204 



have been maintained on the mouth of Salmon Creek for an extended period of years 

 preventing passage of virtually all anadromous fish. If the productivity of Elk River is 

 so exceptional following a similar land management regime, then it would be expected 

 that Salmon Creek is similar, but for intentional man-caused blockage. 



With respect to Yager Creek, Mr. Moyle pleads ignorance because The Pacific Lumber 

 Company (PL) denied he and his crews access. PL has no knowledge of any request 

 and denial of access, but what is interesting is his ability to comment on Elk River and 

 Salmon Creek without any compunctions despite his lack of ever having been there. 

 Mr. Moyle eludes to some "cursory surveys" of Yager Creek and that federal 

 ownership will likely result in restoration efforts. The fact is that PL works 

 cooperatively with California Department of Fish & Game and California Consen/ation 

 Corps in a comprehensive watershed management and fisheries restoration program 

 for all of its lands. Yager Creek and its tributaries have been the focus of the program 

 efforts to date. The drainage is probably the most intensively surveyed and monitored 

 watershed in the state and has had more in-stream and up-slope restoration projects 

 completed than probably any other watershed in the state. PL maintains a fish 

 hatchery on Yager Creek raising natal stocks Including coho to jumpstart the recovery 

 of the fishery as habitat is made accessible and improved. Additionally, the company 

 allows no fishing on its lands, that they may serve as a sanctuary for anadromous fish. 

 All this is being done voluntarily under private ownership. Mr. Moyle again tries to 

 portray the headwaters of Yager Creek and its tributaries as protected with old grovy^h 

 forests. The fact is that the majority of the headwaters areas of this drainage are 

 natural grasslands use for cattle grazing. Studies commissioned by PL by independent 

 consulting hydrologists concluded that the vast majority of sediment entering the 

 drainage system originates from the more unstable grassland soils that are not on PL 

 land and not included in HP 2866. Additionally, very little of the drainage supports 

 old growth, estimated at less than 2%. 



Mr. Moyle's testimony is very disappointing coming from a so-called "scientist." 

 Testimony of this nature is symbolic of the erosion of scientific credibility we are 

 experiencing today. Here is a man of impeccable credentials reporting the status of 

 streams of which he has little knowledge in his effort to advocate condemnation and 

 preservation of productive private lands. This testimony is not science, but pure 

 conjecture masquerading as science by the nature of its source. The political leaders 

 of this country must recognize this ploy and insist upon facts in their deliberations. 



