Not sure why this is a good idea

[MACMAN]

I have a final question:  I’m not a big sky is falling guy. I’m the one telling everyone Obama and Biden aren’t taking your guns so stop buying all the ammo. But, I fear that this “study” will lead to restrictions on Lake Trout, under the guise of protecting endemic species. So, can you guarantee that the stocking numbers of macs will remain the same or more, the angling limits won’t be relaxed or god forbid a catch and kill order/lake trout eradication won’t take place (ie: Yellowstone Lake)?  Can you confirm that will be the case?  Chris, feel free to respond if you can. I would be done with this issue if you can. Whatever that’s worth, probably not much tho.

I'd like to respond to this by saying that there are no plans to change the current stocking of lake trout and/or cutthroat trout in Bear Lake with the results of this study.  Nor would there be a catch/kill regulation implemented on lake trout.  I can tell you that the stocking of both species IS dependent upon the numbers of Bonneville cisco and Bear Lake sculpin in Bear Lake since both cisco and sculpin are the main diets items of both cutthroat trout and lake trout (stocking of predators, either cutthroat trout and/or lake trout is dictated by the bi-state Bear Lake Fisheries Management plan objectives for each species). In fact, UDWR has made several adjustments to cutthroat trout and lake trout stocking numbers during the last 40 years.  Both cisco and sculpin numbers are monitored closely by both the UDWR and IDFG and the best "tool" the fisheries managers have to protect the endemic forage fish is to adjust stocking numbers to balance the stocked predators with the endemic prey.  One thing for sure is that fish populations are always in a state of flux due to many factors (some we can control, such as stocking numbers and fishing regulations; and others we can't control, such as drought, lake levels, temperatures, etc.) and being able to make adjustments allows us to do the best job we can to manage a fishery by using the best data we have available.

I’ll take that answer to my question as a absolutely, positively 100% “MABEY”. 

Thanks for at least answering, I do appreciate and respect that you and Chris are at least defending it publicly.  I wish it would have be open for public input as a proposal, but I guess that’s water under the bridge. I still think Bryce Neilson deserves to be heard and you guys are clearly not wanting to respond about his opinion. Which I understand, as he is one of your own. We are just going to be on opposite sides of this issue. Good luck. Please take care of the fish I love and respect more than any other species at my favorite place in the world.