Both species have had their "hay day" with me and I was just curious which specie you think is smarter. I always thought that steelhead were a little "smarter", but steelhead have the opportunity to "live longer" and return to sea year after year, so they get an unfair learning advantage over salmon. Considering that, which specie do think is really smarter? Is it steelhead or it salmon; and what makes you think that one is smarter then the other?

Cowlitzfisherman

I have to go with Steelhead. Partly because as a repeating anadromous fish, they are exposed to the need to be more adaptive, both from a feeding standpoint and survival standpoint.

Feeding frenzies in Salmon, I believe, make them more susceptible to catching as well. The first jigs I used to catch salmon were nothing more than a used 3-oz tire weight (I was a mechanic for 20 years.) with the clip cut off, drilled on both ends with split rings attaching a swivel on one end and a treble hook on the other. Didn't so much as even shine it up.....slaughtered 'em. Try that with steelhead (joking)!

My hat goes down to the steelhead.

i think salmon are, there down fall is the large numbers they travel in, i can pick off a single steelhead, but try picking off a single salmon???(unless its a spring chinook, people have seen the slaughter when they are piled into a hole, they compete for food) just my experiences?

Salmon are more of a crapshoot than steelhead. I can pretty mutch count on catching at least one steelie on any given trip. Salmon it seems to be either a few or none. Luck seem st play a larger role in salmon fishing.

In fresh water I would say that steelhead are generally better "biters".

As far as intelligence its about a toss-up. Salmon have better problem-solving ability, math and spatial awareness. Steelhead have a definate edge in logic, reading, and verbal skills.

Shouldn't one of them have a brain bigger than a pea before we go calling them "smarter" ?

Dan -- That's precisely what I was thinkin. Believe they operate mainly on instinct/reflex, not reasoning.

Sincerely,
Roger

Both DanS and RRR have a point......are we talking about difficulty in catching.....or taking the S.A.T. test?

Smarter than what? Or compared to what? What does the test look like? Ability to not get caught by you?

Salmon are slightly more evolved than steelhead, so maybe they should have the evolutionary edge in intelligence. Intelligence is usually measured as a function of reasoning ability, but I suppose it could be rated otherwise. Neither species shows much, if any, capacity for reason. It seems their behavior depends mostly on instinct (archtypal) and reaction to stimuli. Both will bite a hook dressed with a piece of yarn. Not too bright.

As far as relative ease of catching, it depends. Steelhead have the longer freshwater life history and tend to revert to troutiness the longer they stay in freshwater as adults. Salmon generally exhibit less feeding behavior after re-entering freshwater, which probably explains why you can get skunked after pounding a pool you know contains a couple hundred salmon and a successful day of steelhead fishing is likely if there is at least one fish in the pool you're fishing.

If smart applies to catching either of these fish, it is the relative "smartness" of the angler that counts.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Back in Minnestota, on some of the tributaries to Lake Superior, I have observed steelhead stopping at falls. Then they would start bobbing straight up with their heads out of the water, as if looking the falls over. I have seen this behavior several times, and I assumed they were checking out the route they wanted to take. Made sense to me at the time, and never gave it more thought. After the bobbing procedure would stop, then the fish would start running the falls. Smart? Maybe.
Catarafter

...but now the question is...who is smarter...a summer steelhead or a winter steelhead??

Smarter?

Hmmm...I guess I'd have to say that neither of them are very smart...

If we're judging them by which are hardest to catch, then...

It's true that salmon are a little further along the evolutionary road than are steelhead, as Salmo pointed out. However, pink salmon are the fartherst along that road, and they happen to be just about the easiest one to catch.

I guess that's not the answer.

I've caught the same fish twice in a day, steelhead, chinook, and coho. Using broken leaders/lures as the evidence, it's taken a bit for the salmon, but I did once catch the same steelhead in two straight casts, a hatchery summer run in May of 2000.

That doesn't sound too bright for either type.

I've had days where I've caught coho after coho, king after king, and steelhead after steelhead...and days when I could sight fish hundreds of each and not hook any, or at least not very many.

I've watched fish after fish of both types refuse my best presented baits and lures, while I've had some of each hit things that any self-respecting fish would be embarrassed to even acknowledge, much less eat.

