Posts: 310
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation:
0
Took a buddy and went to Chesterfield, it was a great day, but the fishing was a little slow. One of the guys fishing next to us caught a nice one. It was probably 23", but kind of skinny, couldn't guess the weight. Looked like he was fishing with worms.
[signature]
Posts: 303
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Was that the picture of the 23 inch fish u were talking about, or one that you caught. That is a damn nice fish, looks like a big male, and looks rather deep to me? The fish looks a nice 5 pound chesterfield rainbow! whoever caught it good work![fishin]
MM
[signature]
Posts: 19,236
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
1
Seriously!!!![laugh] Granted holding it out a ways, but that is a slab!
Very nice colors too...think it is a Kamloop?
[signature]
Posts: 303
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
The picture would be much better if the sunlight was on the fish. But generally a chesterfield fish in the 23inch range would go 5 pounds. He is holding it out a bit, but it is very hard to make a 23 inch fish look small. Not sure if they planted Kamloop in chesty or not, don't think so.
[fishin]
MM
[signature]
Posts: 310
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation:
0
Thats a fish that was caught by a guy that was fishing by me and my buddy. I was really suprised to see how skinny it was, but it was still a very nice fish. It kinda reminded me of the fish that we used to catch in the Beaverhead river in Montanta
[signature]
Posts: 19,236
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
1
I am not getting the skinny part, and can't see the jaw, but maybe it is a male. I mean, yes it could be skinny next to a female full of eggs
[signature]
Posts: 310
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation:
0
All I can say is it looks a lot better in the picture than I remember it. I guess I am comparing it to the fish my wife caught last fall at Henrys. Oh and by the way we might have had a couple by then!
[signature]
Posts: 303
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Wow! looks like they stock about 90 percent Kamloops in Chesterfield. Are these the kind of Kamloops that get huge? Maybe with a bit of luck I can land one of those skinny Kamloops myself!
[signature]
Posts: 19,236
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
1
I am sure that is why the fish in Chesterfield are the size they are specially seeing how it hasn't been that long that they were all killed off, or at least the majority.
So, what everyone thinks is a Rainbow, could be a Kam. They are a Canadian trout that grows much faster.
Several Idaho waters have them. Even Island Park
[signature]
Posts: 73
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2008
Reputation:
0
Hmmmmm.........................
[signature]
Posts: 310
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2009
Reputation:
0
The fish was very dark, I didn't really think to much about it. We also caught one like that, very dark in color, real slimy and few if any scales, about 20" long with a hook jaw, I asked someone else what it was and he said it was a male rainbow. I am going to remember my camera next time, my phone just doesn't do to good.
[signature]
Posts: 303
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2009
Reputation:
0
Any idea in the difference between a Kamloops triploid and a domestic Kamloops. I noticed they planted some Domestic Kamloops in the mid 90's. I would agree that this is part of the reason the fish grow faster, but the food source in chesterfield seems to have a lot to do with the growth as well. How would one be able to tell a Kamloops from a normal Rainbow, or is it not even possible?
[fishin]
MM
[signature]
Posts: 19,236
Threads: 2
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation:
1
I don't know. They are both rainbows.
[signature]
Posts: 1,119
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2008
Reputation:
0
A triploid has 3 genes and therefore sterile. I would imagine the domestic are fertile
[signature]