1
1 DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA
2
SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE )
3 OF FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; and )
WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC., )
4 )
Petitioners, )
5 vs. )DOAH Case No. 92-3038
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 vs. )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, )
vs. )DOAH Case No. 92-3040
16 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT )
DISTRICT, an agency of the State )
17 of Florida; et al., )
Respondents. )
18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
19 100 Southeast 2nd Street
Miami, Florida
20 January 27, 1993
9:30 a.m. - 5:30 p.m.
21
22 DEPOSITION OF ROBERT JOHNSON
23
Taken before RICHARD BURSKY, Registered
24 Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for
the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of
25 Taking Deposition filed in the above cause.
2
1 APPEARANCES
2
ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS SUGAR CANE GROWERS
3 COOPERATIVE OF FLORIDA, ROTH FARMS, INC., and
WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC.
4
5 HOPPING BOYD GREEN & SAMS
123 South Calhoun Street
6 Tallahassee, Florida 32314
BY: GARY V. PERKO, ESQ.
7
8 ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS FLORIDA SUGAR CANE
LEAGUE, INC., UNITED STATES SUGAR CORP., and
9 NEW SOUTH HOPE, INC.
10
PEEPLES, EARL & BLANK, P.A.
11 One Biscayne Tower - Suite 3636
Two South Biscayne Boulevard
12 Miami, Florida 33131
BY: MARK T. KOBELINSKI, ESQ.
13
14 ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-INTERVENOR
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
15
16 THOMAS A.W. FITZGERALD, ESQ.
Assistant United States Attorney
17 155 North Miami Avenue
Suite 600
18 Miami, Florida 33130
19
PRESENT:
20
BRADLEY G. WALLER
21
22
23
24
25
3
1
INDEX
2
Witness Direct
3 ROBERT JOHNSON
4 By Mr. Kobelinski: 3
5
6 EXHIBIT PAGE DESCRIPTION
7 1 5 A document, the first page
entitled, Robert Johnson, Update of
8 Work Experience, bearing Bates
numbers 0961507 through 0961523
9
2 99 A six-page document listing
10 computer files from computer disks
11 3 235 A five-page document
entitled, Comments of the United
12 States to Florida DER on the SWIM
Plan for the Everglades, dated
13 November 19, 1990, Bates numbers ENP
0987029 through ENP 0972033
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
4
1 Thereupon --
2 ROBERT JOHNSON
3 was called as a witness and having been duly sworn,
4 was examined and testified as follows:
5 DIRECT EXAMINATION
6 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:
7 Q. Good morning, Mr. Johnson.
8 If you could would state your name and
9 address for the record.
10 A. My name is Robert Johnson. My address is
11 9952 Southwest 196th Street, Miami, Florida.
12 Q. Mr. Johnson, you have been noticed for
13 deposition in the Everglades SWIM Plan administrative
14 proceedings which I believe you are aware of, is that
15 correct?
16 A. Yes, that's correct.
17 Q. Have you ever been deposed before?
18 A. No.
19 Q. A deposition -- I believe you sat through
20 one or two during these proceedings -- a deposition
21 is an opportunity for a party to litigation or in
22 this case administrative proceedings to ask questions
23 of individuals under oath to find out what facts they
24 may know with regard to the issues involved in the
25 proceedings, and in your case since you have been
5
1 listed as an expert witness, what expert opinions
2 they may hold with regard to the issues involved in
3 the case.
4 I will be asking you a number of
5 questions, as you have seen done in these other
6 depositions you have sat through. I would ask you to
7 go ahead and respond truthfully. If you don't know
8 the answer to a question or don't remember, I don't
9 know and I don't remember are the best answers.
10 Please do not assume any facts you are not
11 aware of, and if you feel compelled to assume, please
12 state on so on the record so we are aware of that. All
13 right?
14 A. Okay.
15 Q. Also, some witnesses aren't aware of it
16 but you need to respond verbally all the time. I
17 think you noticed that at the prior depos
18 (indicating) doesn't do well nor do nods.
19 MR. KOBELINSKI: Please mark that.
20 (A document, the first page entitled,
21 Robert Johnson, Update of Work Experience, bearing
22 Bates numbers 0961507 through 0961523 was marked
23 Johnson Deposition Exhibit 1 for identification)
24 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:
25 Q. Mr. Johnson, I am showing you what has
6
1 been marked as Exhibit 1 to your deposition, which is
2 a document that I would represent to you is attached
3 to a witness disclosure filed by the United States in
4 the administrative proceedings. It is also labeled
5 as Government Exhibit 6A and 6B. That document bears
6 Bates numbers 0961507 through 0961523.
7 I ask you to take a look at that and tell
8 me if you have ever seen that before.
9 (Pause)
10 A. Yes, I have.
11 Q. What does this document comprise, sir?
12 A. The bulk of it is a federal government
13 application form, the physical sciences form 1180
14 which was the application package for, at the time,
15 for hydrology positions for the federal government.
16 Also attached to that is an update of my work
17 experience essentially from June of 1989 on. That
18 essentially updates the application form.
19 The second page is a list of recent
20 publications that I have been a senior or coauthor
21 on.
22 And, let's see, within the package is a
23 set of pages labeled Supplemental Knowledge, Skills
24 and Abilities which are the specific questions that
25 are asked as you apply for a particular position, and
7
1 you state your basic background for that. In this
2 case those were the knowledge, skills and abilities
3 for a position I applied for in I believe June of
4 1989.
5 Q. Are you referring there to Bates page
6 0961516?
7 A. That's correct, from that page through the
8 Bates number 0961519.
9 Then I believe the last page is the
10 summary of my testimony opinions.
11 Q. And we skipped a couple of pages which
12 bear Bates numbers 0961520 through 22. What would
13 those three pages comprise?
14 A. That is a supplemental list of college
15 course work that's included as part of the
16 application form, the federal government 1180
17 application form. So it is a list of my college
18 course work. I think I have one additional course
19 that may not be on the additional list.
20 Q. What course would that be?
21 A. That would be a graduate numerical methods
22 class that I took in 1991.
23 Q. Where did you take that course?
24 A. At Florida International University in the
25 civil and environmental engineering department.
