405
1 DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA
2
3 SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE )
OF FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC., and )
4 WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC., )
Petitioners, ) DOAH Case No. 92-3038
5 v. )
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT )
6 DISTRICT, an agency of the State )
of Florida; et al., )
7 Respondents. )
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
8 FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC.; )
UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION; )
9 and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC., )
Petitioners, )
10 v. ) DOAH Case No. 92-3039
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT )
11 DISTRICT, an agency of the State )
of Florida; et al., )
12 Respondents. )
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
13 FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE )
ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS; )
14 W.E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., )
and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., )
15 Petitioners, )
v. ) DOAH Case No. 92-3040
16 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT )
DISTRICT, an agency of the State )
17 of Florida; et al., )
Respondents. )
18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
100 S.E. 2nd Street
19 Miami, Florida
March 18, 1994
20 8:35 p.m. - 5:03 p.m.
21 DEPOSITION OF W. MICHAEL DENNIS
22 Taken before THOMAS R. NEUMANN, Registered
Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for
23 the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of
Taking Deposition filed in the above cause.
24 - - - - - - -
406
1 APPEARANCES
2
ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS FLORIDA SUGAR CANE
3 LEAGUE, INC., UNITED STATES SUGAR CORP., and
NEW SOUTH HOPE, INC.
4
EARL, BLANK, KAVANAUGH & STOTTS, P.A.
5 One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3636
Two South Biscayne Boulevard
6 Miami, Florida 33131
BY: MARK KOBELINSKI, ESQ.
7
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
8
POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN, LTD.
9 4000 International Place
100 S.E. 2nd Street
10 Miami, Florida
BY: PAUL NETTLETON, ESQ.
11
ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-INTERVENOR
12 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
13 KATHY A. STARK, ESQ.
ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY
14 99 N.E. 4th Street
Miami, Florida 33132
15
16 ALSO PRESENT: RALPH ROOT
17
INDEX
18 Witness Direct Cross Redirect Recross
W. MICHAEL DENNIS
19 By Ms. Stark: 408
By Mr. Nettleton: 477
20
21 EXHIBITS
NUMBER BATES NO. PAGE
22 13 Handwritten notes 528
23
24
407
1 Thereupon --
2 W. MICHAEL DENNIS
3 was called as a witness and, having been first duly
4 sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
5 MR. NETTLETON: We have indicated today
6 that Kathy Stark for the Federal Government is
7 going to start out asking some questions and
8 some specific areas without me waiving the right
9 to come back and complete the direct examination
10 concerning the various areas of opinions that
11 Dr. Dennis intends to provide at trial.
12 MR. KOBELINSKI: Counsel, this is a
13 procedure we actually have cooperatively done in
14 the past. We assume it will be done in the
15 future in other depositions.
16 I would just note hopefully this process
17 will speed things up. We believe it's been
18 going a little slowly over the last two or three
19 days.
20 MR. NETTLETON: I would tend to agree with
21 that.
22 MS. STARK: On behalf of the federal
23 government, our intention this morning is to
24 limit the questions to remote sensing issues and
25 the government would not waive the right to come
408
1 back and ask certain follow-up questions after
2 Paul has completed all of his direct
3 examination. They would not relate to remote
4 sensing, they would relate to other areas.
5 MR. KOBELINSKI: I understand the
6 procedure, fine. I just make a note that you
7 are free to ask about remote sensing or any
8 other areas. I understand what you are saying.
9 I'm not objecting to it.
10 CROSS EXAMINATION
11 BY MS. STARK:
12 Q. Dr. Dennis, good morning.
13 A. Good morning.
14 Q. I would like to take you to the areas of
15 your 1991 and 1993 maps which we looked at somewhat
16 yesterday and I would like to get into a little bit
17 more detail on how those maps were created,
18 specifically the remote sensing techniques that were
19 used in creating those two documents.
20 MR. KOBELINSKI: Kathy, before you start, I
21 don't -- I realize perhaps this exchange could
22 be taken -- misinterpreted in the future. What
23 we are agreeing to do is let you go forward in
24 this particular area. We do not agree either
25 party should be switching back and forth
409
1 repeatedly from attorney to attorney. This is
2 just in this particular circumstance that we
3 agree upon to that procedure. I'm sorry.
4 MS. STARK: I appreciate that. Obviously I
5 have with me an individual who is knowledgeable
6 in this particular area, that's why we are
7 requesting it.
8 MR. KOBELINSKI: No problem.
9 BY MS. STARK:
10 Q. It's my understanding, Dr. Dennis, please
11 correct me if I'm wrong, that primarily you utilized
12 a technique of aerial photography for your 1991 map;
13 is that correct?
14 A. It was as I explained, I believe, done
15 through a combination of photo interpretation of
16 color infrared aerial photographs in combination with
17 aerial reconnaissance and reconnaissance from air
18 boat and identification of cattail and certain areas
19 that perhaps could not be discerned adequately in
20 certain areas based on the aerial.
21 So it was done primarily using the color,
22 infrared aerial photographs as the basis. But it
23 also contained observations from aerial surveys and
24 air boat surveys.
25 Q. I understand. But am I correct in assuming
410
1 that there was no satellite imagery used for the 1991
2 map?
3 A. There was not.
4 Q. Can you tell me for the 1991 map what was
5 the scale of your aerial photography that was taken?
6 A. I believe that's been provided. I recall
7 that it was 1 to 36,000.
8 Q. That would be 1 --
9 A. Inch equals 3,000 feet of the actual photo.
10 Q. How did you determine the classes that you
11 used when you designed the 1991 vegetative map?
12 A. If you will recall, I believe when we
13 discussed that map earlier I indicated that we began
14 that process by trying to identify where cattail was
15 growing throughout the EPA. And we didn't know and
16 we did not have any information from any other
17 sources that gave us a clear picture of where cattail
18 was to be found in terms of geographic extent
19 throughout the entire area.
20 There had been reports and comments and
21 some studies done indicating the extent of cattails
22 in the northern part of 3A, but we weren't aware of a
23 comprehensive evaluation of where else it might have
24 been occurring.
25 So we began the process by trying to
411
1 determine where those other areas were.
2 MR. KOBELINSKI: To save upon an errata
3 sheet, you said there had been studies done
4 mapping of cattails in the northern 3A. Did you
5 mean 2A?
6 THE WITNESS: Yes.
7 BY MS. STARK:
8 Q. But my question is more specific than that.
9 Exactly how did you go about creating the classes
10 that you used on your mapping? I understand your
11 previous testimony. I'm interested in more of an
12 analysis.
13 I understand you said they started very
14 broadly and they narrowed. What I'm interested in
15 finding out is how did you narrow them?
16 A. In the evolution of determining
17 geographical extent, we first identified areas where
18 cattail was growing. And then in doing that, we
19 found that it would be helpful if we gave some sort
20 of indication of the coverage or density or amount.
21 And we began in our data collection in our
22 analysis on the aerial photographs and also in our
23 aerial and ground reconnaissance by making general
24 notations of here is an area of heavy cattail
25 infestation or high cattail density, here is an area
412
1 of low and here is an area of mild. So it began as a
2 very qualitative process.
3 We did not on a '91 map on an A priority
4 fashion determine the categories. And our main
5 purpose in the '91 maps was to note where it was
6 growing to the best that we could and provide some
7 accurate representation of that.
8 So there were no priority categories, and
9 categories actually evolved out of our continuing
10 study of the distribution and amounts and densities
11 as we went through that year.
12 MR. KOBELINSKI: Off the record.
13 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken,
14 after which the following proceedings
15 were had:)
16 BY MS. STARK:
17 Q. Dr. Dennis, let me ask you -- you mentioned
18 in your last answer in your review of these areas
19 that you looked at the coverage or the density of
20 cattail, and I had kind of a general question as to
21 your definition of those terms so that we are on the
22 same sheet of music.
23 For instance, if you observed an area that
24 was primarily often water but the only vegetation
25 that you saw was cattail, how would you characterize
413
1 that area? Would that be considered 100% cattail
2 under your definition or how did that work?
3 A. If I understand your hypothetical
4 correctly, if there was an area of essentially open
5 water with cattails in it, if the cattail was thick
6 enough to cover substantially all of the area, then
7 it would have been mapped as 80 or 90 or 100%
8 cattail.
9 If it was mostly open water and there were
10 sparsely occurring individual plants of cattail
11 scattered throughout there, then it would have been
12 mapped in another density category either sparse or
13 very low or less than 1% or 15% or something of that
14 type.
15 Q. I can assume, then, that you would consider
16 open water or bare ground essentially to be a
17 vegetative class in your classification?
18 A. It would have been considered as part of
19 the classification system, yes, to the extent in very
20 few instances do I recall where there was open water
21 and nothing growing in the water.
22 Typically there was utricularia or water
23 lily or some other kind of submerged floating
24 aquatic. There may have been in those instances some
25 density of cattails in there.
414
1 Q. Let's go back to the previous answer that
2 you gave right before we took our little break. You
3 had essentially described how you got to this point
4 where you had essentially high density of cattail or
5 mid range and a low range.
6 But your 1991 map obviously has more
7 classes than just those three. How did you refine
8 your system of vegetative classing for your 1991 map?
9 A. As we continued through the year and
10 gathered more information through the year, more or
11 less the period in which that map was generated, we
12 began to want to refine our estimates from low,
13 moderate or high to some percentage category.
14 So we began to make visual estimates of
15 percent cover, and we did this from aerial or air
16 boat. And we also then began to make those
17 determinations on the aerial photographs and photo
18 interpretation of those. So what that did was, that
19 allowed us at the end when we finally said okay, we
20 are stopping this mapping effort and we are going to
21 consider this the extent of cattail the best we know
22 it in 1991. We took whatever coverage percent we had
23 or qualitative percent coverage we had and we made a
24 judgment as to what those categories were, and then
25 essentially let the data tell us how we could put
415
1 them into percentage categories.
2 Is that clear?
3 Q. Well, it requires a follow up, which is,
4 how did the data tell you what the categories were?
5 A. If I could refer you to the categories on
6 the map, the highest category indicates mono specific
7 stand of cattails, some interspersing with patches or
8 stands of other species but with an overall cattail
9 coverage of 80 to 100%.
10 What we were recognizing there was that
11 there are some geographic areas where the cattail is
12 the plant there and is growing quite thickly and in
13 terms of percent cover would be very high.
