Originally Posted By Pika
I suspect that the info you quoted included a bit of butter for the frying pan in the calorie data. From the information I have seen, three ounces of raw wild trout contains about 100 calories; just under 35 calories per ounce. When cooked, three ounces have about 130 calories. But, three oz of cooked fish is more fish than the same amount of raw fish; cooking = shrikage. Check out http://www.freedieting.com/calories/trout.htm for one source of trout calorie values.


Incorrect again.......the same website you quote provides the EXACT same nutrition info that I quoted. Go to the area where it says trout, cooked, dry heat (which means grilled or baked in an oven) and change the amount from "one fillet" to "3 oz" and it comes up with 162 calories, 23 g protein. But on that website you can play around with all kinds of the different types of trout and raw vs cooked state and you get all kinds of results. So, let's say its 130 cals per 3 oz.......that's 700 cals of pure protein and healthy fat from one pound of trout flesh - something VERY EASILY had by a decent angler around good trout water. What would you rather have? 700 calories from trout or 700 calories from dehydrated ramen noodles with 10x more sodium anyone should ever eat in one meal? That protein is going to have your fire burning long after that sodium and ramen fizzles out.

And when I cook fish in the wild, I generally bake (steam) it in foil with a small amount of cooking oil and spices so I will generally lose very little during the cooking process as you would if you grilled it.

And if I am going to rely on trout as a meal, I'm not going to bother with miniscule, little 7-8 inchers. If that's all I can catch, I'll let them stay in the water. I also don't like big trout to eat. If a fishery holds large trout, I say throw em back anyway and let someone else later enjoy the sport of catching a bruiser. Especially large trout are special prizes in the back country....let em go. But the Rocky Mountain back country is riddled with waters that hold trout in the 12-16"+ range and these make for fine and substantial eating. Again, it does not take more than 2-3 of these fish to get yourself a substantial meal.

To answer the OP's question - You are obviously hiking to an area known to hold trout and you want to rely on trout and leave some food at home. I would almost never leave behind large quantities of food in the idea that you are going to rely on trout to stay well fed in the back country. Again, any decent angler in areas that are known to hold lots of good trout could rely on fish as the majority of his/her nutrition if they wanted to buy why risk it? You could lose or bust all of your fishing gear 30 miles away form the nearest TH and they you're looking at a crappy, uncomfortable two-day hike out.

If you're serious about it and you are a decent angler with confidence......i say you could feel pretty safe leaving 20-35% of your rations at home. Enjoy the fishing and bon appetite.