8
1 And the only other change is on my
2 undergraduate courses I do have a grade for my fluid
3 mechanics courses which were listed as expected at
4 the time in 1989. So that course was completed.
5 Other than that, I think that section is correct.
6 Q. With regard to the numerical methods
7 course you took in 1991 at FIU, how many credit hours
8 was that?
9 A. It was a three credit course, graduate
10 three credit class.
11 Q. While we have some detail here, I would
12 like to just briefly go through your educational and
13 your work experience. In that regard where did you
14 receive your graduate degree, sir?
15 A. My graduate degree is from the University
16 of Virginia, from the department of environmental
17 sciences, and my area of expertise was water
18 resources.
19 Q. And your undergraduate degree?
20 A. My undergraduate degree was from James
21 Madison University and it was a bachelor's of science
22 in geology.
23 Q. When did you receive your bachelor degree,
24 sir?
25 A. In 1979.
9
1 Q. When did you receive your graduate degree?
2 A. In 1983. I would say I am also enrolled
3 in the civil engineering graduate program at Florida
4 International University.
5 Q. Is that currently, sir?
6 A. That's right.
7 Q. Was the graduate numerical methods course
8 that you took in 1991 part of the civil engineering
9 school?
10 A. Yes, that's correct.
11 Q. Have you taken any additional courses at
12 FIU with regard to civil engineering?
13 A. Yes, I have, beginning in 1986. Do you
14 want to know my undergraduate or graduate courses?
15 Q. Are those contained in what has been
16 marked as Exhibit 1 to your deposition?
17 A. Yes, sir.
18 Q. Those would be in addition to your courses
19 at University of Virginia and James Madison
20 University?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. I believe you said you started taking
23 those courses from 1986. Approximately how many
24 courses have you taken?
25 A. I think I began taking undergraduate
10
1 courses initially to build up my math skills and
2 computer science skills back in 1985 and I have taken
3 I guess four undergraduate math and computer science
4 courses and then I took approximately six graduate
5 courses at FIU to date.
6 Q. What areas are those six course in?
7 A. Almost all in civil and environmental
8 engineering, specifically water resources except for
9 one course in statistical methods and research taught
10 by the department of statistics.
11 Q. That would be a course other than that
12 graduate numerical methods course that you mentioned?
13 A. Right. This is a statistical methods
14 class.
15 Q. Have you received any additional degrees
16 other than the graduate degree from the University of
17 Virginia or the bachelor's degree from James Madison?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Are you working toward an additional
20 degree?
21 A. I enrolled at FIU primarily because it is
22 easier to take classes as an enrolled student than it
23 is as a special student. I don't know if I will ever
24 get a degree from the civil engineering department.
25 I have been waiting for a Ph.D. program to be
11
1 established either in the civil engineering program
2 or in geology. And I am hoping I can transfer my
3 credits at that time.
4 Q. Have you been enrolled in any type of
5 Ph.D. program at any of the schools we have mentioned
6 or any other schools?
7 A. No.
8 Q. With regard to your bachelor's degree at
9 James Madison University, a degree in science and
10 geology, generally what are the topics that are
11 covered in that type of program?
12 A. My geology courses, I guess I took
13 approximately 60 credit hours, so they ran the gamut
14 of courses from basic geology such as physical
15 geology, oceanography, historical geology up through
16 courses such as stratigraphy and sedimentation. I
17 did an honors thesis while at James Madison
18 University primarily in sedimentology.
19 Q. Were you just describing the geology
20 portion of that degree?
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. Or did you essentially describe the entire
23 program?
24 A. That's the bachelor of science in geology,
25 those are the major courses I had.
12
1 Q. With regard to your honors thesis in
2 sedimentology, what exactly was the more specific
3 subject of that thesis?
4 A. I looked at chemical and physical
5 decomposition of bedrock and sediments in tributary
6 streams in the Shenandoah National Park of Virginia.
7 Q. Did you work between receiving your
8 bachelor's degree and your graduate degree or did you
9 proceed directly on to your graduate program?
10 A. I took a year and worked full-time. Also
11 while I was an undergraduate I worked part time.
12 Q. Perhaps we will go through your work
13 experience in a just few moments.
14 Going on to your graduate degree in water
15 resources, could you again describe generally what
16 that degree covers?
17 A. The degree is from the department of
18 environmental science so the degree is in
19 environmental sciences but the program has four
20 disciplines.
21 Most of my course work was in hydrology.
22 The major courses I took there were dealing with
23 geomorphology and hydrology, groundwater and surface
24 water hydrology, and my masters thesis was in surface
25 water hydrology and geomorphology.
13
1 MR. KOBELINSKI: Could you read back the
2 early part of that answer.
3 (The portion referred to was
4 thereupon read by the reporter
5 as above recorded)
6 Q. What were the four disciplines?
7 A. Geology, hydrology, climatology and
8 ecology. And you can essentially get a specialty in
9 any of those four fields up through the Ph.D.
10 Q. With regard to your master's thesis in
11 surface water hydrology, could you be a bit more
12 specific as to what that covered?
13 A. I looked at extreme storm events responses
14 in river channels in the central part of Virginia.
15 Essentially I did a statistical analysis of stream
16 channel responses to an extreme rainfall event within
17 the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia. The storm
18 event was the Hurricane Camille storm of 1972. No,
19 '69, sorry.
20 Q. What courses have you had during your
21 graduate degree in biology?
22 A. Graduate biology courses would be
23 relatively limited to terrestrial ecology, I believe
24 is the only graduate course in biology that I have
25 had.
14
1 Q. What is covered in terrestrial ecology?
2 A. Essentially it is ecology of terrestrial
3 systems, anything that would not be in a submerged
4 environment.
5 Q. In that course did you study the biology
6 of wetland marshes, be they fresh water or salt
7 water?
8 A. That was one of the topics discussed.
9 Q. Do you recall how much time was devoted
10 toward that topic?
11 A. I think it was a relatively limited
12 amount, probably a couple of weeks.
13 Q. With regard to your undergraduate degree
14 at James Madison in science and geology, how many
15 courses did you have in biology in that degree?
