74 
MR. F. DAT ON THE LOCH-LEVEN TROUT. 
of a trout taken April 27th, 1841, that weighed 10 lb., being 
27 inches long and 17 inches in girth. We are likewise told of 
the fish in this lake, that their superiority in quality is not 
confined solely to the Loch-Leven trout proper, but is to be 
observed in the common trout, and even in the pike, perch, and 
eels ; also that the trout of Loch Leven do not continue to 
exhibit the same distinctive superiority when they are removed 
to other waters. In new quarters, however favourable such may 
appear to be, they are said to invariably deteriorate and lose 
much of their quality. 
The peculiarly excellent food in the water at Loch Leven has 
been supposed to consist of a small reddish-coloured mollusk, 
believed to be restricted to the shallow shingly beds lying near 
to the shores (the form here alluded to would seem to be a 
Limncea ), and the sessile-eyed crustacean, “screw” or “water- 
shrimp,” Oammarus. Mr. Wilson concluded that it was owing 
to the abundant and perpetual breeding of these and other 
living creatures that the trout in question owed their supe- 
riority. A fisherman, however, who had the management of the 
curing of the trout, and had observed the food taken from their 
stomachs, remarked that he had never observed any small shells, 
but mostly worms, minnows, perch, and young trout. Further- 
more, evidence was adduced by fish-dealers and others who had 
been regularly supplied with trout, both before and since the drain- 
age, who distinctly stated that they could observe no deteriora- 
tion whatever in the fish. Parnell, however, held a dilferent 
view ; and there cannot be a doubt that the stock of fish largely 
diminished from some cause. 
Whether this form is or is not the Salmo Cumberland of La- 
cepede, in his ‘ Histoire Naturelle des Poissons,’ vol. v. p. 696, 
cannot now be determined from the meagre description which 
has been handed down to us ; but that author described • it as 
having a small head, white flesh, and being externally of a grey 
colour. A correspondent of Loudon’s ‘Magazine of Natural 
History,’ 1832, vol. v. p. 317, remarked upon a form of trout 
which was found in Ulswater and Windermere, termed by the 
residents a “ grey trout ” and having the habits of a char, which 
he likened to Lacepede’s fish, and asserted was captured up 
to 20 lb. weight. Parnell in 1S38, l. c., appears to be the first 
who scientifically investigated this form of trout, and from 
his remarks we learn that he considered “ the differences that 