14 There are other areas where it may be
15 growing very high but it's somewhat patchy. So you
16 may have one area that has very dense cattail and
17 right next to it an area with dense sawgrass.
18 But there was a scale problem in trying to
19 capture accurately that type of geographic
20 distribution and sometimes patchiness and depict it
21 on the scale of the mapping which covered all of the
22 Water Conservation Areas.
23 Q. What is the scale on this mapping of 1991?
24 A. The scale is 1 inch equals 2,540 meters on
25 the presentation that is here as Exhibit 9.
416
1 Q. Why did you mix the categories of inches to
2 meters? I've never seen a scale like that. Isn't
3 that kind of unusual?
4 Why did you choose that scale?
5 MR. KOBELINSKI: Object to the form of the
6 question. It's compound.
7 THE WITNESS: Well, this information is in
8 the geographic information system format, so the
9 particular scale of this map production is not
10 really significant. That scale was essentially
11 chosen because it would take up this completed
12 sheet of paper.
13 We tried to depict it as big as we could on
14 this particular standard sheet.
15 BY MS. STARK:
16 Q. How did you deal with this problem of the
17 occurrence of cattails in patches that was difficult
18 to deal with on the scale?
19 A. We tried to do that in category 1 and 2.
20 Category 1, as I read it, is essentially areas with
21 solid stands of cattail. Within that area it's
22 somewhat patchy. So within an area that's mapped in
23 that designation as cattail, we are clarifying that
24 it's not 100% cattail in there but maybe patches of
25 other vegetation within the area mapped in category
417
1 1.
2 And just so that we would know, there were
3 areas of other vegetation in there.
4 In category 2, we indicated that there were
5 mixed stands of cattail and sawgrass or cattail
6 slough. There the patchiness was more obvious. So
7 we were trying to give a representation that within
8 that category the overall cattail percent coverage
9 would be in the 40 to 80 range.
10 We didn't feel from the data we collected
11 and information we had we could narrow it any more
12 than that, but we were trying to represent overall
13 with that area that that would be the range of
14 cattail coverage and that it was patchy.
15 Then as we go down through the third,
16 fourth and fifth categories, there is decreasing
17 density of cattail, and it's reflective generally of
18 how the cattail occurred and our identification of
19 the cattail throughout that area in that time period.
20 Q. How much of the area that's depicted on
21 Exhibit 3 did you actually have aerial infrared
22 aerial photography for?
23 MR. KOBELINSKI: This is Exhibit 9.
24 Exhibit 3 is the '93.
25 MS. STARK: I'm sorry.
418
1 BY MS. STARK:
2 Q. Exhibit 9, 1991 map is the one I'm
3 referring to.
4 A. The exact lines I believe were provided in
5 the documentation, production of document process.
6 As I recall, generally it covered
7 essentially all of WCA-1, to the northern part of 3.
8 I would say most of 3, but not all of 3.
9 Q. What is the actual number of aerial
10 photographs that you have that you used for the 1991
11 map?
12 A. I don't know.
13 Q. Can you give me an estimate? Is it more
14 than 1,000, less than a hundred?
15 A. Those were produced as the individual
16 photographs and also, I believe, an index with the
17 number of photographs on there. There were 9 x 9
18 transparencies. I wouldn't hazard a guess how many
19 individual photographs there were.
20 Q. Was there actually any area that showed on
21 the 1991 map Exhibit 9 that you did not have aerial
22 photographs for or did you essentially have an aerial
23 photo for everything that you mapped on there?
24 You seemed to indicate that you had all of
25 1, all of 2 and most of 3. Is there any particular
419
1 area that you didn't have aerial photographs for?
2 MR. KOBELINSKI: Are you referring to where
3 cattails are or literally the entire boundaries
4 of the three conservation areas 1, 2A, 2B and 3?
5 MS. STARK: Anything he mapped.
6 MR. KOBELINSKI: Where he identified
7 cattails?
8 MS. STARK: Anything he mapped on that map.
9 THE WITNESS: There are areas depicted on
10 that map that we did not have aerial coverage
11 for.
12 BY MS. STARK:
13 Q. Are you including any of those areas in the
14 area that you contend contains cattails?
15 A. I would need to go back and look at the
16 specific coverage and compare that. My recollection
17 is that we had aerial coverage for most of the areas
18 that are mapped as cattail on there. But that there
19 are probably some areas indicated in some of the
20 generally lower categories of cattail density that we
21 did not have aerial photographs for.
22 Q. If you did not have an aerial photograph
23 for a particular area and you intended to show that
24 area as containing some cattail, how did you go about
25 mapping that particular area and placing it into one
420
1 of your categories?
2 A. Based on field reconnaissance from either
3 fixed wing aircraft, helicopters or air boats with
4 some geographic locating mechanism such as Loran,
5 GPS.
6 Q. In 1991 do you recall if you used Loran or
7 GPS or both?
8 A. My recollection is we began using Loran and
9 that at some point in the year we obtained GPS
10 equipment and converted our data collection from
11 Loran to GPS.
12 Q. What was the accuracy of your Loran unit
13 that you were using?
14 A. I think the general accuracy of Loran is in
15 the neighborhood of several hundred meters.
16 Q. What about the GPS unit when you switched
17 to that, what was the accuracy of the GPS unit for
18 your 1991 maps?
19 A. It would have depended on whether -- the
20 specific time relative to the number of satellites
21 available, how the military was adjusting the
22 information that you could receive from those
23 satellites and whether or not the readings were taken
24 and post processed with the base unit or not.
25 Q. Were you post processing the information?
421
1 A. I can't recall whether we were doing that
2 in 1991 or not.
3 Q. How about in 1993?
4 A. 1993, by then we had established a base
5 station and that data was generally post processed,
6 but there probably was some data that was not.
7 Q. Assuming you did not post process to a base
8 station in 1991, what would the accuracy have been of
9 your GPS locations?
10 A. In the neighborhood of 230 meters or so to
11 perhaps 100 plus or minus meters.
12 Q. Are you familiar with the intention -- the
13 intentional drift that's worked into the GPS system
14 by the military?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Do you have or does anyone with BDA have
17 the security clearance in order to receive the key to
18 take care of that intentional drift?
19 A. To my knowledge, no one at BDA has such a
20 security clearance.
21 Q. When you were mapping into these five
22 categories that you eventually determined for your
23 1991 map, did you make any quantitative or
24 qualitative determinations of how a certain drop off
25 in density of cattail would behave?
422
1 In other words, how did you determine where
2 to draw the line between one percent of coverage and
3 another percent of coverage?
4 A. Either from the aerial photographs or from
5 the aerial and ground reconnaissance.
6 Q. So you would visually examine either your
7 photos or the actual land?
8 A. That's correct.
9 Q. And then how would you make the
10 determination of where to draw the line between the
11 percentages?
12 A. If we could determine a cattail boundary
13 from the aerial photographs, we will use aerial
14 photographs to delineate a boundary and then assign a
15 percent coverage category to that.
16 If it was one of the very low sparse
17 coverage categories, we would use the field
18 reconnaissance in which we determined a point where
19 we saw cattail. And then beyond that point, we
20 either saw no more cattail or essentially no more
21 cattail or no more cattail that was in that general
22 coverage category. And in that case we would use
23 that determination and field data locations to draw a
24 line.
25 Q. What was the minimum mapping unit that you
423
1 could use on your aerial photographs when you would
2 digitize that data?
3 A. I don't understand your question.
4 Q. In other words, you have described the
5 process where you took your aerial photos and you
6 would overlay them. Then someone would physically
7 sit down and draw the various mapping units on to
8 that acetate so that that information could be placed
9 into the computer.
10 Is that a correct understanding of the
11 process of how you did it?
12 A. That's essentially correct.
13 Q. What was the smallest polygon that your
14 photographers could draw on the map?
15 A. I don't recall an exact number, but
16 probably in the range of 30 to 50 feet, more or less.
17 Q. You said that my explanation of the process
18 of what was done with the aerial photos was
19 essentially correct. I would like to ask you a few
20 more questions as far as the detail of what that
21 process entailed when BDA did its aerial photography.
22 First let me ask you, was all of the aerial
23 photography for the 1991 map done by the same pilot
24 or the same photographer or was there a variety of
25 people used?
424
1 A. All of the photography for the '91 map was
2 taken, I believe, by Southern Resource Mapping.
3 Whether or not they used the same pilot and the same
4 photographer, I do not know.
5 Q. Once you received your photographs, how did
6 you go about determining the accuracy of your aerial
7 photos and your ground visuals when you reconciled
8 them onto your map?
9 A. Essentially what was done was actual field
10 identifiable points which could be referenced to
11 established base maps were used in conjunction with
12 photographic scales to locate the photos and
13 essentially tie them together for the composite map.
14 Q. Was all of your photography for the 1991
15 map color balanced? Do you know what I mean by color
16 balanced?
17 A. I'm not sure I do.
18 Q. In other words, were all of these photos
19 for this area that's going to be used on this map all
20 processed at the same time in the same batch with the
21 same developing condition?
22 A. I don't recall.
23 Q. What was the accuracy of your field
24 identifiable points? How did you determine what
25 points to use?
425
1 A. We would pick points such as control
2 structures, bins and levees, distances along levees,
3 roads, road intersections, those type of photo
4 identifiable points.
5 Q. What would you do as far as determining the
6 accuracy of, say, in the entire area of 2A where you
7 have no control structures or levees or roads?
8 A. I believe various scaling procedures were
9 used.
10 Q. What scaling procedures did you use?
11 A. Information from one photo where you had an
12 identifiable point would be gathered. That would be
13 entered, and then where there were photos that did
14 not have those kinds of points, some determination of
15 scale of those photographs was used -- in the scaling
16 process was used to, in essence, fit those photos
17 together in a mosaic that would be registered to a
18 base map.
19 Q. I understand that. But I think my question
20 is, what was the scaling process that you used to
21 create the photo mosaic to put on the map?
22 A. Probably at this point we are getting into
23 details of the photographic and registration process
24 that I'm not -- that I did not do, and I was relying
25 on others that had better knowledge and abilities to
426
1 know how to do that to perform those tasks.
2 Q. Was that work done by BDA, this scale that
3 we are discussing?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Was it done by a particular individual at
6 BDA?
7 A. There were probably several people that
8 worked on that process, yes.
