You never know where your research questions might lead but species adaptability to climate change brought us in a brave new direction. As first-time “fish farmers,” we faced challenges knowing when to begin artificially spawning our three Arctic grayling populations (Kup, Oks-Zev, and Oks3) in order to populate our common garden experiment with hand-raised larval fish. If we started too early, the eggs might be immature. On the other hand, waiting too long might cause the eggs to degrade and become non-viable. When our populations showed signs of spawning readiness, such as fish pairing up within the stream, breeding tubercles, and expression of eggs and milt, we pulled out all the stops to catch fish, using combinations of weir traps, fyke nets and angling. We held the fish we caught in large mesh pens within the rivers so we could check their spawning condition daily. However, although we were able to express eggs and milt early on, we mistook mature eggs for immature eggs due to a unique feature of Salmonid oocytes, lipid droplets, which mimicked early stages of vitelligenesis (the accumulation of yolk within an immature egg). After some deliberation and consultation with more experienced colleagues, we proceeded with fertilizing our Arctic grayling eggs. We hit it right-on with one population, the Kup, almost caught it right with another population, Oks3, and flat-out missed it with our third population, Oks-Zev. In my opinion, the condition of our grayling eggs reflected differences in the timing of spawning for these populations, such that Oksrukuyik headwaters likely spawned first, followed by the lower Oksrukuyik, and then the Kuparuk. Discovering what drives variation in spawning timing for grayling populaitons is certainly on my “To Do” list and I already have some testable ideas in mind. As with every field season, we learn something new about this amazing species, the Arctic grayling, and the Arctic tundra stream ecosystem.