16 A. I had approximately 30 hours of biology at
17 the undergraduate level. I started out as a biology
18 major at a previous university before transferring to
19 James Madison.
20 Q. What university was that, sir?
21 A. Christopher Newport College which is a
22 branch of William and Mary University.
23 Q. With regard to the courses you had in
24 undergraduate biology, did you continue with any of
25 those courses after you transferred to James Madison?
15
1 A. Yes, I did. I was a biology major for
2 approximately one year at James Madison.
3 Q. How many years were you at Christopher
4 Newport College?
5 A. I was there for two years.
6 Q. How many years were you at James Madison?
7 A. I was there for four years.
8 Q. With regard to the biology courses you had
9 undergraduate, did any of them deal with the
10 biological systems of wetland marshes?
11 A. Yes. I had two classes that dealt with
12 the ecology of wetland marshes. A class in general
13 ecology and a class in plant ecology.
14 Q. Were those saltwater or freshwater
15 marshes?
16 A. A combination of both.
17 Q. With regard to the general ecology course
18 that you took, approximately how much time was
19 devoted towards the ecology of wetland marshes?
20 A. Probably a few weeks.
21 Q. That would be both the freshwater and
22 saltwater?
23 A. I believe so.
24 Q. With regard to the plant ecology course
25 that you had, approximately how much time would have
16
1 been devoted to wetland marshes?
2 A. Again a few weeks.
3 Q. That would cover again both saltwater and
4 freshwater?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Subsequent to your receiving your bachelor
7 undergraduate degrees from James Madison and the
8 University of Virginia respectively have you taken
9 any additional biology courses?
10 A. No.
11 Q. With regard to the hydrology and geology
12 courses that you have taken, have any of them dealt
13 with the study of wetland, the hydrology of wetland
14 marshes?
15 A. Only as projects as part of a formal
16 course, not necessarily as lecture material.
17 Q. Would that have been in graduate or the
18 bachelor program, sir?
19 A. Graduate.
20 Q. University of Virginia?
21 A. At Florida International University right
22 now.
23 Q. Did you, just so I understand your
24 response, was it both at the University of Virginia
25 and Florida International or just the Florida
17
1 International course that you have been describing?
2 A. I believe just the Florida International
3 University courses.
4 Q. What courses at Florida International
5 University that you have taken have dealt with
6 hydrology of wetland marshes?
7 A. Advanced groundwater hydraulics and
8 special topics course called coupled surface
9 water/groundwater modeling.
10 Q. In either of those two courses have you
11 studied in particular the Everglades wetland marshes
12 or the surrounding marshes?
13 A. Yes, in both of those courses we dealt
14 with Everglades systems.
15 Q. Any other courses that you have taken
16 either at the graduate or undergraduate level that
17 have dealt with the Everglades marshes at all?
18 A. I believe a graduate course in
19 hydrogeology at the University of Virginia I did a
20 special project on, like a report, on the Everglades
21 system.
22 Q. What was the report regarding?
23 A. The groundwater conditions in the
24 Everglades, primarily looking at the aquifers that
25 underlie the system.
18
1 Q. When did you have this advanced
2 groundwater hydraulics course from FIU?
3 A. I believe it was in 1986.
4 Q. And the coupled surface water/groundwater
5 modeling course?
6 A. I believe it was the next year in 1987.
7 Q. If we could then briefly go through your
8 work history, and I believe you mentioned that you
9 were working during your undergraduate studies?
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. So perhaps that is a good place to start.
12 A. In terms of professional related work
13 experience that relates to the field of sciences I
14 worked in I believe I started working for the geology
15 department during the second year I was there so that
16 would have been 1976.
17 Q. There would be?
18 A. At the James Madison University. I
19 started as a teaching assistant and I was a teaching
20 assistant I believe for three years there.
21 Then while I was at James Madison during
22 the second year I became employed with the
23 archeological research center at the university and I
24 worked on a number of archeological research projects
25 primarily as geologist and hydrologist doing field
19
1 work, mapping of soils and river channel deposits and
2 bedrock units.
3 Q. Did any of these projects deal with
4 Florida?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Go on, if you would.
7 A. After I graduated in 1979 I spent a year
8 working for the archeological research center
9 full-time. And I left the archeological research
10 center the summer of 1980 and worked for the summer
11 in northern Maine on archeological research projects
12 there. And in the fall I enrolled at the University
13 of Virginia.
14 Then for the first two years at the
15 University of Virginia I was a teaching assistant in
16 the department.
17 Q. That would be approximately the fall of
18 1980 through the summer of 1982?
19 A. That's correct. And then in the summer of
20 1982 I started working as a research assistant for
21 the coastal research center at the university and I
22 worked for them until I graduated and took employment
23 at the national park. That would be November of
24 1983. So that was part time until approximately May
25 of 1983 and then full-time for the summer until
20
1 November of 1983. Essentially I have been at
2 Everglades National Park since November of 1983.
3 Q. The coastal research assistant, that was
4 still with the University of Virginia?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Where was that located, sir?
7 A. It is in the department of environmental
8 sciences at the university.
9 Q. Any particular area that you were
10 researching?
11 A. Coastal hydrology, coastal ecology,
12 coastal meteorology.
13 Q. Any particular projects or research that
14 was with regard to the South Florida area?
15 A. No. I take that back. We did some field
16 sampling along the Atlantic coast, I believe some of
17 the samples were in the northern part of Florida but
18 nothing in South Florida.
19 Q. I believe you stated you started with
20 Everglades National Park or the Park Service in
21 November of 1983?
22 A. That's correct.
23 Q. What was your position then?
24 A. I was a hydrologist at that time.
25 Q. Would that have been your job title?
21
1 A. Correct.
2 Q. When you started in 1983 how many
3 hydrologists were there at the Park? And when I say
4 Park, I am referring to Everglades National Park.
5 A. I believe there were five hydrologists.
6 Q. In addition to yourself?
7 A. Correct. Actually six.
8 Q. In addition to yourself?
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. Were you in a particular department within
11 the Park organization?
12 A. I was in the hydrology program and I
13 worked on the water delivery studies project.
14 Q. You mentioned hydrology program. Is that
15 a type of division within the Park?