9 Q. Do you know who those individuals were?
10 A. Dr. Joe Burch, Derrick Davis.
11 Q. Derrick or Eric?
12 A. Derrick. There were probably others.
13 Q. Do you know what the accuracy of the
14 process would be if you are dealing with a
15 identifiable point, say, on the levee and you want to
16 get into the interior of, for example, 2A, what type
17 of accuracy do you come out with?
18 A. I don't recall.
19 Q. Do you have a range?
20 A. No, I don't.
21 Q. Again, I understand that you did not do
22 this particular work, but I need to ask you in
23 detail. When you obtained the aerial photographs and
24 they were given the acetate overlay, was there one
25 person or a group of people at BDA that did this
427
1 actual outlining that you described?
2 A. For consistency, we had one person doing
3 that.
4 Q. Who was that?
5 A. Dr. Joe Burch.
6 Q. What is the accuracy of that particular
7 step in the process? Is there any way to determine
8 that?
9 A. Would you restate the question, please?
10 Q. You stated for consistency that you used
11 one individual. I would assume he probably has a lot
12 of experience in this type of work, this drawing on
13 the aerial photos, but is there any way of
14 determining how accurate that drawing is?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. What is that?
17 A. By going and doing a ground truthing
18 determination.
19 Q. You had made a statement yesterday or the
20 day before that we were sort of using ground truthing
21 in a generic sense. I assume there is probably a
22 more narrow definition.
23 What would your definition in this
24 particular instance of ground truthing be in order to
25 determine the accuracy of these aerial photo
428
1 overlays?
2 A. As I use ground truthing related to this
3 particular effort, ground truthing would include
4 actually the ground inspections conducted principally
5 by air boat, sometimes getting in and out of the air
6 boat and walking around. Also helicopter over
7 flights at various altitudes and some inspections
8 from fixed wing aircraft.
9 One thing that becomes very apparent in
10 trying to conduct a mapping effort such as this in
11 this kind of area is the vastness. I mean, it's
12 just -- it's just an immensely vast area to work in.
13 So that's why typically ground truthing and
14 in the strict sense would be involved in going out
15 and physically standing on the ground and looking at
16 your area and looking at the map and looking at the
17 vegetation and collating those and say, yes, this is
18 pine forest, or this is oak tree or this is marsh.
19 But in this instance where distances are so
20 great and accessibility is such a problem, we
21 reverted to the use of helicopters and airplanes to
22 help get around and facilitate getting into various
23 places.
24 Q. I understand. Were you able to conduct a
25 ground truthing effort of these aerial photographs
429
1 after they were overlayed?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. To what extent?
4 A. Essentially what we would do is identify an
5 area, map an area, and then go back to that area as
6 many times as we felt necessary to resolve any
7 questions of accuracy that we might have. So we
8 would go back to some areas once. We would go back
9 to some areas perhaps more than once.
10 Q. Do you recall specifically what areas you
11 may have gone back to more than once?
12 A. The areas with the greatest cattail
13 density, which are reflected in the greatest
14 complexity of matching, were areas we spent more time
15 going back to and working with.
16 Q. So that would be, for instance, the
17 northern part of 2A and southern part of 1, would
18 those be included in that?
19 A. Yes.
20 Q. Any other areas?
21 A. The northern part of 3A and the area
22 generally west of the S-9 structure.
23 Q. And you say this was primarily done by
24 either fixed wing or helicopter over flight?
25 A. Or air boat.
430
1 Q. In 1991 did you have the GPS unit with the
2 bar code system that you referred to yesterday or did
3 you only have that for your '93 efforts?
4 A. As I recall, we only used the bar code
5 efforts in our 1993. We may have begun developing
6 that procedure in the 1991 or 1992 time period.
7 Q. But that would be after this map was
8 produced?
9 A. Created.
10 Q. Created?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. Did you use a some transfer scope on your
13 digitization of your photographs?
14 A. I don't recall specifically whether that
15 was used or not.
16 Q. Can you describe for me the process that
17 was used in order to transfer your aerial photographs
18 onto your maps?
19 A. I don't believe I can explain in any more
20 detail than what we already discussed.
21 Q. All right. Do you know if the image of the
22 aerial photographs with the acetate overlays were
23 optically projected onto the map or were they
24 digitally scanned? I was not clear on that?
25 A. Okay. It's my recollection and
431
1 understanding that they were digitally reported.
2 Q. What was the pixel size on the scan photos?
3 A. I don't believe I indicated we scanned the
4 photos.
5 Q. If you scanned it to a digital file you
6 would have had to scan the photo, right?
7 A. I believe there is some confusion. I think
8 I indicated that we went through a process of
9 digitizing the delineations from the aerial
10 photographs. We did not scan that into a digital
11 density type of system.
12 Q. All right. You somehow had to transfer the
13 information that's on your aerial photographs onto
14 your map, correct? You had to merge the two?
15 A. Somehow we had to get the information from
16 the color infrared areas and the acetate overlays on
17 those into the base map format, right.
18 Q. So when you did that, did you digitize the
19 photos or did you digitize just the overlays or both?
20 A. We digitized the delineations that we made
21 on the clear acetates that were overlaying the
22 photos.
23 Q. What is the accuracy of the finished map
24 that's created from that type of process?
25 MR. KOBELINSKI: Without the ground
432
1 truthing?
2 MS. STARK: Yes, without the ground
3 truthing.
4 THE WITNESS: I don't know what the
5 accuracy would be without the ground truthing.
6 That would depend on the skill of the
7 photographer.
8 BY MS. STARK:
9 Q. I think you told me your photographer was
10 Dr. Joe Burch?
11 A. That's correct.
12 Q. Did he do the digitizing by scanning or did
13 he do it manually, the digitizing of this overlay?
14 A. I don't believe he did the digitizing.
15 Q. Who did that?
16 A. It would have been various of our computer
17 scientists and technicians.
18 Q. Do they do that manually or do they do that
19 by scanning?
20 A. Manually.
21 Q. What's the accuracy of that procedure?
22 MR. KOBELINSKI: Again, I assume without
23 any ground truthing?
24 MS. STARK: I'm just talking about that
25 process.
433
1 THE WITNESS: I don't recall.
2 BY MS. STARK:
3 Q. Once you had ground truthed the 1991 map,
4 what was your estimate of the accuracy of the
5 depictions on that map?
6 A. To the best of my knowledge and our ability
7 to study the area and the photographs at that time,
8 that map is a very representative and accurate
9 depiction of the extent of cattails within those
10 areas in the 1991 time period.
11 Q. Have you actually calculated a figure for
12 the accuracy, a percent or within a certain meter
13 accuracy?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Do you intend to do that prior to trial?
16 A. I currently have no plans to do that.
17 Q. What additional information would you need
18 in order to create such an accuracy figure or do you
19 have it now?
20 A. When you refer to the accuracy, are you
21 referring to the location and densities of the
22 cattail depicted or the cartographic scale of the
23 map?
24 Q. That's a valid question. Let's start by
25 you talking about the accuracy of the scale. How
434
1 would you determine that?
2 A. I believe there probably are procedures in
3 which the overall accuracy of the map could be
4 determined.
5 Q. And what would they be?
6 A. Essentially picking known, verifiable
7 points and locations and determining distances on
8 those from a source such as survey or other types of
9 mapped information that may be available at a
10 sufficient scale and then compare that data to
11 distances and representations on this map.
12 Q. You would agree, would you not, that the
13 classifications that are used as far as the density
14 of the cattail is basically a subjective type of
15 analysis, is it not?
16 MR. KOBELINSKI: Object to the form of the
17 question.
18 THE WITNESS: The determination of the
19 percentage cattail as I indicated was done by a
20 visual estimate, which is a qualitative
21 technique rather than a quantitative technique.
22 BY MS. STARK:
23 Q. So if you wished to determine the accuracy
24 of those classifications that are shown on your map,
25 how would you go about doing that?
435
1 A. One method would be to go back to our field
2 notes and data sheets and look at what those data
3 indicated and go back to our map and see whether or
4 not what was depicted on the map was representative
5 of what we had recorded in the field.
6 Q. So that would certainly give you some idea
7 of how accurate a depiction your map is of your field
8 notes, correct?
9 A. Of our observations, yes.
10 Q. Or at least what's written down of your
11 observations?
12 A. That's correct.
13 Q. There is no way to go into the field at
14 this point and determine the accuracy of the 1990
15 map, is there --
16 MR. KOBELINSKI: Again?
17 BY MS. STARK:
18 Q. -- today?
19 A. There is no way that I'm aware of to go
20 back in time and verify the accuracy of a particular
21 map unless you have some site specific data that was
22 taken in the time period that the map was produced
23 that you feel is reliable that you can use.
24 Q. What type of site specific data?
25 A. If in any period of time you had gone back
436
1 and recorded for a particular point or area that you
2 inspected the area and visually it was 50% cattail,
3 then you could come back and use that information to
4 determine whether or not that was accurate on the
5 map.
6 If you had more detailed data where you
7 went to an area and you counted every plant in a
8 certain geographic area and you believed the person
9 had identified the plant, he had identified the area
10 and he knew how to count and was basically a reliable
11 person, that level of detail, if you had it
12 available, would allow you to go back in time and say
13 I believe that data and therefore this area generally
14 is accurately depicted on the map.
15 But there is no way that I'm aware of other
16 than that kind of category of data that you can look
17 at a map that was produced of a particular point in
18 time and necessarily verify its accuracy.
19 Q. And you would agree that that type of site
20 specific verification would be subject to any
21 accuracy problems with your GPS or your Loran as far
22 as determining its exact location, would you not?
23 A. Yes. Your ability to know a particular
24 point on the ground is limited by the accuracy of the
25 instrument or the method that you are using to
437
1 identify yourself and your point on the ground.
2 Q. It's my understanding that there can be
3 some adjustment that needs to be done with aerial
4 photographs to take into effect the fact that those
5 photos may have been taken on an angle or there may
6 be some problems along the edges of the photographs
7 as far as the resolution.
8 Are you familiar with the procedures that
9 BDA used to correct those types of problems with your
10 aerial photographs?
11 A. In general terms.
12 Q. Okay. Give me the general terms.
13 A. In general we would use the center portion
14 of the photograph. You are correct. On any aerial
15 photographs that are taken there can be distortion
16 and due to the instability of the aerial platform
17 that you use. So there is some error fact inherent
18 in any aerial photograph.
