I saw the darker breast, but still considered it to be lighter, and not as large of an area when compared to the other photos of verified CNBG males.

So George's last photo, the one showing the washed out coloration, is an immature male? Never would've figured a fish with those dynamics (size) to be immature? Would the darker breast not indicate maturity? Or is this not reliable?

I'm very curious as to Todd's statement regarding opercular size and placement, indicating male. Would love to learn more about this, as the northern fish I am accustomed to seeing display different attributes here.

Cuckolds and sneakers must surely account for some instances of misidentification, but not all unless this behavior is much more widespread and prevalent than what I've previously thought.

Thanks everyone, for taking time to share info.

"Forget pounds and ounces, I'm figuring displacement!"

If we accept that: MBG(+)FGSF(=)HBG(F1)
And we surmise that: BG(>)HBG(F1) while GSF(<)HBG(F1)
Would it hold true that: HBG(F1)(+)AM500(x)q.d.(=)1.5lbGRWT?
PB answer: It depends.