16 A. That is within the Research Center at
17 Everglades National Park there were four major
18 programs, hydrology was one of those four programs.
19 Q. And the other three?
20 A. Would be the wildlife program, the marine
21 ecology program and the vegetation program.
22 Q. What was your particular task at the point
23 you started in November of 1983?
24 A. My original projects dealt with a lot of
25 field sampling in the Taylor Slough Basin, the
22
1 routine water level, data collection in the basin.
2 Then in 1984 we began a detailed study of
3 the effects of a particular canal drawdown
4 experiment.
5 Q. Who was your immediate supervisor with
6 regard to your initial programs dealing with field
7 sampling in Taylor Slough?
8 A. Joel Wagner.
9 Q. Who was the head of the hydrology program
10 at that time?
11 A. At that time the position was vacant.
12 Q. Was there an acting head?
13 A. Not for the first year and a half.
14 Q. You are referring to the first year and a
15 half that you worked with the Park Service?
16 A. That's correct. Sometime in 1985 Joel
17 Wagner was named as the hydrology program head.
18 Q. Who was the head of the Research Center
19 itself?
20 A. Gary Hendrix.
21 Q. When did you start your involvement in the
22 drawdown, what did you say, the C-111 drawdown?
23 A. The L-31W canal drawdown. The field work
24 began in the summer of 1984.
25 Q. For the drawdown, you mean?
23
1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. Prior to that point you had mentioned you
3 were doing field sampling in Taylor Slough and you
4 stated water level and rainfall. Were there any
5 additional type of field sampling you were doing?
6 A. I believe I did some discharge
7 measurements.
8 Q. At what structures?
9 A. Not at structures, at the Taylor Slough
10 flow section. It is the published flow section at
11 Taylor Slough near Homestead.
12 Q. In the summer of 1984 when you started
13 work on L-31W drawdown, did that halt your field
14 study activities in Taylor Slough that you referred
15 to previously?
16 A. No, the monitoring that I did in Taylor
17 Slough continued through mid-1985.
18 Q. Did that change at all from what you
19 described it as?
20 A. No. The monitoring that was done at
21 Taylor Slough was, it was every two week sampling of
22 a discontinuous network and the continuous recorders
23 through mid-1985. And at that point we discontinued
24 monitoring on many of those stations. Some of the
25 stations were continued as part of this L-31W
24
1 drawdown study.
2 Q. What was your role in the L-31W drawdown
3 study?
4 A. I was responsible for most of the field
5 elements of the project, installing groundwater
6 wells, establishing the water level recorder network,
7 performing the drawdown analyses and I was the author
8 of the final report, the primary author.
9 Q. How long did the drawdown study go?
10 A. The original study went for one year based
11 on an experimental agreement with the South Dade
12 agricultural community, and then it was extended for
13 three more years as part of the three-party agreement
14 with the Water Management District at the objection
15 of the Park Service. So the drawdown ran for a total
16 of four years.
17 Q. How long did your study go on?
18 A. Four years.
19 Q. Were you serving in the same position
20 during that entire position?
21 A. I was -- no, my position changed in 1986
22 when Mr. Wagner left Everglades National Park.
23 Q. How did your position change?
24 A. I took over as the project leader on the
25 water delivery studies project.
25
1 Q. When in 1986 was that?
2 A. I believe it was May of 1986.
3 Q. Prior to May of 1986 who was the project
4 leader of the L-31 drawdown study?
5 A. Joel Wagner.
6 Q. Was he your immediate supervisor during
7 the period then prior to May of 1986 in the drawdown
8 study?
9 A. Yes, that's correct, from when I started
10 in 1983 until he left in 1986.
11 Q. As of 1986 did that result in your taking
12 on additional responsibilities?
13 A. Yes, it did.
14 Q. How so?
15 A. The water delivery studies project is
16 responsible for tracking water deliveries to all of
17 the major drainage basins to the Park so we had
18 additional work in the Shark Slough Basin and in the
19 in the C-111 eastern panhandle basin.
20 Q. You mentioned the water delivery study.
21 Was this a project in addition to the L-31W drawdown
22 study?
23 A. The water delivery studies is a group of
24 people on a particular project area and the L-31W
25 drawdown study is one project underneath the water
26
1 delivery studies group.
2 Q. When you became project leader, was that
3 of the water delivery studies or the L-31W drawdown
4 study?
5 A. The water delivery projects.
6 Q. Was there a particular project leader of
7 the L-31 drawdown study itself?
8 A. That would also be Joel Wagner until his
9 departure in 1986.
10 Q. In 1986 you also became the project leader
11 of the L-31 drawdown study?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Were there any additional studies you
14 became project leader on?
15 A. There was additional data analysis being
16 done to track the experimental water deliver program
17 in the Shark Slough Basin that began in 1985 and I
18 took over the responsibilities on that project and in
19 1985 we also established a new monitoring project in
20 the lower C-111 basin in the eastern panhandle. And
21 I took over the project leader job on that.
22 Q. With regard to the water delivery study
23 and the various studies you said which are underneath
24 or comprise that study, what specifically was being
25 studied besides water levels and rainfall? What
27
1 exactly was the study looking at?
2 A. In the Shark Slough Basin the study was
3 look at the impacts of the experimental water
4 delivery program. Initially it was looking at the
5 comparison between the minimum delivery schedule that
6 was established in 1987 -- sorry, 1970 -- and the
7 first experiment that was referred to as the
8 flow-through test that ran from 1983 through 1985.
9 That was the first project I worked on dealing with
10 Shark Slough.
11 Following that was a project looking at
12 the current rainfall-based delivery schedule for the
13 Shark Slough Basin.
14 And then after that in 1988 we established
15 a project referred to as the hydropattern study for
16 the Shark Slough Basin. Those would all be Shark
17 Slough pattern studies.
18 Q. That is hydropattern study?
19 A. Essentially it is a project that
20 established a network of approximately 51 new
21 discontinuous water level and rainfall monitoring
22 stations throughout the Shark Slough and northern
23 Taylor Slough basins to examine spatial and temporal
24 variability of rainfall and water levels in those two
25 systems.
