; perhaps pipe genetic to molecular genetics if appropriate; genetically closer, taxonomic
• Y "by Dr. Gerald R. Smith, Curator of Fishes at the Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan and Ralph F. Stearley, doctoral candidate, Museum of Palentology, University of Michigan indicated" I don't think this level of detail (institution and degree) is necessary here. How about replacing the whole thing with "suggested"?

• This is a bit that is inconsistent with advice given and taken at Talk:Rainbow trout/GA1#Taxonomy. The text here is essentially the same as in Rainbow trout. Consistency?? --Mike Cline (talk) 18:31, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• I think it's extraneous on that article too! Why are you singling out this particular fact, among many facts given in the article, by highlighting the names and degrees of the people proposing it? WP:UNDUE? Sasata (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Not ready to bend on this yet. The inclusion of this was at the specific request of the GA reviewer for the Rainbow trout article. Since it achieved GA with this content, it should be included here as well. Additionally, the Rainbow trout article has completed two weeks of peer review in prep for FAC and no one has raised this as an issue.--Mike Cline (talk) 16:08, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Don't worry, I'll raise it at the FAC if no-one gets there first :) What's the rationale for including this information (other than possible bad advice from another reviewer)? Sasata (talk) 16:21, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Yref #5 does not indicate that O. c. clarki is also known as the "sea-run" cuttthroat

• Added ref to Behnke which specifically calls it "sea-run" --Mike Cline (talk) 18:39, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y"The type species [5]" incomplete sentence, missing punctutation; more importantly, it is not a type species, but rather a nominate (or nominotypical) subspecies

• Behnke (2002) specifically refers to O. c. clarki as such: "The name clarki is based on the coastal cutthroat trout; thus when the species is divided into subspecies the coastal cutthroat becomes Oncorhynchus clarki clarki because this subspecies is the 'type' (first described) of the species" pg.146. It appears from my reading of both Type (biology) and nominate subspecies that they are essentially the same. I find no references to "nominate subspecies" in any cutthroat literature, but I am not a biologist. --Mike Cline (talk) 18:56, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• I cannot find this usage of "type species" elsewhere. I note that Behnke refers to the subspecies clarki as a "type" (which it is), but not as "type species", which refers specifically to the species that defines the characteristic of the genus. Oncorhynchus gorbuscha is the "type species" of Oncorhynchus, and I think it's incorrect to use this term to refer to O. clarki clarki. How about simply "type subspecies", which avoids the potentially confusing/jargony "nominate subspecies", and appears to be used by ichthyologists? Sasata (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y Changed to type subspecies --Mike Cline (talk) 16:12, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y perhaps link population (yes, a common-knowledge word, but it's important in the understanding of taxonomic relationships for this species)
• Y"Humboldt cutthroat trout O. c. spp." should this be O. c. humboldtensis?

• From all my research, O. c. humboldtensis is a proposed subspecies name (Behnke and Trotter 2008), not an accepted subspecies name. It is not listed in any of the major taxonomic sources as accepted.  ??Should we just say that is a a proposed name? --Mike Cline (talk) 19:06, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Sure, that works. Sasata (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y "Considered by some to be a population of O. c. henshawi." source?

• Clarified with source --Mike Cline (talk) 17:12, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y "Whitehorse Basin cutthroat trout, O. c. spp.,[6] once considered a separate subspecies" if this was once considered a subspecies, what was its subspecific name? Also, the cited source does not seem to support the phrasing "once considered": "The Lahontan cutthroat trout is one subspecies of the wide-ranging cutthroat trout species (O. clarki)" Perhaps there's a better source for this (I wouldn't expect a government information page to be reliable for taxonomic details)?