19 There are ways to deal with that. And
20 generally I believe in this process the way we dealt
21 with it was by using the center part of the
22 photograph, and then we went through a process of
23 best fitting the series of photographs to the base
24 map. And I have tried a couple of times this morning
25 to describe to you how that was done. I described it
438
1 to the extent of my specific knowledge on it. So
2 that's generally how we tried to deal with that.
3 Q. When we say the center part of the
4 photograph, can you estimate on a particular
5 photograph how much of the area you are actually
6 using. Are you discarding 50% of the photo around
7 the edges? Is there any way to quantify that type of
8 statement, that it's the center part?
9 A. It would probably vary a little bit. But
10 generally the center third, more or less, of the
11 photograph.
12 Q. The center third in from the side and in
13 from the top and bottom?
14 A. And in from the top. Color infrared areas
15 also have a vignetting effect around the outside. So
16 in terms of eliminating the tilt problem that you
17 were questioning and the vignetting part, you would
18 use generally the center part of the aerial which
19 gives you a better signature to delineate.
20 Q. I think you told me that these photos are 9
21 inches by 9 inches; is that correct?
22 A. That is right.
23 Q. So am I correct in assuming that you
24 essentially used the three inch square in the middle,
25 is that what you are telling me? You said the
439
1 center, so I'm trying to look at it in inches.
2 A. Depending on the particular degree of
3 vignetting on the photograph, it was probably used
4 approximately the -- probably about four or five
5 inches on the center part of the photograph. I guess
6 that doesn't equate to exactly one-third.
7 Q. I think it might.
8 How did your -- I guess it would be your
9 computer technicians geo reference these digitized
10 overlays to the base map?
11 A. By taking known geo reference points and
12 identifying those on the areas to the extent they
13 occurred, and then in putting that in a digital
14 manner into the geographic information system. And
15 where that couldn't be done, utilizing some sort of
16 scaling procedure with the other photographs.
17 Q. And I know I have already asked you how
18 many total photos you had. Are you aware even in
19 general terms how many photos were actually digitized
20 and geo referenced in order to make the 1991 map?
21 A. I don't know.
22 Q. Just a point of clarification. When you
23 referred to the known point on the ground when we are
24 talking about the geo referencing of the overlays,
25 are you referring to, for instance, a structure or
440
1 levee or are you talking about specific GPS points?
2 What known points are you using?
3 A. Generally I'm talking about the known
4 points as we discussed earlier with structures and so
5 forth. There may have been some GPS recorded points
6 that were utilized, also.
7 Q. How did you go about changing your
8 categories for your legend from the '91 map to the
9 '93 map? Obviously you have more classifications on
10 the '93 maps. How did that process occur?
11 A. We used the information data that we had
12 acquired in our 1991 cattail mapping exercise. And
13 then developed what we believe would be a more
14 systematic approach to mapping the cattail in the
15 conservation areas.
16 Therefore, we, in a priority fashion for
17 the '93 map, determined the classifications that we
18 would use.
19 MR. KOBELINSKI: If you are moving on to
20 '93, would this be a good place to take a break?
21 MS. STARK: This would be fine.
22 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken,
23 after which the following proceedings
24 were had:)
25 BY MS. STARK:
441
1 Q. As your counsel pointed out, we are
2 shifting gears into the '93 map. Let me start by
3 asking you kind of a general overall question.
4 What were the primary differences, if any,
5 between the methodology that was used in the
6 development of the 1993 map versus what we have just
7 gone through this morning as to the development of
8 the 1991 map?
9 A. As we discussed earlier, the 1991 map was
10 an evolutionary process. We didn't know where
11 cattails occurred, and we were attempting to figure
12 how to best capture the location and geographic
13 extent of cattail within the vast area that comes at
14 WCA-1, 2 and 3. We had the benefit of that
15 experience in conducting our 1993 map. So the 1993
16 map was different in that we established our density
17 or percent cover classifications up front.
18 We also utilized GPS technology much more
19 in the 1993 map than we did in the 1991 map.
20 Q. What's your understanding of the meter
21 accuracy of the GPS with the intentional drift built
22 in if in fact you do not have the military key and
23 the security clearance in order to adjust for that?
24 A. My understanding is that currently with
25 post process GPS data, with the type of GPS units we
442
1 have and use, we can be accurate to within three
2 meters.
3 MR. KOBELINSKI: Off the record.
4 (Discussion off the record.)
5 BY MS. STARK:
6 Q. You are saying that your GPS measurements
7 are accurate to three meter? I think I missed
8 something there.
9 A. I'm saying that with our GPS units and
10 utilization of a base station and by post processing
11 the data, we can be accurate to within three meters.
12 Q. For the 1993 map, was all of your GPS data
13 post processed?
14 A. I don't know.
15 Q. Do you have any estimate of the percentage
16 that may not have been post processed?
17 A. No, I do not.
18 Q. Who did that work? Did BDA do it?
19 A. Which work?
20 Q. Any post processing that may have been done
21 on the GPS, or was that something you hired someone
22 else to do?
23 A. BDA did that.
24 Q. Whom within BDA would have been responsible
25 for that?
443
1 A. I believe most of that was probably done by
2 an employee we had who was a professional land
3 surveyor and trained in the use of GPS.
4 Q. Is that individual still with BDA?
5 A. No.
6 Q. What was that individual's name?
7 A. Tony Downs.
8 Q. Did you use any aerial photography for the
9 creation of the 1993 map?
10 A. Yes.
11 Q. What procedures were used in obtaining, I
12 guess, the synthesis or the analysis of those aerial
13 photos? Did it differ at all from what you did in
14 1991?
15 A. The process was similar to what we used in
16 1991.
17 Q. Did you also use Southern Resource Mapping
18 for that area of the photography work?
19 A. No.
20 Q. Who did you use?
21 A. Aerial Cartographics of America.
22 Q. And do you know if Aerial Cartographics of
23 America utilized one pilot for your entire project?
24 A. No, I don't.
25 Q. How much of the area of WCAs 1, 2 and 3 was
444
1 aerial photographed for the 1993 map?
2 A. Again, I believe the flight lines that
3 indicated coverage provided that in general terms the
4 northern part of WCA-1 was not included and perhaps
5 some of the southern areas of WCA-3.
6 Q. When you say that the flight lines were
7 provided, I'm not sure if I could look at that piece
8 of paper and really make heads or tails of it in any
9 way, and I haven't seen it in your documentation.
10 Can you describe for me the method by which
11 a pilot would go about aerial photographing, a
12 particular geographic pilot? Does he fly up and down
13 in lines or is it a circular pattern? What type of a
14 pattern do they use?
15 A. The typical process that I believe occurs
16 is that the general geographic area of the requested
17 or required coverage is looked at and perhaps the
18 boundary is depicted on some type of base map. The
19 altitude that would need to be flown at with a
20 particular camera lens combination to obtain the
21 coverage that is requested in terms of the scale of
22 photographs would be determined, and then flight
23 lines would be prepared.
24 Generally, and I believe in this case they
25 were already in a north/south, and those flight lines
445
1 are mapped off on the base map to insure adequate
2 coverage of the target area with the degree of
3 overlap that's either requested or required.
4 And then with that information the pilot
5 and the photographer would find that on an
6 appropriate day and fly the mission.
7 Q. I think you had mentioned when Paul was
8 questioning you that the American Society for
9 Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing is the overseer or
10 the society to which various individuals that are
11 experts in these areas belong.
12 Do you know if either Southern Resource
13 Mapping or Aerial Cartographics of America are
14 members of that society?
15 A. I do not know from personal knowledge what
16 societies either of those cartographic firms are a
17 member of.
18 Q. You say you don't know from personal
19 knowledge. Do you have some hearsay information as
20 to what they might belong to?
21 A. I know that with respect to Aerial
22 Cartographics of America, they are extremely active
23 and participating in their professional
24 organizations.
25 From general conversations that we have had
446
1 with them and representatives of their firm, it's my
2 sense that they are extremely active in their
3 professional societies or organizations.
4 Q. Is Dr. Joe Burch a certified
5 photogrammetrist?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Is he a member of the American Society of
8 Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing?
9 A. I don't believe so, but I'm not sure.
10 Q. What about the computer technicians that
11 you spoke of earlier who did some of the digitizing
12 work for you? Are any of them certified
13 photogrammetrists?
14 A. No.
15 Q. Again, are they members of CASPRS?
16 A. They may be, but I don't know from personal
17 knowledge.
18 Q. Getting back to the methods that were used
19 for the 1993 map, the aerial photos that were taken,
20 were they color balanced?
21 A. I'm not sure.
22 Q. Just to save time, was the same type
23 acetate overlay, line interpretation and digitizing
24 of the data used in the processing of the aerial
25 photos as in 1991 or did you use a different method?
447
1 A. It's my understanding generally the same
2 methods were used.
3 Q. Did you use any satellite imagery in the
4 creation of the 1993 map?
5 A. I know we didn't use satellite imagery for
6 any of the cattail mapping purposes. Now that you
7 ask me that question in that format, I seem to recall
8 some mention or possible use in the 1993 cattail map
9 and perhaps even to a degree in the 1991 map of some
10 type of satellite that may have been used somehow in
11 the base map development, but as I tell you that I
12 have told you really about all that I remember about
13 it.
14 Q. I was going to say that's kind of vague.
15 A. I understand it's vague. I'm very clear
16 that to my knowledge we didn't use any satellite
17 photography to map cattail, but in the overall map
18 making and cartographic processes, which I didn't do,
19 just so I can give you an accurate and as complete
20 answer as I possibly do recall, I do seem to remember
21 some reference to some satellite that was used in
22 some manner in that process.
23 Q. What's your best guess as to who would
24 know, would that be Dr. Burch?
25 A. He might know. Also George Carlson or
448
1 Chuck Ronsaghan, R-O-N-S-A-G-H-A-N, something like
2 that, would probably be able to provide that detailed
3 information.
4 Q. Do you know what scale the base map for the
5 1993 map is? Do you understand the question?
6 In other words, what scale did you use for
7 the creation of the base map?
8 A. The base map was essentially a GIS data
9 file. So to that extent, the scale is whatever you
10 want to produce the hard copy of.