28
1 Q. Has that study concluded?
2 A. No. The project leader left in 1990 and
3 annual reports were completed and one publication was
4 completed but the final technical reports have not
5 been completed.
6 Q. What was your involvement in the
7 hydropattern study?
8 A. No direct involvement. At that time I was
9 already the hydrology program manager and I just had
10 the responsibility of overseeing the project. And I
11 supervised the project staff.
12 There are other hydrology projects in the
13 other basins. Do you want me to go over those?
14 Q. Yes, if you could.
15 A. In the Taylor Slough Basin in addition to
16 the L-31W drawdown study, we conducted a series of
17 groundwater tracer studies in the northern portion of
18 the basin.
19 Through assistance with cooperators at
20 Florida International University we developed a
21 surface water groundwater model for the northern
22 Taylor Slough Basin and we conducted a series of
23 studies looking at the effects of water management
24 operations on the adjacent Taylor Slough marshes.
25 And then finally in the eastern panhandle
29
1 basin we established a, essentially a baseline
2 monitoring program and we have an ongoing project to
3 look at the water budget of the lower C-111 basin.
4 And I have been involved in one way or
5 another in all those projects.
6 Q. Starting from the top with the with regard
7 to the L-31 drawdown, you already discussed it
8 briefly but what exactly were the impacts that were
9 being studied by that?
10 A. There was an experimental program
11 established to lower L-31W canal stages on October 15
12 from four and a half to three and a half feet. And
13 we were looking at the effects of the artificial
14 drawdown in the L-31W canal on the adjacent marshes.
15 Q. You had mentioned groundwater wells and
16 recorders. How exactly were you studying the effects
17 or impacts on the marshes by the drawdown?
18 A. We developed distance drawdown curves to
19 examine the spatial extent of drawdowns west of the
20 canal.
21 We developed an initial one-dimensional
22 groundwater model and then a two-dimensional
23 groundwater model to examine the spatial and temporal
24 extent of the drawdown impacts on adjacent marshes.
25 Q. Was there any type of vegetative survey
30
1 done or study of the plant biomass at all?
2 A. Not as part of our study, no.
3 Q. Was there an additional study going on at
4 the same time with regard to vegetative impacts?
5 A. No, but there had been previously
6 vegetative mapping projects in the northern Taylor
7 Slough Basin.
8 Q. What was the extent of the effect of the
9 drawdown in feet?
10 A. I believe maximum drawdowns we were able
11 to detect west of the canals extended out to our
12 furthest monitoring station which was approximately
13 12,000 feet from the canal.
14 Q. Did you make a determination that there
15 was no effect beyond that point or was that just as
16 far out as you studied?
17 A. That is the maximum extent we had
18 monitoring stations. We had established that station
19 thinking it would be a background and be unaffected
20 by the canal drawing down and we were wrong.
21 Q. What was the conclusion of your study as
22 to impact upon the adjacent marshes?
23 A. That the impact was localized to basically
24 an area of a few miles west of the canal.
25 Q. What was that impact?
31
1 A. Essentially the quantification of the
2 amount of drawdown of the wetlands adjacent to the
3 canal. We simply mapped the depth and areal extent
4 of the drawdown as well as keeping track of the
5 discharge volumes coming out of the canal.
6 Q. Other than mapping the effect, in other
7 words, the hydrological water effect, did you make
8 any study or determinations as to what the impact
9 upon the marsh vegetation was?
10 A. No.
11 Q. The next study you had mentioned was
12 groundwater tracer, I believe.
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. What was that study and during what period
15 did you participate in that?
16 A. I believe the study began in 1985, and we
17 conducted groundwater tracer studies during 1985 and
18 throughout 1986. And a report was prepared I believe
19 in either late 1986 or early 1987 by a cooperator
20 with Florida International University.
21 Q. Who was that, sir?
22 A. Dr. Robert Fennema, F E N N E M A.
23 Q. What was your role in the groundwater
24 tracer study?
25 A. I was responsible for the installation of
32
1 all of the groundwater monitoring wells. I
2 participated in the tracer injections. I was
3 involved in the groundwater sampling. And I had a
4 limited role in the laboratory analysis. And then I
5 assisted in the final report preparation and analysis
6 of the data.
7 Q. What exactly was the lab analysis that you
8 participated in?
9 A. We used three major types of tracers. We
10 used a suite of freons, fluorocarbons, we used
11 potassium bromide and we used, I believe it was like
12 a fluorescein dye. And I did some of the fluorescein
13 dye analyses and I did some of the preprocessing of
14 the freon samples prior to their analysis.
15 Q. Where was the groundwater tracer study
16 located?
17 A. The study was conducted in the northern
18 Taylor Slough marshes adjacent to the L-31W canal.
19 MR. PERKO: Did you say L-31?
20 THE WITNESS: L-31W.
21 Q. Were you the project leader with regard to
22 that study?
23 A. It was a cooperative agreement, and I was
24 the government technical representative on the
25 project.
33
1 Q. Was there any other Park representative
2 involved in that?
3 A. Technicians that worked for me.
4 Q. Was there any type of conclusion found as
5 a result of that study?
6 A. The study was designed to quantify the
7 aquifer parameters of Biscayne Aquifer underlying
8 Taylor Slough so we produced a report that documented
9 hydraulic conductivities, aquifer flow rates and
10 primarily presented a series of break-through curves
11 which document the time it took for the tracers to
12 travel a certain distance.
13 Q. Just so I understand, with regard to this
14 study were you just essentially pouring the tracers
15 on the surface and seeing how they would go into the
16 groundwater and where they would disperse or were
17 they injected into the groundwater?
18 A. They were directly injected into the
19 groundwater at a depth of approximately 3 meters.
20 Q. So your study would not have determined
21 water loss to groundwater through the aquifer in the
22 Taylor Slough area, would it?
23 A. No, not part of the tracer study.
24 Q. The third study you mentioned, the
25 groundwater surface water model, I believe that was
34
1 with regard to Taylor Slough, is that correct?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. When were you involved during that study?
4 A. I believe it was in late 1986 through late
5 1987.