• Clarified text a bit with an additional source --Mike Cline (talk) 16:41, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y the Northern Rockies and Southern Rockies subsection are lacking sources.
• Y link strain, gill
• Y "These markings are responsible for the formation of the typical name "cutthroat"." The underlined part is awkward prose. Also, is it a "typical" name or common name?
• Y "The sea run forms of coastal cutthroat averages 2 to 5 pounds (0.91 to 2.3 kg)" averages->average; should trim that conversion output to 1 decimal place
• Y ".4 to 3.2 ounces" Per MOS:DECIMAL, include a leading zero in decimal numbers (check for other instances too)
• "depending on habitat and food availability." … "depending on their particular environment and availability of food." unecessary to repeat this information so closely
• Y "The largest of the cutthroat subspecies is the Lahontan cutthroat trout O. c. henshawi." put scientific name in paretheses for consistency with others
• Y "the Lahonton cutthroat attains average weights of .25 to 8 pounds" it sounds odd to use the term "average weights" when such a disparate range of weights is given; perhaps "typical" is a better adjective? ( or "typically attains weights between …")
• Y link oxygenated, habitat loss, introduction, siltation, co-evolve, opportunistic feeder, forage fish, U.S. Bureau of Fisheries, overfishing, intraspecific breeding, genes, state fish
• Y "Although cutthroat trout are not native to Arizona, they are routinely introduced into high mountain lakes in the White mountains in northeast Arizona." who does this?

• Arizona Game and Fish Department - added to sentence --Mike Cline (talk) 19:50, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y"Beaver (Castor canadensis) ponds" don't think scientific name is warranted here (we all know what a beaver is!)

• done

• Y our article thinks that "head water" should be one word
• Y link riverine earlier
• Y "a number of" is idiomatic; suggest "several"
• Ythe use of the serial comma is inconsistent throughout the article

• Should be consistent now as I removed all serial commas that I could find --Mike Cline (talk) 16:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y page #'s for ref #28?

• Assume this was Schullery, Fishes of YNP. FYI - should refer to reference explicitly as the # change as referencing is updated. --Mike Cline (talk) 20:03, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y is the name of the photographer of the West Thumb, 1897 photo relevant to this article?

• Removed. Always like to give F. Jay credit for this photos. --Mike Cline (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y "From the world class Yellowstone cutthroat trout fishery" doesn't sound like neutral language

• It may not sound neutral, but it--"World-class"--as it pertains to the cutthroat trout fishery in Yellowstone is certainly supported by a wide variety of online and independent sources. If we need a specific source, I can certainly add one. --Mike Cline (talk) 19:32, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

• Whether it's true or not, it doesn't sound neutral to express this in Wikipedia's voice. Would the sentence really lose any meaning by leaving out "world-class"? Sasata (talk) 15:49, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• It loses accuracy. There is nothing POV about using this term. A lot of reliable sources use this to refer to the Yellowstone cutthroat fishery (brown and rainbow fisheries as well). In fact, I would contend that we would be violating NPOV by not using it or denying it as it is well supported by RS. --Mike Cline (talk) 16:22, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• It doesn't lose "accuracy", the sentence is discussing the popularity of the cut-throat trout as a game fish; this information is not any more or less accurate when the public opinion of the Yellowstone trout fishery is included. Also, the reliable source currently used to source the world-classness of the trout fishery was co-written by someone employed by the same trout fishery! Really, I'm not too fussed about this for the GAN, but this is something I might oppose at FAC. Sasata (talk) 16:38, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

• Y'This 31.5 inches (80 cm) cutthroat" -> "This 31.5-inch (80 cm) cutthroat". This caption will need to be sourced, and the grammar fixed (missing "it").

Sasata (talk) 06:50, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get the work on these. There are a few comments above (I will highlight later) that are contrary to work done on the Rainbow trout GA. Thus from a consistency standpoint, we will have to discuss some to ensure we maintain some consistency between articles. I will be pushing both Brook trout and Brown trout for GA soon and will be using both Rainbow trout and this article as a guide. --Mike Cline (talk) 15:33, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi again! Nice that the review has begun. Just let me know soon which comments of Sasata you think are contradictory to my review. We shall discuss what would be best for the article. Great that you are working hard on fish articles, the two articles you will be working upon, I saw, will require much ordering and rewriting before they become GAs. Surely you'll work hard on them! :) Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 13:06, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Summary: All pics appropriately licensed, random spot-checks showed adequate paraphrasing and accurate representation of sources; all other GA-criteria are met… promoting article now. Sasata (talk) 16:20, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Congrats, Mike! This article looks pretty well-cut for FAC. Sainsf <^>_{Talk all words} 11:18, 5 February 2014 (UTC)

Tributaries

I'm a bit confused about usage here. I understand how a river can be a tributary of the Pacific Ocean, and maybe the Great Basin, but how can something be a tributary of the Rocky Mountains? Lesgles (talk) 18:22, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Clarified this a bit by adding "the rivers of the" --Mike Cline (talk) 20:45, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, that helps.