11 Q. What information was contained on the base
12 map when it was run prior to any of the addition of
13 your vegetative information?
14 A. Again, we are right on the edge of the area
15 that I have detailed knowledge about. But in
16 general, it's my understanding that there -- the base
17 map would contain known locations of levees, canals,
18 roads, structures, those types of information.
19 Q. And understanding that you did not do this
20 work, and obviously I'm just sort of trying to
21 determine what your knowledge encompasses, do you
22 know what coordinate system was used for that base
23 map or what coordinate system it contains?
24 A. I believe it was UTM.
25 Q. What does that stands for?
449
1 A. Universal Transverse Mercator.
2 Q. What was the projection of the base map?
3 A. I don't know. These are good questions,
4 but it's outside the area that I have direct
5 knowledge of.
6 Q. You say that in the creation of your '93
7 map that you were able to utilize considerably more
8 GPS type information and we discussed at some length
9 the pen and bar code system.
10 Is that what you are referring to as far as
11 this additional GPS data information?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. I'm not sure that I'm clear on the actual
14 physical field work that was done for that. Was that
15 particular system used when you ran the transects
16 that we talked about or did you set up a different
17 type of geographic coverage, if you will, when you
18 did that work in field?
19 A. I don't understand that question.
20 Q. In other words, we discussed a variety of
21 transects that were set up, for instance, in WCA-1.
22 I believe there were six transects that you went in
23 and you took information on water depth and water
24 quality and some soil cores. That type of
25 information -- and I'm not holding you to specifics,
450
1 but that was what we were discussing as far as what
2 was done on the transects.
3 Was it also a transect system that was used
4 in doing this GPS pen and bar code analysis of
5 vegetative coverage, or was this a separate trip into
6 the field in which you used some other system of
7 covering a certain geographic area?
8 MR. KOBELINSKI: Object to the form,
9 compound.
10 THE WITNESS: I believe you did ask me
11 several questions there.
12 BY MR. NETTLETON:
13 Q. Let me try again then. I think the
14 question I'm asking you is, did you do the GIS work
15 when you did the transect work -- GPS work or did you
16 do it separately?
17 A. There was GPS locational data taken when we
18 conducted certain of the transects that we discussed
19 at some length yesterday in various geographic areas
20 in Water Conservation Areas 1, 2 and 3.
21 As I described yesterday, we performed
22 certain transects and took certain data and located
23 that data or those locations with GPS for those
24 particular investigations.
25 For the 1993 cattail map we conducted
451
1 additional transects that were separate and apart
2 from those studies, overall comprehensive fashion.
3 Q. How was the protocol developed for those
4 transects that were done for this pen and bar code
5 work?
6 A. We established certain east/west flight
7 lines at a distance to insure adequate coverage.
8 Q. What was that distance?
9 A. I don't recall the exact distance, but we
10 established those series of east/west aerial
11 transects, and there were some air boat transects
12 that were conducted also to gather information for
13 the 1993 map.
14 Q. What is your estimate of the widths of a
15 particular transect as it was flown for this GPS
16 work?
17 MR. KOBELINSKI: Distance between
18 transects?
19 BY MS. STARK:
20 Q. In other words, as your aircraft -- was
21 this done by helicopter or fixed wing?
22 A. Most of this was done by fixed wing.
23 Q. As your fixed wing aircraft is traversing
24 from east to west across a given geographic area,
25 what is the width in meters, feet or whatever of the
452
1 area that you would be covering in your pen and bar
2 code calculations that you would be making as you
3 flew over that area?
4 A. I don't recall that distance.
5 What was done was the transects were set up
6 so that with the altitude at which the plane flew,
7 the distance between the flight paths was such that
8 it provided adequate coverage and detail for this
9 mapping exercise.
10 Q. What was the altitude that the aircraft
11 flew?
12 A. 300 feet, approximately.
13 Q. I think we established the other day there
14 is no way to see what's under the belly of the plane
15 unless you strap on to the bottom?
16 A. We indicated we did not strap Dr. Joe Burch
17 and fly him across.
18 Q. So am I correct in assuming that there
19 would be one person recording data off of each side
20 of the plane, or did you do it off one side only?
21 A. One side of the plane.
22 Q. Which side of the plane?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. You indicated that the pen and bar code
25 system was capable of recording every one to five
453
1 seconds, I think you said, as far as data. Data
2 could be entered that frequently?
3 A. That's correct.
4 Q. What was the protocol on how frequently
5 data would be entered as the plane progressed across
6 the transect?
7 A. The protocol was essentially to record a
8 data point often enough to characterize and provide
9 sufficient information for a particular area, and to
10 make sure that whenever a boundary between one
11 category and another was crossed, a data point was
12 taken to insure the capture of that distinction.
13 Q. I'm sorry, are you finished?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. How many individuals recorded GPS data on
16 the over flights?
17 A. One.
18 Q. Who was that?
19 A. Dr. Joe Burch.
20 Q. Once these over flights were done -- and I
21 assume also any air boat transects were done -- in
22 which this pen and bar code system was used, how did
23 you reconcile that information to the aerial
24 photographs that you had for 1993?
25 A. We would take that GPS field data and look
454
1 at it in conjunction with the aerial photographs.
2 Q. Let me stop you there. When you say in
3 conjunction, did you have your GPA data here and your
4 photographs here in front of you, or is this
5 something that's done by computer?
6 A. It may have been there laying on the table
7 or it may have been done in combination with the data
8 on the computer terminal. I just don't know.
9 Q. You are not familiar with the process?
10 A. I just don't know exactly every instance
11 how or what format the data was in when I looked at
12 it.
13 Q. Did you ever see any type of depiction of
14 the pen and bar code data in its raw form?
15 A. I have seen tabulations of GPS data. I
16 can't specifically recall which, if any, of the raw
17 GPS data I saw relative to the '93 map. I just can't
18 recall.
19 Q. I guess I'm trying to understand what it is
20 that you come out with when you have done these over
21 flights and air boat transects and you have entered
22 this data.
23 Does it produce for you some type of a
24 geometric picture or is it simply a listing of GPS
25 locations and whatever was entered into the bar code
455
1 system?
2 A. The GIS system, I believe , will allow
3 either a geographic or tabular display of that data.
4 Q. Do you know what the degree of accuracy
5 would be on the geographic depiction of the data if
6 it was run through a GIS system?
7 A. It would be to the level of accuracy
8 attached to it that we talked about this morning.
9 Q. If all of your GPS data was post processed,
10 it would be within three meters?
11 A. Theoretically.
12 Q. And just so I'm clear, I think you said
13 that you do not know if all of this data was post
14 processed or not?
15 A. No, I don't.
16 Q. Once your GPS data is transferred into
17 whatever type of system makes it usable, and you then
18 want to correlate with your aerial photos and put it
19 on to a base map, how do you go about doing that?
20 A. One method would be to have the GIS system
21 display the location and coverage estimates on the
22 base map.
23 Q. Do you know if that's what was done for the
24 1993 map?
25 A. I don't know specifically.
456
1 Q. For the 1993 map, do you know if the aerial
2 photos were placed on -- were correlated to the base
3 map first or was the GPS data correlated to the base
4 map first?
5 A. As I understand it, it was -- both the GPS
6 information and the photographic measurements were
7 used in conjunction with each other to formulate the
8 map.
9 Q. How does whatever equipment is correlating
10 these two divergent sets of data, how does it adjust
11 for any differences that may exist between the aerial
12 map and the GPS data?
13 A. If there were any differences in that data
14 then those differences were analyzed, evaluated and a
15 judgment call was made as to which data was deemed
16 most representative of the particular area.
17 Q. And who did that evaluation?
18 A. Dr. Joe Burch.
19 Q. Do you know if any such divergences
20 occurred in the data between one set and the other?
21 A. No.
22 Q. No, you don't know or no, there weren't
23 any?
24 A. No, I don't know.
25 Q. What, if any, ground truthing was done
457
1 after the creation of the 1993 map to determine its
2 accuracy?
3 A. As I understand, there was some selective
4 ground truthing as the map was produced to verify the
5 accuracy of the cattail distributed and coverage
6 distributions.
7 Q. When you say some selective ground
8 truthing, can you be more specific? Do you know
9 anything about that effort?
10 A. I know that various areas were looked at.
11 I don't know how many areas and I don't know exactly
12 what areas. I just know the process that was gone
13 through.
14 Q. Who was responsible for that ground
15 truthing effort?
16 A. Dr. Joe Burch.
17 Q. Has there been a calculation made of the
18 degree of accuracy of the 1993 map?
19 A. Not within my understanding of the concept
20 of the degree of accuracy that you are using as we
21 discussed earlier this morning.
22 Q. Is there another concept of degree of
23 accuracy that you feel this map has been subjected
24 to?
25 A. I believe our information sources are base
458
1 maps. Our procedures and our existing data have been
2 looked at to determine whether or not we believe that
3 the 1993 map accurately depicts the extent and
4 coverage of cattail.
5 Q. When you say it has been looked at, who has
6 looked at it?
7 A. There is the geographic information system
8 scientists and technicians, Dr. Joe Burch, Dr. Jack
9 Hill.
10 Q. Have any of these individuals conducted a
11 formal peer review of the 1993 map?
12 A. What do you mean by formal peer review?
13 Q. What would your understanding as a
14 scientist be of the formal peer review?
15 A. Well, there is a peer review process for
16 publishing scientific articles where you submit a
17 manuscript for publication in a particular
18 periodical, and that manuscript is reviewed by the
19 editor and various other scientists that are
20 knowledgeable in the field of the subject matter of
21 the publication. And then usually comment is
22 received or suggestions are made concerning the
23 manuscript and any changes to it, and then the
24 editors of the publication openly make a
25 determination about whether to publish it or not,
459
1 whether to insist that all of the issues raised by
2 the peer reviewers be considered or some considered
3 and others deemed not to be necessary to be
4 considered.
5 They had to make that determination that
6 the paper is published. That's how I'm usually
7 associated with a formal peer review process.
8 Q. Would there be any type of a peer review
9 process of any experimentation that may have been
10 done by a particular scientist? In other words, if a
11 scientist conducted some type of survey, geographical
12 survey, is there any method by which another
13 scientist might criticize the review, the protocols
14 or the methodology that was used?
15 MR. KOBELINSKI: Just general question,
16 whether one scientist can look at another
17 scientist's work?
