Been wondering for a few years about the possibility of getting Bear Lake Cisco planted in Jordanelle?
Wouldn't that be a benefit both to the population of cisco as well as providing much needed forage in Jordanelle for the predators?
What do you guys think? Good / Bad?
[signature]
Hmmmm, Cisco in lake X? I always thought that the Feds would say no, but since you put it here on the interweb, Are you telling me there is a chance?
[signature]
Why would the Feds say no? Are there endangered species between "X" and Deer Creek? I guess there could be toads (or frogs), but I don't see cisco causing an issue with them.
Am I telling you there is a chance? NOT GOOD
(Like 1 in a million!)
[signature]
i bet its because they are endemic to bear lake, which is why they would not consider moving them
[signature]
I thought about that (endemic to Bear Lake). But that made me think about the June Sucker -- didn't they stock June suckers in a couple lakes that they were not endemic to (Mona?) in order to increase their populations?
If not cisco -- which I think would be a fantastic option -- why not shad? We need something for the trophy smallies to prey on.
(if cisco got downstream into Deer Creek, wouldn't that also help that system? bolster the walleye?)
[signature]
RE "Am I telling you there is a chance? NOT GOOD
(Like 1 in a million!)"
Yeeaaahhh! Then there IS a chance!
[signature]
If there was a threat to the population at Bear Lake they would do EVERYTHING possible to save them. Including introducing them in another water. Not a lot of people know, but they tried to establish them in Flaming Gorge many years ago. It was less about the Cisco, and more about at forage specie for Lakers.
[signature]
I think the state spent a lot of time and money trying to put sisco in bigger bodies of water like the gorge and maybe the berry, back in the day.
They never would survive, the program was a bust!
[signature]
And stand the possibility of them competing with june sucker down stream? The feds wouldnt allow it.
[signature]