Sometimes when you've looked at thousands upon thousands upon thousands of bluegill, and cut open just about as many, you'll start to go a little beyond the rules and just "know" what a fish is. I know that's not terribly useful, but the second I saw that fish I just knew it was a male.
Here's my best description of why that I can quantify:
1. The breast color of a female like this will look yellower. Males that have yet to attain spawning color, or come from turbid waters have a hint of burgundy like this one does.
2. The ear tab on a female "drops" as soon as it heads posteriorly from the superior attachment. Male ear tabs head upwards or rearwards in the case of a non-dominant or immature fish. The female eartab looks like a crescent moon, while the males can be more of a lobe.
3. This fish meets the classic criteria of a fish that is not ready to be the top nesting dog in his pond, but you'd be surprised how quickly that tab will grow when his time comes. This fish's tab could look quite a bit different in a few weeks.
4. I think the best description of my certainty stems at least as much from the fact that this fish exhibits no female characteristics as it does from the fact that it looks like a male. Remember that males mimic females a lot more than females mimicing males.
5. The urogenital pore coloration could be currently absent for the same reason that the other colors are all washed out. It could be turbid water, immaturity or even an individual quirk that makes this fish so pale, but he looks truly healthy and with a lot of potential to be a trophy?
Does this help, or muddy the waters further?