I think it's not very accurate to put a human measurement of "intelligence" on animals, at least ones that do indeed have brains the size of peas.

My opinion falls somewhere along the line that it is more proper to measure the ability of the fisherman to figure out what works best at a given time during given conditions. When a river is perfect steelhead green and is full of fresh fish, almost anyone can catch at least one. A week later as the river has dropped way down and no fresh fish have arrived, only a few are caught.

Did the fish get "smarter"? I doubt it. They still respond to the same stimuli and react with the same instincts.

Did the fishermen get "dumber"? Of course not...but the conditions changed and their technique did not.

I do, however, find it notable that during those perfect conditions where everyone caught a fish, a few guys caught more than a few...maybe a lot more than a few.

More importantly, I find it more notable that as the conditions get crappier, they're the same ones who catch the few that do get caught.

I guess my 'final answer' is not an answer at all, but a comment that there probably isn't a real answer.

Fish on...

Todd.

i would have to go with salmon as they tend to school up more!!!! seriously steelhead would have my vote as more geneticly prepared for there trips upstream. even tho they dont have to have that sense of urgency to get with it. they are a bit more crafty when hooked as far as fighting style and knowing where that dam tree is at
FISHON

I would have to say the pecking order from hardest to easiest to catch would be,

Winter
Summer Run
Salmon

I think Salmon are smarter with the Snohimish system Silvers being the top dogs

I figure either a salmon or a steelhead is as smart as it needs to be. Wish I could say as much for homo sapiens.

Dan, Salmo

Well it's 3:58 pm, and most of the rivers are still out and you are probably just sitting at your desks waiting to write something or go home, so I thought that I would give you guys something to rebut!

Obviously, I never intended this thread to be an IQ test between man and fish! Since you both have degrees in biology, and have voiced your opinions about salmon and steelhead having the brains the size of a "pie" lets talk about that for just a minute. Is it the size of a brain that counts, or is it how it is used that counts?

Maybe my thread should have read; "Are salmon and steelhead smarter than each other, or are they just smarter then humans?

Apparently, according to "some biologists" on this board, salmon species have been here just a hair bit longer than humans have, even though their brains are only the size of pees; so who's really the smarter ones…salmon, steelhead, or humans?

Since some of you people that have degrees in biology; please tell us your secrets why you believe that we are so "smart" and fish are so dumb. Or it the "pecking order" that you are talking about?

Do you see fish polluting the earth? Do you fish creating weapons that can completely destroy their own species? Do you see any "fish jails"? Do you see fish dying from high blood pressure; hart disease, cancer or other man made or created diseases?

I respect what Smalma had said until proven otherwise about salmon; "…as I recall the first of the salmonid type fish show up in the fossil records maybe 50 million years ago" (how long ago do you say that humans first showed up?). "The first of the salmon/trout type was around maybe 10 million years ago (again, how long ago do you say that first human types first showed up?)

. … "As recently as 12,000 years ago the area north of Southern Puget Sound was ice covered. As that ice age ended and the ice receded our streams were colonized from populations found to the South, interior of the upper Columbia and/or the Queen Charolate Islands north of Vancouver Island."… end quote.

Dan and Salmo, how long do you think humans have been here, give or take a million or so years?

How big is the size of the brain of a "cock roach"? He's (Mr. cock roach) as been around longer then most, so what is your point about the size of brains? Is it the size of the "brain" that makes one smarter, or is it how a species uses it brain to survive that makes it smarter?

If salmon and steelhead species are so dump, why does man spend so much of his time, efforts and his money trying to out-smart them, and keep trying to catch them? Who's really dumber? Do you see any salmon or steelhead trying to catch any humans?

So how is "smarter'?


Cowlitzfisherman

Hmmmmmm, interesting...

How about this CFM, tell me what size hat you wear and we'll go from there. :p j/k

4Salt
Surly you can do much better then that!

Is that the best that a TV producer can come up with? No wonder why I don't watch any more "junk" TV!