18 MS. STARK: Correct.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes.
20 BY MS. STARK:
21 Q. Did anybody do that type of work that you
22 did for the creation of the 1991 and the 1993 map?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. And who did that?
25 A. Dr. Jack Hill.
460
1 Q. Did Dr. Jack Hill create any reports or
2 memoranda of his review of your work?
3 A. Not to my knowledge.
4 Q. Did he report back to you after he had
5 reviewed the protocols and methodology?
6 A. He -- I would -- I don't know if I would
7 use the term report, but he did a review of
8 procedures associated with the cattail mapping and
9 provided us comments, discussion.
10 Q. At what stage of development did he provide
11 those comments? Was it after the maps were
12 completed?
13 A. We collaborated with Dr. Hill throughout
14 the development of protocols. And as the whole
15 process was going on, we have been collaborating with
16 Dr. Hill for some time on these matters in general
17 and some of the specifics of the maps have been
18 produced.
19 Q. Am I correct in my assumption that Dr. Hill
20 is not an employee of BDA?
21 A. You are correct.
22 Q. What input specifically did Dr. Hill have
23 in the creation of the 1991 and 1993 maps?
24 A. I don't recall what specific input he may
25 have had.
461
1 Q. Do you recall what areas he may have
2 provided comment or input?
3 By areas I would mean did he talk to you
4 about the aerial photography, did he talk to you
5 about your digitization or GPS, those type of general
6 broad areas specifically? What was it that he was
7 commenting on?
8 A. Essentially in the entire range of issues
9 all the way from the use of aerial photographs to
10 production of the GIS based map. I was used in
11 quality control, quality assurance function.
12 Q. Did Dr. Hill conduct any of the field work
13 for other than 1991 or 1993 maps?
14 A. I believe that he conducted certain field
15 visits for different purposes, but he did not collect
16 nor was he used in the capacity of collecting the
17 field data for the maps.
18 Q. Did any other individuals act in a similar
19 capacity to Dr. Hill in providing comments to BDA in
20 their development of these maps?
21 A. There may have been general discussions
22 with some others outside of DEA concerning matching
23 and production of the maps, but nothing beyond
24 general type discussions that I could recall.
25 Q. Did BDA seek any independent input -- by
462
1 independent, I mean someone not somehow connected to
2 the litigation -- in the development of your
3 protocols or methodology for the development of the
4 maps?
5 A. We got the input of Dr. Jack Hill. He was
6 an outside DBA type person. But other than that, no.
7 Q. Have you taken any steps to determine the
8 statistical precision of your percent cover
9 classifications in either the year 1991 or 1993 maps?
10 A. Not that I'm aware of.
11 Q. I'm about to switch areas again. It's a
12 quarter after 11. Take a break?
13 MR. KOBELINSKI: Yes.
14 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken,
15 after which the following proceedings
16 were had:)
17 BY MS. STARK:
18 Q. Doctor, I would like to ask
19 you a couple of questions about the work that was
20 done by ARAM, the firm you said from Michigan?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. I believe you mentioned that they utilized
23 Landsat?
24 A. Satellite imagery.
25 Q. Is that correct?
463
1 A. That's my recollection.
2 Q. I believe you also mentioned that they used
3 the MSS spectral scanner, multi-spectral scanner?
4 A. I don't remember indicating that. I may
5 have, but I don't remember indicating that.
6 Q. I have it in my notes. I probably wouldn't
7 have come up with that on my own.
8 In any event, are you familiar with the two
9 different sensors that are on the Landsat, satellite?
10 A. I'm familiar with the different sensors
11 there.
12 Q. Do you know what the different resolutions
13 are of those scanners or sensors?
14 A. I'm familiar with generally Landsat,
15 satellite imagery. And for clarification, I guess
16 for the record, I'm not absolutely sure which scanner
17 they use or which band on which scanners they used,
18 to my knowledge. That was not part of my
19 participation in that process.
20 Q. So you could not definitively testify
21 whether they used the MSS or the TM sensor?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did you have any involvement with ARAM
24 other than the location and, I guess, some of the
25 trips to the training stations that we talked about
464
1 earlier?
2 A. As I recall what we talked about previously
3 was basically assisting them in their field
4 investigations for their mapping effort.
5 Q. Did any of the work that you did to assist
6 ARAM end up being part of the work that you utilized
7 for any of your efforts for this litigation?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. Specifically, what task or work did you do
10 for ARAM that ended up in your work?
11 A. The reconnaissance that we conducted with
12 ARAM helped us identify where cattail might be
13 occurring. And to the extent that we gained some
14 additional knowledge of the geographic extent of
15 cattail, that was helpful to us in the development of
16 our '91 cattail map.
17 Q. On these field reconnaissance missions or
18 trips, how did you record this information that
19 helped you to identify where the cattail was
20 occurring?
21 A. Would you clarify for me what you mean by,
22 how did you record?
23 Q. Obviously, I assume you probably wrote it
24 in a field notebook. What I'm looking for is, how
25 were these locations identified on this
465
1 reconnaissance work?
2 Were you using a particular GPS or Loran
3 system?
4 A. At that time we would have been using the
5 Loran system within the helicopter that we contracted
6 with.
7 Q. And how specific was the data that you
8 collected during these field reconnaissance missions?
9 Were you at that time breaking down percentages of
10 cattail cover or were you just looking to see if
11 there was cattail at all?
12 A. We were principally looking to see if there
13 was cattail at all, and we were obviously interested
14 in, if we found it, whether there was a big area of
15 it, was it a mono specific stand or was it just some
16 standard individuals.
17 For our purposes relative to the '91 map
18 this was all what I would characterize as
19 reconnaissance type investigations.
20 Q. Preliminary investigation, so to speak?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. When was this field reconnaissance work
23 done?
24 A. The best that I can recall, it was 1991.
25 No, I believe that was 1990.
466
1 Q. Did you collect any other types of data in
2 your field reconnaissance work with ARAM that you
3 ended up using for some other project as it relates
4 to this litigation?
5 A. Not that I recall.
6 Q. Once the actual training stations were
7 located, did you do any collection at any of those
8 stations that you used for any other purposes other
9 than ARAM and their work?
10 A. Some of the places where we found cattail
11 growing ultimately became some of the areas that we
12 studied further.
13 Q. When you say once we discovered where
14 cattail were growing, are you referring to once you
15 established the training stations and you physically
16 went to those locations and you determined the
17 cattail was there?
18 A. That was several questions. We
19 investigated and tried to find with ARAM large enough
20 patches of cattail, and as I recall sawgrass or other
21 types of species to assist them in their
22 classification to assist them in their mapping
23 effort. So we would do that.
24 And then some of those areas, for instance
25 the area south of the 10 structures in WCA-2 was an
467
1 area that we identified, and we ended up going back
2 and taking additional data in that area as I
3 described yesterday. But other than that, we
4 conducted no other specific studies for ARAM.
5 Q. What would have been a margin of area of
6 cattail or sawgrass in order to be effective for
7 ARAM's purposes?
8 A. As I recall, they wanted locations that
9 were as large as we can find. I don't remember them
10 giving us any specifics that said they had to have a
11 certain acreage area for their use. I just don't
12 know.
13 We helped them find the cattail, identify
14 "Here is an area, it looks like this area is thick
15 with cattail," or whatever. Then they take that
16 information and go back and use it however they
17 deemed appropriate.
18 Q. On your '91 and '93 vegetative maps, that
19 being cattail cover, have you calculated the acreages
20 of the various classifications of cattail?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. I'm going to assume that you probably don't
23 have those numbers right off the top of your head; is
24 that correct?
25 A. That's correct.
468
1 Q. Where would I find the calculations of
2 those acreages?
3 A. I don't recall specifically any formal
4 tables or tabulations of them. There may be. I just
5 don't recall.
6 What we have done with the information and
7 geographic information system computer format, you
8 can ask for an acreage fix by identifying any of the
9 polygons or areas on there, so we have looked at
10 acreage calculations in that way at various times
11 through the last several years.
12 Q. What type of GIS processing software do you
13 use in order to get those calculations?
14 A. The GIS software that we use primarily is
15 ARC Info.
16 Q. Have you created any reports, whether or
17 not you may have placed this data in a tabular form,
18 that reference acreage of the various classifications
19 of cattail?
20 A. Not that I can recall.
21 Q. Other than the aerial photography and the
22 GPS work and the other processes that we discussed
23 this morning which went into the development of the
24 1991 and '93 maps, did you use any other remote
25 sensing techniques in the creation of those two maps?
469
1 A. To the best that I can recall, the process
2 that we discussed this morning encompasses the scope
3 of the types of procedures that we used.
4 Q. For any of the other projects that you have
5 undertaken for purposes of this litigation, have you
6 utilized any remote sensing techniques that we have
7 not discussed this morning?
8 A. Would you repeat that, please?
9 MS. STARK: Can you read it back?
10 (The question referred to was thereupon
11 read by the reporter as above recorded.)
12 THE WITNESS: If I understand your question
13 to mean have we used flying other than aerial
14 photography and field reconnaissance and field
15 study type procedures in any of the specific
16 study areas that we went over yesterday in our
17 studies and analysis, no, we haven't.
18 BY MS. STARK:
19 Q. You are correct in your understanding of
20 the question. I don't want to rehash all of the
21 methodologies that we have gone through. What I'm
22 looking for is different types of methodologies that
23 may have been used.
24 Have you used any other types of data in
25 your work either on the vegetative maps or any of the
470
1 other tasks that you told us about that you have done
2 for litigation such as radar or shuttle photography,
3 that type of data?
4 A. We have not used any radar sensing devices.
5 We do have a radar instrument, but I don't recall
6 that we specifically used it in any of the studies we
7 talked about. We may have, but we only received that
8 technology within the last year or two.
9 Q. Were there any other sources of data that
10 you might have used in the creation of the '91 and
11 '93 maps other than various things we discussed this
12 morning?
13 A. Not that I recall.
14 Q. How about for any of the other projects?
15 A. Not that I recall.
16 Q. Has anyone at law environmental reviewed or
17 looked at any of your vegetative maps or any of your
18 data?
19 A. I don't know.
20 Q. Who at BDA would know that?
21 A. I'm not sure whether anyone would or not.
22 It may be they have seen our cattail maps, but I'm
23 not sure.