6 Q. What was the purpose of that study?
7 A. The development of a model to look at the
8 effects of water management operations in the
9 adjacent canals on the Taylor Slough Basin.
10 Q. What was your involvement in that study?
11 A. I prepared much of the data analysis to be
12 input into the model. I assisted in the development
13 of the one-dimensional model and I had limited
14 involvement in the two-dimensional model except for
15 review of the final results and some of the, I
16 believe, graphical analyses and report writing.
17 Again, this was a cooperative project done
18 with a local university.
19 Q. What university was that, sir?
20 A. Florida International University.
21 Q. Anyone in particular at Florida
22 International University?
23 A. Dr. Robert Fennema was the principal
24 investigator at the university.
25 Q. Was a report prepared at the conclusion of
35
1 this study?
2 A. Yes, it was.
3 Q. When was that report produced?
4 A. I believe late 1987.
5 Q. Who was the primary author of that report?
6 A. Dr. Robert Fennema.
7 Q. Did you assist in the preparation of that
8 report?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. I believe you stated it was to study the
11 impacts of canal water management on the Taylor
12 Slough area, is that correct?
13 A. That's correct.
14 Q. Exactly what impacts were you studying?
15 A. The model was initially developed to look
16 at the effects of the L-31W drawdown study, to
17 quantify using a model what the range of effects
18 would be on the wetlands and aquifer under varying
19 canal stages in L-31W.
20 Q. Did this study at all involve a study or
21 research as to the impacts on vegetation of the water
22 management activity?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Was it similar then to, as you mentioned,
25 the L-31 drawdown study?
36
1 A. Yes. The only difference is the model was
2 used to simulate the effects of drawdowns over a
3 wider range of conditions than just under what
4 occurred during the drawdown.
5 Q. Is that model still being used by the
6 Park?
7 A. The model has been run since then to look
8 at canal operational changes not associated with the
9 L-31W drawdown.
10 Q. Is it still in use currently then?
11 A. We haven't run the model lately, no, we
12 are using different models now.
13 Q. Were you the Park representative with
14 regard to this cooperative effort?
15 A. I was the government technical
16 representative.
17 Q. Were there additional government technical
18 representatives other than technicians working
19 underneath you?
20 A. No.
21 Q. I believe the fourth study that you
22 referred to was a study of water delivery impacts on
23 the marshes in Taylor Slough, is that correct?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. During what period of time was this study
37
1 conducted?
2 A. It is sort of an ongoing project. We did
3 some initial work in 1988 and produced a report in
4 1989, and we have done followup work since then. And
5 we produced another report this month, January of
6 1993.
7 Q. Were you involved with this study for the
8 entire period 1988 through 1993, then?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Is this also a cooperative study or is
11 this something being done solely by the Park Service?
12 A. It is primarily being done by the Park
13 Service but there are people at local universities
14 that have been co-investigators on it although they
15 were never put on in the capacity of a contractor or
16 official cooperator.
17 Q. You said they were not put on a contract,
18 does that mean they were not reimbursed for the study
19 or their participation in the study?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. Who outside of the employees of the Park
22 Service participated in this water delivery impact
23 study?
24 A. In the initial report that came out in
25 1989 Dr. Robert Fennema was a principal investigator.
38
1 On the most recent report Dr. Robert Fennema and a
2 Dr. Thomas Van Lent.
3 Q. Is Dr. Fennema still associated with FIU?
4 A. No. He left the university in December of
5 1991.
6 Q. Is he associated with another university
7 at this point?
8 A. No, he is not.
9 Q. Is he employed by any organization?
10 A. He's employed by Everglades National Park.
11 Q. Did he join the Park in 1991 then?
12 A. He joined the Park in 1992.
13 Q. You also mentioned a Dr. Van Lent?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Is he associated with any university?
16 A. He is in a research associate's position
17 currently with the University of Virginia, although
18 he is detailed to Everglades National Park.
19 Q. Does that mean he spends a particular
20 percentage of his time at the Park?
21 A. He lives in South Florida and works at the
22 Park every day.
23 Q. How long has he been doing that, sir?
24 A. Since April of 1992.
25 Q. Has your role with regard to this study
39
1 been the same from 1988 through today?
2 A. Well, the involvement on the projects
3 vary.
4 Q. Perhaps you could start in 1988 and walk
5 me forward.
6 A. In 1988 we worked on a project primarily
7 to look at the effects of water management in
8 response to the draft C-111 GDM and produced a report
9 on the effects of canal management on a series of
10 long-term water level recorders in the C-111 basin.
11 Since that time the project has focused
12 more on what are the needed improvements in the
13 Taylor Slough Basin. And the most recent report
14 focuses heavily on structural and operational
15 modifications needed for the C-111 GRR which is a new
16 title of the GDM and a proposed Taylor Slough
17 demonstration project that is supposed to begin in
18 June '93.
19 Q. Do you have a particular title with regard
20 to this study, for instance, project leader?
21 A. It is not an official project in terms of
22 having a separate project leader. There is really
23 only one project leader on the water delivery studies
24 project and that's myself. There are other principal
25 investigators but not project leaders.
40
1 Q. What has been your personal involvement in
2 this water delivery impact study?
3 A. I was the senior author on the 1989 report
4 and I was the second author on the 1993 report so I
5 did much of the data analysis, report writing,
6 graphics.
7 Q. Was this a study again geared towards
8 hydrologic water level and water analysis?
9 A. That's correct.
10 There was one other study that I did not
11 mention in Taylor Slough that was a report that came
12 out in 1992 that also dealt with the effects of canal
13 water management, but it focused on the effects on
14 refugia of small fish and invertebrates in the
15 northern Taylor Slough marshes.
16 Q. With regard to this water delivery impact
17 study we have been discussing, did any portion of
18 that study focus on impacts upon vegetation?
19 A. No.
20 Q. With regard to the fifth study you just
21 mentioned, the effects of canal water management on
22 the refugia of small fish and invertebrates --
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. -- what exactly was the scope of that
25 study?
41
1 A. My involvement was to look at historical
2 water level changes related to canal operations and
3 estimate what the effects were on different sampling
4 areas that were monitored by a fisheries biologist on
5 our staff.