Maybe it's time to go back to the video store to get something "new"…you think?

j/k! D

Cowlitzfisherman

Well, how about this, fish can learn

I was involved in a study once where hatchery coho smolts fresh out of the saltwater acclimation pond were put in an aquarium with a lingcod, who promptly ate most of them. The one's he didn't eat were marked and put in with another lingcod along with a bunch of "rookies". The rookies got et at many times the rate of the survivors. But we also put fish in the aquarium on another side of a porous plastic barrier that got to watch the lingcod at work. When they were put in with him the ling had a devil of a time catching them - that's right, they learned from watching their buds get eaten. :p

So at least coho are smart enough to figure life and death out, which is what is important to them anyway. You are right, CF, it's doubtful if most humans can even figure out what's important, period.

Seems that we are confusing survivalability with being smart. Based on some of the previous discussion of all our fishes the lampreys would be the "smartest" - they have been around the longest.

If the intent is which would be the easiest to catch (limited to freshwater) then surely it would be steelhead. I have long maintained that they are the easiest to fool of all our freshwater fish. Believe they can be caught on a piece of banana. The rub of course there has to be fish in the river to be caught!

If we could ever find a river with steelehad densities (fish/mile) of even the average trout or salmon stream we would all be experts and double digit days common.

Tight lines
Smalma

CFM,

So what do you think?

Are "people that have degrees in biology" smarter than those that don't?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Mooch,

You asked me;

Are "people that have degrees in biology" smarter than those that don't? That's a great question! I think it would be safe to say; some are and some aren't!

As an example, I live on a private hillside; a lot of local people call it "school house hill" because it has 13 families living here; out of those 13 families, eight of them are school teachers. I have seen some of the things that a "few" of these teachers have done, and I would have to say that some of them are not as smart as those that are not teachers (this is not knocking all teachers, it's only one example). Some are pretty smart; but some are not to smart! ...but all are intelligent

I hate to sound like "you know who", but it depends on what you define the word "smart" as (or is that "is" as?)!

You noticed that I didn't ask you who the more "intelligence" of the two was; I asked which one was "smarter"!

Cowlitzfisherman

Hey Cowlitz,

One sure fact that can be derived from this thread is that TV producers and retired fishing guides make lousy comedians huh?

Here's a quick overview of Bulletin Board abbreviations that may prove helpful.

j/k = just kidding. The grinning graemlins were supposed to give it away.

IMHO = In My Humble Opinion. In a previous thread you stated that you didn't know what the hell IMHO meant. Now you do.

Since there appears to be a slight level of animosity between us, I'll refrain from any more attempts at good-natured humor at your expense.

If longevity is the test of intelligence or "smarts", then you'd better get used to being outwitted by viruses and bacteria. They've been around longest.....but somehow I get the feeling I could take either one in a game of Jeopardy.

I have no degree in biology.

...but you did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once though, right Dan?

You bet. You'd be surprised how much your intellect can be improved with a simple overnight stay.

Dan,

Please except my apology for wrongly implying that you had a "degree" in biology. That was a mistake on my part. For some unknown reason, I had "you" mixed up with what "Parker" had said in an earlier thread… again, please except my apology!

4Salt; you are probably right; we both believe in what we are trying to do. We both want to see that we have a continued perpetual sport fishery. Sometimes both of our humor sidetracks us!

Again 4Salt, thanks for telling me what "IMHO" means! I made the statement earlier, but no other board member had informed me what "IMHO" meant.

It's sometimes seems that the whole world is not understanding what each other is trying to say. Please be patience, I'll get there sooner or later! I talk a lot on email with our attorney, but we never use these terms!

I would rather see fish back in our rivers then learning new internet abbreviations.


Cowlitzfisherman

Hey, no sweat, cowfish. It's difficult to carry on a conversation via a bulletin board.....you can't type your tone, so it's easy to misunderstand what someone is saying sometimes.

I'd like to hook up and fish with you sometime, though. You're an interesting kind of guy, I think you'd make good company for a day on the river.

Dan,

Thanks for understanding! It would be fun to fish with you, Lets try to set up a trip for this spring to talk about fishing and fish!

Cowlitzfisherman

Yea Dan and Cowlitzfisherman!! I'm glad to see some agreement as to what IS enjoyable.....FISHING!!

I am puzzled how what starts out as a fun question to me (entirely meaningless, but fun) can stir such .........."stuff".

WHO, really, gives a hoot which "fish" is smarter?.....I mean, REALLY? They are both a kick to catch, and THAT is what matters, does it not?

Best to All!

To Cowlitz: