View attachment 1068392 this is one i got from Ken what do you guys think
I have no idea on id but thats a mean looking wolf NICE.
View attachment 1068392 this is one i got from Ken what do you guys think
View attachment 1068392 this is one i got from Ken what do you guys think
View attachment 1068392 this is one i got from Ken what do you guys think
View attachment 1068392 this is one i got from Ken what do you guys think
ok, Clarification, malabaracus does not occur in Uruguay, there is a smaller brown species in the southern part of the country Felipe calls cf malabaracus because it is the brownest one in the country, the rest of the Hoplias in the central and northern parts of the country are lacerdae and australis, until very recently australis was considered a sub species of lacerdae. Now all the fish we catch are either lacerdae or australis, depends on where they were caught, and where rivers that have lacerdae run into the Rio Uruguay there are intergrade crosses between the 2, I consider any we caught in Belle Union as australis and any from the central or norther part of the country lacerdae. I don't know where Joe caught the fish in the pictures, but it is not any type of malabaracus, all you experts who have never been in the field, never caught a wild fish and use other peoples pictures to start you case, (ie Felipe's pic) all of you use is not a comparison of malabaracus and lacerdae, but actually is lacerdae and australis, I keep seeing it pop up in all the discussions.
ok, Clarification, malabaracus does not occur in Uruguay, there is a smaller brown species in the southern part of the country Felipe calls cf malabaracus because it is the brownest one in the country, the rest of the Hoplias in the central and northern parts of the country are lacerdae and australis, until very recently australis was considered a sub species of lacerdae. Now all the fish we catch are either lacerdae or australis, depends on where they were caught, and where rivers that have lacerdae run into the Rio Uruguay there are intergrade crosses between the 2, I consider any we caught in Belle Union as australis and any from the central or norther part of the country lacerdae. I don't know where Joe caught the fish in the pictures, but it is not any type of malabaracus, all you experts who have never been in the field, never caught a wild fish and use other peoples pictures to start you case, (ie Felipe's pic) all of you use is not a comparison of malabaracus and lacerdae, but actually is lacerdae and australis, I keep seeing it pop up in all the discussions.