6 Q. Would that be a Mr. Fleming?
7 A. No, it would be William Loftus.
8 Q. Has that concluded?
9 A. Yes. And a report was submitted in April
10 of 1992.
11 Q. What was the conclusion of that report?
12 A. That the long-term lowering of canal
13 stages had caused a drainage of the adjacent marshes
14 and aquifer system leading to a loss of refugia for
15 small fish and invertebrates.
16 Q. With a negative impact upon the
17 population?
18 A. I would assume that that would be the
19 case. It is not my area of expertise but I assume
20 that would be the case.
21 Q. Was that a conclusion of the report?
22 A. I believe so, that it would have a
23 negative impact, correct.
24 Q. What portion or area of expertise on that
25 report were you contributing?
42
1 A. The hydrology portion looking at the
2 history of canal operational changes and the effects
3 on the adjacent aquifer and wetlands.
4 Q. Did you contribute to any portion of the
5 biological study on the fish and invertebrates?
6 A. Other than reviewing the document, no.
7 Q. You had mentioned a few moments ago that
8 you had become the hydrologic program manager.
9 A. That's correct.
10 Q. When was that, sir?
11 A. In April of 1988 I believe I moved into
12 the position as an acting. I served as acting for a
13 little over a year. So approximately June of 1989 I
14 believe I took over as the official hydrology program
15 manager.
16 Q. Prior to that point am I correct that your
17 position title would have been project leader of the
18 water delivery study?
19 A. Right. That would be my title at the
20 organization. I was a hydrologist in terms of my
21 personnel title though until I became the program
22 manager.
23 Q. At that point your title --
24 A. Became supervisory hydrologist. It is
25 just a difference between personnel titles and what I
43
1 am referred to at the Research Center.
2 Q. Has that changed since then?
3 A. No, I am still a supervisory hydrologist
4 at the center.
5 Q. Are you still a hydrology program manager?
6 A. After 1988 when I moved into the program
7 manager's position in an acting capacity I was
8 officially no longer the project leader on the water
9 delivery studies project. Since January of 1992 I
10 moved back out of a project leader position and I
11 became the project leader for the water delivery
12 studies project again.
13 Q. I believe you just said you moved out of
14 the project leader position and moved back --
15 A. I moved out of the program manager's
16 position. Sorry.
17 Q. That was in January of 1992?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Was there a reason for your move back to
20 the project leader of the water delivery study?
21 A. In October of 1991 the Research Center
22 went through a reorganization and we did away with
23 disciplinary programs and we went to
24 interdisciplinary programs focused on different
25 functional groupings. At that time I took over as
44
1 the program manager for ecosystem analysis and
2 modeling. And I remained in that position for
3 roughly three months. And then in January of 1992 at
4 my request I stepped down as a program manager and
5 moved back into the project leader position.
6 Q. That was program manager of ecosystem --
7 A. Ecosystem analysis and modeling is the
8 name of the program.
9 Q. Stepping back a moment to April of 1988
10 when you became the hydrology program manager, who
11 was your supervisor at that time?
12 A. That would have been the research
13 director, I believe Jim Tilmant was the research
14 director at that time.
15 Q. From April of 1988 through approximately
16 October of 1991 approximately how many people did you
17 have working for you in the hydrology program?
18 A. I believe six people worked full-time and
19 then we had outside cooperators.
20 Q. Of those six people, were those all
21 hydrologists?
22 A. I believe there were three hydrologists
23 and three technicians, although the individuals
24 varied depending on the date. Some people came and
25 other people left.
45
1 Q. For the brief period from October of 1991
2 through January of 1992 you had mentioned you were
3 the program manager of ecosystem analysis and
4 modeling.
5 A. That was from October of 1992 to
6 January -- no, that's right, you are right, it was
7 from October of 1991 to January of 1992, that's
8 correct, I was the program manager for that program.
9 Q. Who did you replace as the program manager
10 of that program?
11 A. There was no program by that title
12 previously. That was created out of the
13 reorganization.
14 Essentially what we did was we took the
15 functional groups in each discipline that did
16 long-term monitoring and data collection and put them
17 in one group, and we took all of the research people
18 in any discipline and put them in another group and
19 we took all the people dealing with resource
20 management issues and put them in another group and I
21 was put in charge of the research group.
22 Q. The research group then was the program --
23 excuse me, ecosystem analysis monitoring --
24 A. Modeling.
25 Q. Modeling, excuse me.
46
1 Could you then go through the other two
2 groups and explain to me what their titles were and
3 title of their programs?
4 A. There is a program called inventory and
5 monitoring, and their job essentially is to do
6 long-term monitoring and data collection for all of
7 the major monitoring projects in the Park.
8 There is a program called data base
9 management that maintains our long-term data bases
10 and does computer support.
11 There is the ecosystem analysis and
12 modeling program that I referred to earlier.
13 And then there is a program called, I
14 believe it is science applications that essentially
15 handles resource management activities of the center.
16 So there would be a program manager in
17 charge of each one of those programs.
18 Q. Going through this, you stated you took
19 all the researchers and they were essentially pulled
20 together in the ecosystem analysis and modeling, in
21 the inventory and monitoring, that was what, all the
22 data collectors?
23 A. Primarily the field monitoring people.
24 When I was the head of the hydrology program that
25 would be a project leader and two technicians that
47
1 were moved to that program and there would have been
2 similar positions in marine and vegetation and
3 wildlife.
4 Q. Data base management?
5 A. Is the computer support group, essentially
6 they are all computer programmers and GIS experts and
7 cartographer types.
8 Q. Science applications?
9 A. That would be all of the people who are in
10 resource management specialist positions for the Park
11 Service such as wildlife resource manager, marine
12 resource manager. All of our hands-on resource
13 management projects like exotic plant control are
14 handled in that group.
15 We have a position that was put in there
16 for the water quality specialist.
17 Q. Are these still the same programs you have
18 ongoing today, the same organization?
19 A. That's correct.
20 Q. With regard to service applications, are
21 there researchers or research programs being worked
22 on by service applications?
