02-22-2013, 06:07 PM
Fishrmn, is right...generally, strain is not the limiting factor in terms of how big a fish may grow. Generally, some other factor is limiting fish growth. In Strawberry, for example, most of the cutts are in the 16-21 inch range. Why? It has nothing to do with limited growth potential, but with angler harvest. Once fish reach that 22 inches--the upper end of the slot--they are quickly harvested. That's why the number of trout in Strawberry appears to have maxed-out and only a relative few fish are caught above that slot.
In terms of Kamloops trout, I would have to say that you are talking about one of the biggest trout myths out there. Kamloops is a small town in British Columbia. Before the mid 1800s, the numerous small lakes in the region were barren of fish. But, once stocked these waters saw fish grow to giants. 18-20 pound fish were not uncommon; however, as years went by, the sizes of the stocked rainbows beganto dwindle and diminish greatly. So, what happened? The bucket got too full...originally, the lakes and ponds had an abundance of good food, but once the bucket began to be filled, that food source dwindled and fish growth went down.
Nevertheless, a couple lakes in BC do exist where the Kamloops name and myth is probably warranted--The Gerrard stock of rainbow trout which reside in Kootenay Lake are probably the most well known of these fish. These fish developed in a system, like Fishrmn has said, with cold clear glacial water as their source and kokanee salmon as their prey species. Moved outside of similar waters, Kamloops rainbows and even the famous gerard strain are not really any better.....
A lot of work has been done in Utah comparing different strains of trout and how they perform...but rarely, if ever, has strain ever been determined to be the limiting factor of growth.
[signature]
In terms of Kamloops trout, I would have to say that you are talking about one of the biggest trout myths out there. Kamloops is a small town in British Columbia. Before the mid 1800s, the numerous small lakes in the region were barren of fish. But, once stocked these waters saw fish grow to giants. 18-20 pound fish were not uncommon; however, as years went by, the sizes of the stocked rainbows beganto dwindle and diminish greatly. So, what happened? The bucket got too full...originally, the lakes and ponds had an abundance of good food, but once the bucket began to be filled, that food source dwindled and fish growth went down.
Nevertheless, a couple lakes in BC do exist where the Kamloops name and myth is probably warranted--The Gerrard stock of rainbow trout which reside in Kootenay Lake are probably the most well known of these fish. These fish developed in a system, like Fishrmn has said, with cold clear glacial water as their source and kokanee salmon as their prey species. Moved outside of similar waters, Kamloops rainbows and even the famous gerard strain are not really any better.....
A lot of work has been done in Utah comparing different strains of trout and how they perform...but rarely, if ever, has strain ever been determined to be the limiting factor of growth.
[signature]