24 Q. Has anyone at BDA reviewed any of
25 environmental maps or data?
471
1 A. Not to any significant degree.
2 Q. When you say not to any significant degree,
3 can you quantify that for me? Have you looked at
4 something?
5 A. I could explain it. I'm aware that Law is
6 performing some type of mapping. I have not seen the
7 maps. And that's about the extent of my knowledge of
8 it.
9 Q. Have you personally discussed methodologies
10 or protocol for developing vegetative maps with
11 anyone at Law Environmental?
12 A. No, I haven't.
13 Q. Do you know if Dr. Burch has had any such
14 discussions with anyone at Law Environmental?
15 A. He may have, but if he did they would be
16 very brief, informational kinds of discussions.
17 Q. You are not aware of any data exchanges or
18 anything between BDA and Law Environmental?
19 A. I'm not aware of any.
20 Q. So you, yourself, have not seen any data
21 from Law Environmental?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Do you know if Dr. Hill, Dr. Jack Hill, has
24 seen any of the data or maps of Law Environmental?
25 A. I don't know.
472
1 MS. STARK: I think that pretty much covers
2 the remote sensing areas that I wanted to go
3 into. I guess I will let you pick it up again.
4 As we discussed this morning, there may be
5 some other areas I might want to ask you about
6 when Paul is finished, but he is so thorough I
7 suspect they will be brief.
8 Actually, before we do that, I have one
9 more question. It's very general.
10 BY MS. STARK:
11 Q. You produced color sides to the United
12 States and we had them made into photographs which I
13 have brought a stack of them here. Were any -- was
14 any of that slide work specifically used in the
15 creation of your '91 and '93 maps or is this a
16 different effort?
17 A. I haven't looked at what slide work you are
18 referring to and I'm not sure I can answer that
19 question without reviewing that.
20 MR. KOBELINSKI: Let him look at that at
21 the lunch break.
22 MS. STARK: Okay, that would be fine. Or
23 we can do it later.
24 THE WITNESS: I'm aware that we produced
25 our 35 millimeter slide files for you all.
473
1 BY MS. STARK:
2 Q. I guess what I would be asking is in the
3 sense of you did your aerial photography, that was a
4 particular thing that you went out and did in order
5 to create the vegetative maps.
6 Did you go out and create 35 millimeter
7 slides specifically to create the vegetative map or
8 maybe there was just some overlap?
9 A. We did not take 35 millimeter slides
10 specifically for the maps, if that's your question.
11 MS. STARK: That's my question. If that's
12 the case, then I think we can probably talk
13 about those at some later time.
14 MR. KOBELINSKI: You want to start up after
15 lunch?
16 MR. NETTLETON: Yes.
17 (Thereupon, a lunch recess was taken,
18 after which the following proceedings
19 were had:)
20 MR. NETTLETON: Ready?
21 THE WITNESS: Before we go -- before we
22 start on your line of questioning, sir, I want
23 to make sure that I accurately answered a couple
24 of the questions this morning.
25 Thinking back on them, I think I did. But
474
1 just so the record is clear and I haven't
2 inaccurately answered in any way, I think you
3 were asking me had we used any additional remote
4 sensing data in our cattail mapping or in our
5 individual location studies that we discussed.
6 MS. STARK: Correct.
7 THE WITNESS: I think I answered no, we
8 hadn't.
9 MS. STARK: Yes.
10 THE WITNESS: I wasn't sure in reflecting
11 back whether you had asked a broader question
12 than that or not in terms of whether we looked
13 at any other remote sensing data.
14 BY MS. STARK:
15 Q. Okay. I had excluded that because I knew
16 that you had talked previously about reviewing
17 historical aerial photos. So no, my question did not
18 go to that type of remote sensing work. I knew that
19 you had done that. That was not included.
20 Is there another aerial data that you
21 looked at or sensing data?
22 A. I could think -- in trying to be complete
23 in my answer, I could think of a couple of other
24 satellite or remote sensing types of information that
25 I have looked at but not -- relative to the
475
1 Everglades but that I have not specifically used in
2 these particular cattail mappings.
3 I wanted to make sure if that was your
4 question I was giving you a complete answer and there
5 were a couple of other things I didn't mention if
6 that was your question. I'm just trying to make sure
7 that I'm being as complete in my answer as I can.
8 Q. Just so we covered the area completely and
9 we don't have to go back to it at some point, you
10 obviously are indicating to me at some point you have
11 looked at some remote sensing data that you may or
12 may have not looked at.
13 You want to tell me what that is?
14 A. Well, you have to bear with me. We are
15 four days and I'm just trying to make sure that I
16 have accurately answered the question and I have
17 given you all of the information, and I can think of
18 two other bits of information that we haven't talked
19 about.
20 Q. What are those?
21 A. One is that we investigated the use of an
22 airplane mounted sensor that's referred to as CASI.
23 What it is is an airplane platform digital remote
24 sensing sensor, if you will. It has been developed
25 by a particular company, and I can't recall whether
476
1 the company and the sensor's called CASI or both.
2 But it basically records spectral
3 signatures in a digital format and then you run
4 through a remote sensing type analysis on it.
5 Q. Did you obtain any data using that system
6 that you were able to utilize?
7 A. We did not use any of that data in any of
8 the maps or studies that we have been talking about
9 that we performed.
10 Q. Did you use it for any other purpose in the
11 litigation?
12 A. Our primary purpose in investigating it was
13 to determine its feasibility as a remote sensing
14 tool.
15 Q. What did you determine?
16 A. We basically determined that it was a good
17 sensor. It had good resolution. You get resolution
18 of either two meters or four meters. And if you used
19 it in any more small or confined geographic area it
20 worked well, but that you could not necessarily
21 transfer the analysis that you obtained from it in
22 one area and have it stand in another area and have
23 it be reliable.
24 That's basically what we found.
25 Q. I think I understand that. What was the
477
1 other thing that you had recalled that related to the
2 remote sensing technique?
3 A. The other is several years ago the Florida
4 Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission conducted a
5 state-wide computer mapping project whereas they
6 mapped vegetation in various categories throughout
7 the state of Florida.
8 And we have that database and we have
9 generally looked at it, but again we have not used it
10 specifically for these studies or this series of maps
11 we produced.
12 I just wanted to clarify that in case the
13 question that you asked was brought up, I just wanted
14 to be complete.
15 MS. STARK: Thank you. All right.
16 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. NETTLETON:
18 Q. Why didn't you use the Florida Game and
19 Fresh Water Fish Commission database?
20 A. We were not sure whether the resolution and
21 the categories that we used in that mapping
22 classification and with it the caveats that Game and
23 Fish placed on that database and analysis were the
24 most appropriate for the particular investigations
25 that we were concerned with.
478
1 Q. What was the time period of the Fish --
2 Game and Fish Commission's data?
3 A. It was either late '70's or perhaps early
4 '80's or a combination of both of those.
5 Q. Do you know that data was produced with
6 your production of documents and materials?
7 A. I don't believe it was. That's public
8 information.
9 Q. What categories of vegetation were Game and
10 Fish mapping?
11 A. Basically primary land use classifications
12 such as urban areas, agricultural areas, forested
13 upland to forested wetlands, herbaceous wetlands.
14 Q. Did they have any classification for
15 sawgrass, cattail or the various vegetation that
16 appears in the Everglades system?
17 A. As I recall, and I really hadn't looked at
18 that in a while, but as I recall the details to that
19 classification system are not that specific.
20 It would basically be a fresh water marsh
21 type of classification or something of that nature.
22 Q. Dr. Dennis, yesterday we went through the
23 various sites where you had collected field data,
24 most notably water depth measurements and vegetative
25 cover data.
479
1 With regard to any of those studies, were
2 you attempting to test any hypothesis when you went
3 out to collect that data?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. What was the hypothesis you were testing?
6 A. The basic hypothesis we were testing was,
7 as you recall, all of these areas we picked because
8 there was cattail growing there and we were trying to
9 test the hypothesis of whether or not the cattail was
10 growing in areas that the District or the federal
11 government had defined as nutrient enriched areas or
12 not, and whether or not the areas where the cattail
13 was growing were in areas that appeared to be
14 somewhat deeper than the surrounding areas or in some
15 instances had any elevated phosphorous levels.
16 Q. Have you or has anyone else performed any
17 statistical analysis on the data you collected in
18 these various field collection trips?
19 A. No. Will you read the question back?
20 (The question referred to was thereupon
21 read by the reporter as above recorded.)
22 THE WITNESS: Steve Millard in that one
23 paper we talked about earlier. That's the only
24 one that I'm aware of.
25 BY MR. NETTLETON:
480
1 Q. That was for area 1, right?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. And other than the Millard document that
4 was previously marked as an exhibit, has there been
5 any other statistical analysis of any of the data you
6 collected in the other areas that you described
7 yesterday?
8 A. We haven't conducted any. I'm not aware of
9 anything anybody else has conducted.
10 Q. With regard to the hypothesis whether
11 cattail was growing in areas defined as nutrient
12 enriched, what did you conclude?
13 A. That cattail was growing in areas that had
14 been identified as nutrient enriched and cattail was
15 growing in areas that had not been identified as
16 nutrient enriched.
17 Q. What did you conclude with regard to your
18 hypothesis whether cattails were growing in areas
19 that appeared to be somewhat deeper than surrounding
20 areas or that elevated phosphorous levels?
21 MR. KOBELINSKI: Object to the form of the
22 question to the extent it's two questions.
23 MR. NETTLETON: That's the way he stated
24 it, that it's two separates hypotheses.
25 THE WITNESS: I think it's two separate
481
1 questions.
2 MR. NETTLETON: I'll break it down.
3 BY MR. NETTLETON:
4 Q. What did you conclude with regard to your
5 hypothesis of whether cattails are growing in areas
6 appearing to be somewhat deeper than surrounding
7 areas?
8 A. We found that the cattails were growing
9 generally in areas where the water depths based on
10 comparison -- relative comparison with the cattail
11 growing areas and adjacent areas that cattail were
12 generally growing in deeper areas.
13 Q. What did you conclude with regard to
14 whether cattails were growing in areas -- whether
15 cattails were growing in areas that had elevated
16 phosphorous levels?