Canada

Is there a map of its range in Canada? Brutannica (talk) 21:57, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Indeed there are plenty of maps showing cutthroat trout ranges in Canada, but none that have been made available in the public domain or creative commons that I can locate. --Mike Cline (talk) 12:10, 16 June 2014 (UTC)

Clarkii/Clarki

Is the species clarki or clarkii? ITIS says under Oncorhynchus clarki "invalid - unavailable, literature misspelling". Richardson also seems to use clarkii. Lesgles (talk) 00:53, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I guess it depends on the source since the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service uses one "i"......like here. So long as this article has consistency in whether it uses one or two "i", unless we can find an absolutely authoritative source to reference.--MONGO 01:11, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I guess my preference would be for the original namer's spelling, but I don't know much about the rules of fish taxonomy. Perhaps someone will come along with an absolutely authoritative source. Or if the two spellings are equally acceptable, it might be good to note it at some point in the article. Lesgles (talk) 15:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

I think we need to ask @Mike Cline: on this, as he did the bulk of the work and has the source material. The article is pretty consistent as far as I can see in using "clarki", but several of the sources say "clarkii." I think it's Mike's call. Montanabw^(talk) 00:24, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Several places list "clarki" as invalid/misspelled, same for the subspecies spellings which use "clarki". I don't know when it arose, but the misspelling somehow persisted in circles with this fish. The nomenclatural epithet "clarkii" is from what I understand, for the naturalist John Henry Clark, and William Clark. Esoxid^{talk•contribs} 21:17, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

@Lesgles: @MONGO: @Montanabw: Sorry to drag this back up but ref 3 has Clarkii while ref 4 has Clarki, both from the same source. Jodosma (talk) 15:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

It's fixed now. Jodosma (talk) 08:49, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Changes?

Per WP:BRD, an editor is attempting to make changes to this article without discussion citing changes to other WP articles, saying the information is more recent. The changes are not of featured article quality but there may possibly be updated information that should be considered. Pinging the lead editors and reviewers of this article @Mike Cline: @MONGO: to review the material, the sources and per WP:BURDEN , asking that the editor @Olaff: adding this material explain why it needs to be added, with the caveat that one wikipedia article is not a source for another, we need the source material. Montanabw^(talk) 02:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Sure...I'll look it over but probably not in detail for a day or two....Mike is the trout-master though....me thinks he might be part fishman.--MONGO 19:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

I hope I have given the references clearly, which is my burden. I have not understood that there would be different principles of editing featured vs. other articles, or any ranking among editors. Mentioning other articles in edit summary was meant to referring to the published sources given in those articles, sorry if that was unclear. - Olaff (talk) 16:00, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Best not to go around changing reference names, it can really mess up the footnoting. If I were you, I'd explain what you are doing and let the other editors respond before you do it. Featured Articles have already gone through an extensive review process and while any article can be improved, featured article improvements should be discussed - some things are the way they are for a reason. Montanabw^(talk) 11:14, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

As far as I see I have not changed reference names, but rather given name tags to unnamed references that are used repeatedly, and added information (from those references) that clarify the current understanding of distribution ranges and changing views on taxonomy; that seems appropriate? Now (again) I suggest to make these changes to the version you obviously have accepted. The grounds for them are the information in the given published references, which is the practice here. Please tell if there is a reason not to include that modern information; I would understand that is your burden. Particularly, please check if the opening sentence of the Subspecies chapter is accurate (is this the proper source for the number 14?). Olaff (talk) 18:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

The case was introduced for discussion 5.5 months ago, and no comments on the actual contents or the wording have been presented (whereas three wholesale reverts occurred meanwhile). So the changes might be considered uncontroversial now. Olaff (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

• @MONGO: and @Mike Cline: can review your changes. I am not convinced that you improved anything and there seems to be no reason to change the names of the references. However, if no one else cares, it's not my battle. Montanabw^(talk) 03:55, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Edit reverts by Montanabw

@Montanabw: The Schullery refs do not link directly to Nature and Culture at Fishing Bridge but to the Yellowstone National Park home page and some searching is required by the reader to get to Nature and Culture at Fishing Bridge, by first of all clicking on History and Culture on the home page then searching the new page for Nature and Culture at Fishing Bridge which is listed under the heading Publications About Yellowstone History. Only then does the reader reach the cited source. My edits directed the reader straight to Nature and Culture at Fishing Bridge without having to do any more searching. The other edits I made were simply to combine identical repeated refs to avoid their unnecessary repetition. And finally to remove the small formatting from the Guptil quote which I feel is unnecessary and looks much better full size. I sincerely hope I didn't upset anyone because I want to suggest some more changes. Jodosma (talk) 09:54, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Well, I'll let Mike Cline weigh in, he was lead editor on this article, I just did some FAC reviewing. If he's OK with it, I'm OK with it. But the point is that this a featured article, so all substantive changes have to keep the article FAC quality. Montanabw^(talk) 23:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

@Montanabw: I noticed that ref 77 no longer leads to the Schullery quote. Not good. Jodosma (talk) 21:02, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

So someone should probably run it through Wayback and get the archive link. I'm a bit busy but if it is something others don't know how to do, let me know. Montanabw^(talk) 21:32, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Jodosma (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Referencing style

I suppose @Mike Cline:, @Montanabw: and @MONGO: may be the most interested but I welcome anyone's views. I "borrowed" Cutthroat trout and made a subpage so I could make some changes. I've used harv style referencing on a lot of the refs so they are all linked to the relevant sources in a new Sources section. It can be seen at User:Jodosma/Cutthroat trout.

I realise this is a featured article and haven't altered any of the content, although I have removed the small formatting from the Guptill ref. I also realise that Mike Cline is not keen on the sfn/harv style but hope he will reconsider. Many featured articles use this style; it avoids a lot of repetition. Please have a look and let me know what you think. Jodosma (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm not a huge fan of the Harvard referencing style. It uses less space in the editing window and has a somewhat tidy appearance, but this article hasn't been featured that long comparatively to many others so I do not see any reason to switch what passed FAC not too long ago.--MONGO 09:44, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

There is no rule on preferring one citation style over another; what I can say is that citation style needs to be consistent, and here, in the case of a featured article, should NOT be changed without consensus. Montanabw^(talk) 20:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160312205328/http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/upload/vol5-1.pdf to http://www.nps.gov/yell/planyourvisit/upload/vol5-1.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:36, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141129200120/http://www.fws.gov/jackson/production.htm to http://www.fws.gov/jackson/production.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120313090503/http://www.sos.idaho.gov/ELECT/Emblem.htm to http://www.sos.idaho.gov/elect/emblem.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224110033/http://www.ypf.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6562&news_iv_ctrl=1061 to http://www.ypf.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6562&news_iv_ctrl=1061
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131224102635/http://soswy.state.wy.us/Information/StateInfo_Symbols.aspx to http://soswy.state.wy.us/Information/StateInfo_Symbols.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131226114607/http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00G to http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00G
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131231000206/http://www.fws.gov/ecos/ajax/docs/life_histories/E00Y.html to http://www.fws.gov/ecos/ajax/docs/life_histories/E00Y.html
• Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6M9CeArQ1?url=http://whirlingdisease.montana.edu/pdfs/TU_Report_99.pdf to http://whirlingdisease.montana.edu/pdfs/TU_Report_99.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951d01956560u%3Bview%3D1up%3Bseq%3D80

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113135053/http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00Y to http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00Y
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131226114714/http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00F to http://ecos.fws.gov/speciesProfile/profile/speciesProfile.action?spcode=E00F

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:36, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cutthroat trout. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131212202242/http://www.montana.edu/mcmahon/Jakober%20winter%20ice.pdf to http://www.montana.edu/mcmahon/Jakober%20winter%20ice.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:12, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello?!,

Is that photo for Cutthroat trout (see below) the same painting (photo thing) that I saw in The Scouting Guid to Basic Fishing by Wade Bourne? The photos look (to my human eye) the exact same thing. If they indeed are, I am genuinely concerned, for in the copyright of the book The Scouting Guid to Basic Fishing, it says quote

"All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced without the express written consent of the publisher, except in the case of brief excerpts in critical reviews or articles."

I looked, and found no context allowing usage. Cheers,User:Shadowblade08 (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

Major re-work needed

The genetics and species classification of cutthroat trout has undergone a major overhaul in the past six year. The entire page needs to be rewritten to reflect these changes. Refer to this collection of articles. N8vetrout (talk) 20:07, 12 August 2024 (UTC)