17 A. We found some areas where cattail were
18 growing in the areas with phosphorous levels that
19 were greater than surrounding or nearby areas, and we
20 found some instances where cattail was growing in
21 areas that did not have phosphorous levels that were
22 appreciably different from surrounding areas.
23 Q. And what type of exercise or calculations,
24 if any, did you perform in order to reach that
25 particular conclusion?
482
1 A. We looked at the location of the cattail
2 and available soil phosphorous data and whatever
3 depth measurements we would obtain and compared that.
4 Q. Well, you indicated there was no
5 statistical analysis performed; is that correct?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. So was this just an eyeball looking at the
8 data and reaching a conclusion based upon that as
9 opposed to any type of rigid statistical analysis or
10 calculations?
11 A. Based on reviewing the data, but without a
12 formal statistical analysis.
13 Q. Is there any reason why statistical
14 analysis was not attempted with regard to all these
15 areas other than WCA-1?
16 A. No, other than the fact that these were
17 principally field investigations where we were taking
18 field data. And in taking that field data we had not --
19 we were trying to understand the system and we were
20 trying to gather as much information over as broad an
21 area as we could and we did not set up the specific
22 sampling with statistical design in mind ahead of
23 time.
24 That would be a good follow up thing to do,
25 to go back and form more extensive statistically
483
1 based sampling. I believe I have seen proposals that
2 have been submitted to the District and got variance
3 groups to attempt to do that.
4 Q. Well, would it be fair to characterize
5 these conclusions, then, as essentially a reflection
6 of your anecdotal observations in the field?
7 A. I think it would be fair to characterize
8 them as data collected from specific locations that,
9 when compared to other existing data and databases
10 such as broader soil phosphorous studies that may
11 have been conducted, that that gives a good
12 indication of factors that are at play in determining
13 where cattail grows.
14 These were not experimental studies in a
15 rigorous sense. I believe that it's appropriate that
16 data of this type be taken and that that be compared
17 with more rigorous experimental design information
18 and combined, all of that information. Ultimately
19 the best hypothesis can be tested and confirmed or
20 rejected.
21 Q. Well, you stated this was not an
22 experimentally designed study. Am I also correct
23 that from your testimony you just gave that it was
24 also not a correlative design study?
25 A. I'm not sure what you mean by that.
484
1 Q. It was not set up with the intent to
2 perform any correlative analysis on the data?
3 A. It was, as I believe I indicated, not set
4 up and designed with a predetermined statistical
5 design in mind.
6 Q. You mentioned you looked at the soil
7 phosphorous. For these particular areas that we
8 discussed excluding area 1, the other various areas
9 that we discussed yesterday, did you look in those
10 areas at any soil phosphorous data other than that
11 which you collected during your visits?
12 A. Yes, sir.
13 Q. Whose soil data did you look at for those
14 particular areas?
15 A. We have looked at soil phosphorous data
16 that has been developed by Dr. Reddy, by Duke, by ESP
17 and by Dr. Patrick. There may be others. Those are
18 the primary ones I can recall.
19 There is certain soil phosphorous data
20 that's been produced and reported in various Water
21 Management District documents and studies. We would
22 refer and use all of that data.
23 Q. Well, did any of these sources of soil
24 phosphorous data have samples specifically in the
25 areas that you were taking water level measurements
485
1 at?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. Were any of those soil phosphorous samples
4 taken in conjunction or concurrently with your field
5 collection of data?
6 A. You are talking about these other --
7 Q. Other than area 1?
8 A. These other soil phosphorous data sets
9 other than the ones collected by BDA?
10 Q. Right.
11 THE WITNESS: Now that I clarified, would
12 you read the question back, please?
13 MR. NETTLETON: I can restate it.
14 BY MR. NETTLETON:
15 Q. Were any of the soil samples taken by Duke,
16 ESP, Reddy, Patrick or the South Florida Water
17 Management District in the areas of your study taken
18 concurrently with the time that you were taking your
19 field data?
20 A. The only one that I can recall that was
21 taken concurrently was some of ESP's data. And I
22 should have mentioned also the Florida Game and Fresh
23 Water Fish Commission in terms of the data that they
24 have taken in the holyland or that they have recorded
25 from the holyland.
486
1 Q. When you previously testified that no
2 statistical analyses have been performed on the data
3 that you collected, is that also true with regard to
4 the data you collected concerning water depth,
5 vegetation cover and the soil data collected by these
6 other sources you just identified?
7 A. That was a long question. Read it back,
8 please.
9 Q. Let me just restate it, it may be easier.
10 Was any statistical analysis performed by
11 you or anyone else to your knowledge of the data that
12 you collected, the water depth data and so forth and
13 vegetative cover in the areas we discussed, other
14 than area 1 along with any of the soil data from any
15 other source?
16 A. I think you are asking whether or not any
17 of the data that we took we gave to somebody else and
18 they analyzed it in conjunction with their own soil
19 phosphorous data. I think that's what you are
20 asking.
21 Q. Correct.
22 A. Okay. Other than the ESP stations that I
23 mentioned, I don't believe so. And as I clarified
24 one other day in these discussions I'm not referring
25 to the periphyton studies that were conducted by
487
1 Dr. Bud Smart.
2 Q. Have you or anyone else at BDA taken the
3 soil data from any of these other sources in
4 combination with the data you collected and performed
5 any statistical analysis?
6 A. Not that I recall, no.
7 Q. In your previous answer you made a
8 reference to other than ESP.
9 Has ESP performed any statistical analysis
10 on the data that you collected in either isolation or
11 in combination with any other data?
12 A. I'm not sure whether they have or not. I
13 was referring to the fact that certain of the data
14 that we discussed we took in conjunction with ESP.
15 And they would have had our data and they may have
16 conducted some statistical analysis, but I'm not
17 sure.
18 Q. Have you seen any such statistical
19 analysis?
20 A. I don't believe so.
21 Q. Have you heard about any such statistical
22 analysis?
23 A. As I sit here right now, I can't recall.
24 Q. Other than the various areas that you
25 described yesterday where you were collecting this
488
1 data which I believe you identified had cattail
2 growing, did you go to any areas of the EPA where
3 there was no cattail and collect any data?
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. Where was that?
6 A. In these areas that we talked about, we
7 would extend out of the cattail area to the adjacent
8 areas in some instances and look at those. We also
9 looked at areas where melaleuca was growing. Those
10 were not necessarily the same areas where cattail was
11 growing. So to that extent we looked at other areas
12 other than cattail areas.
13 Q. In those other areas were you collecting
14 data on vegetative cover, water depth, water quality
15 information?
16 A. We didn't collect that type of information
17 when we were investigating melaleuca. We only
18 collected that data generally, as I have already
19 recorded, adjacent to areas that were particularly
20 part of the same overall transects that might have
21 gone from the cattail area to non-cattail area.
22 There is one other exception of that and,
23 as I indicated a day or so ago, I believe, that I
24 went with Dr. John Davis on his entry and inspection
25 into the 14, 16 water quality sites within
489
1 Loxahatchee wild life refuge. And in those instances
2 there was data on the water quality and water depths.
3 Q. Was there also information taken on
4 vegetative cover?
5 A. Yes.
6 Q. Has any statistical analysis been performed
7 on that particular data?
8 MR. KOBELINSKI: Which data?
9 MR. NETTLETON: Water quality, water depth
10 and vegetative cover data that were taken during
11 your trip with John Davis to interior marsh
12 stations of the Loxahatchee.
13 THE WITNESS: We have not performed any
14 statistical analysis on that data.
15 BY MR. NETTLETON:
16 Q. Has anyone else, to your --
17 MR. KOBELINSKI: You are referring to all
18 three parameters?
19 MR. NETTLETON: Any and all in combination
20 or isolation.
21 THE WITNESS: John Davis may have conducted
22 some analysis of the water quality data.
23 BY MR. NETTLETON:
24 Q. In the study areas that you described
25 yesterday, how far beyond the cattail did you run
490
1 your transects?
2 A. It varied from study to study.
3 Q. Was there any criteria you used for the end
4 point of your transects?
5 A. The general criterion would have been to be
6 far enough outside the area where cattail was growing
7 so that we would be clearly in a different vegetation
8 association.
9 Q. And how far was that, generally?
10 A. It would have vary from individual site to
11 individual site.
12 Q. Well, if your criteria was that you would
13 be far enough out from the cattail, was there not a
14 uniform, what you considered far enough?
15 A. I understand your question. At least I
16 think I do. If the transects were a few hundred feet
17 long, then we might go 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 feet more
18 or less outside of the area where the cattail was
19 growing.
20 If the transects were miles long, then we
21 might go several thousands of feet beyond. So it
22 just depended on -- relatively on the length of the
23 original transect.
24 Q. Was there any specific quantitative
25 relative relationship between the length of the
491
1 transect within the cattail and the distance that you
2 went out beyond the cattail?
3 A. There was no magic formula that I recall
4 that was used.
5 Q. Was that the only criteria for determining
6 the end point of the transect beyond the cattail
7 areas?
8 A. That was the typical criterion in the
9 transects that were conducted in the Everglades
10 National Park as far as the entry and inspection
11 process.
12 Some of those transects were established
13 for distances clearly beyond the location of any
14 cattail. In those instances, we were going that
15 distance. In some instances, to replicate the length
16 of the transects that other investigators had
17 conducted.
18 For instance, Ron Jones conducted several
19 transects in the Park and we were going typically the
20 times and lengths of distances that he had reported.
21 And that reminds me, I guess, that when you
22 asked had we gone to any other areas that didn't have
23 cattail there were a few areas in the Park entry
24 inspection process that we had gone to that didn't
25 have cattail in them, also.
492
1 Q. Did you take soil cores from -- or
2 generally, did you take soil cores from the last
3 station in your transect, the end point?
4 A. Where we took soil cores we would typically
5 take them in representative locations along the
6 transect. In other words, what we would try to be
7 doing in taking whatever core samples we took is
8 capturing whatever variability there might have been
9 and in general capture differences within areas where
10 cattail was growing and areas that cattail was not
11 growing.
12 Q. You did not do any statistical analysis to
13 determine what that variability was?
14 A. As I stated previously, I'm not aware of
15 any statistical analyses that were performed on that
16 day.
17 Q. Did you generally take water quality
18 samples from the surface water at the last station
19 along your transects?
20 A. In going back and thinking through and
21 reviewing some of the detail on those transects we
22 discussed, I found that I think we very