23 A. Science applications.
24 Q. I am sorry, science applications.
25 A. It is primarily not research, it is
48
1 short-term assessments or direct manipulation of
2 resources in the Park such as control of exotics,
3 keeping track of fisheries harvests, as compared to
4 more long-term research projects that deal with
5 understanding the ecology or hydrology of the system.
6 Q. You had mentioned a position was made for
7 a water quality specialist?
8 A. Yes. When the hydrology program -- during
9 the restructuring, the hydrology program had a water
10 quality project leader position in it and when we
11 went through the reorganization that position was
12 moved to science applications.
13 Q. When you joined the Park in 1983 was there
14 a water quality specialist in the hydrology program?
15 A. There wasn't by that title but there were
16 three professional positions that all dealt with
17 water quality.
18 Q. And that would be three of the seven
19 hydrologists that you referred to or are those
20 additional individuals?
21 A. Those would be two of them are additional
22 individuals other than the ones that I mentioned that
23 worked for me when I became the program manager.
24 Two of the people had left by the time I
25 took over the program.
49
1 Q. I am referring back to 1983 when you first
2 joined the Park as a hydrologist, was there a water
3 quality specialist at that point in the hydrology
4 program?
5 A. There were three hydrologists working on
6 water quality projects.
7 Q. Who were those these?
8 A. Mark Flora, Dave Walker and Dan Scheidt.
9 Q. When you became the hydrology program
10 manager you mentioned you also had three water
11 quality specialists working underneath you?
12 A. No. We had only one water quality
13 specialist working at that time.
14 Q. Who was that?
15 A. Dan Scheidt.
16 Q. Did that change occur during the period of
17 time you were the hydrology program manager?
18 A. Yes, we went to having no water quality
19 expertise --
20 Q. At what point was that?
21 A. I believe Dan left in 1991.
22 Q. When in 1991?
23 A. I don't recall the exact date.
24 Q. Prior to the October '91 reorganization?
25 A. Yes. Just prior to the August of '91
50
1 settlement agreement.
2 Q. And during the period that you were the
3 program manager of ecosystem analysis and modeling
4 did you have water quality specialists working
5 underneath you at that time?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Who was your supervisor during the period
8 from October of 1991 through January of 1992 when you
9 were the program manager of ecosystem analysis and
10 modeling?
11 A. That would have been the research
12 director, Mike Soukup.
13 Q. You were only the program manager of the
14 ecosystem analysis and modeling for three months?
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. Did you participate in any particular
17 studies or research?
18 A. The water delivery studies projects that I
19 had been involved with previously continued during
20 that period.
21 Q. And they were within that program?
22 A. Yes.
23 Q. Are you still within that program then?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. But as a project leader at this point?
51
1 A. That's correct. I am in a weird position
2 because I supervise several project leaders, I am not
3 a program manager but I am not really the project
4 leader, but, yes officially I am a project leader.
5 Q. Who replaced you as the project manager?
6 A. Dr. Thomas Armentano.
7 A. Dr. Thomas Armentano.
8 Q. Could you spell the last name?
9 A. A R M E N T A N O.
10 Q. Prior to being sidetracked on some of the
11 changes within the reorganization we were going
12 through the studies you had participated in with
13 regard to Taylor Slough. We had gone through five of
14 those studies. Does that cover all the studies that
15 you had participated in with regard to the Taylor
16 Slough?
17 A. I believe so.
18 Q. With regard to the Shark River Slough,
19 have you also participated in studies there?
20 A. Yes, I have.
21 Q. If you could go ahead and list those
22 studies that you have participated in since 1983 when
23 you joined the Park Service?
24 A. I had minor involvement on a study done to
25 look at the distribution of flow through the S-12
52
1 structures, primarily just reviewing documents.
2 I was a principal investigator on a
3 project to examine the impacts of the minimum
4 delivery schedule and the flow-through experiment in
5 the Shark Slough Basin and I was the principal
6 investigator on the project to project the effects of
7 the current rainfall based delivery formula.
8 Q. Anything else, any other studies?
9 A. I helped to set up the hydropattern study
10 for Shark Slough, although I wasn't a principal
11 investigator.
12 I believe that's all of them.
13 Q. Outside the Taylor Slough and the Shark
14 River Slough which we have both covered, what
15 additional studies have you participated in during
16 your time with the Park Service, in other words from
17 essentially 1983 forward?
18 A. I have worked on a project in the lower
19 C-111 basin looking at the impacts of water
20 management on the eastern panhandle wetlands, and
21 done essentially a water budget study of the lower
22 C-111 canal system.
23 Then I have done a couple of projects or a
24 couple of reports on projects that were independent
25 of my work in terms of assigned responsibilities.
53
1 One was a review of water management
2 changes in the Everglades system from 1940 through
3 roughly 1990, and another one was --
4 Q. That was 1940 through 1990?
5 A. That's correct. And another was a report
6 on the impacts of the major alternatives for the
7 modified water deliveries general design memorandum.
8 And then I am doing work on the use of the
9 natural system simulation model to examine hydrologic
10 changes in the Everglades basin.
11 Q. Anything else?
12 A. Can I look at my list of publications?
13 Q. Yes.
14 (Pause)
15 A. I have done some minor work on water
16 allocation studies in the Everglades that came out in
17 a publication in 1992, and then I am anticipating
18 some followup work on that during 1993.
19 Q. If we could as we did previously, just
20 very briefly going back to the Shark River Slough
21 studies, although you provided a bit of insight, let
22 me see if I need any additional information.
23 With regard to your inventory study of the
24 distribution of flows through the S-12s, you say you
25 had a minor role in that?
54
1 A. I just reviewed documents.
2 Q. What was the purpose of that study?
3 A. It was to examine the water distribution
4 patterns as water passes southward from the L-29
5 canal through the S-12s and into Everglades National
6 Park, either directly through the structures, through
7 the gaps under the old Tamiami Trail or down L-67
8 extension canal.
9 Q. Was there a project leader or study leader
10 with regard to that study?
11 A. I believe the project leader would have
12 been David Sikkema, and then there were two
13 hydrologists that worked on those projects, three
14 hydrologists that worked on those projects.
15 Those were projects that were going on
16 while I was working in Taylor Slough so I didn't have
17 a direct involvement on the projects.
18 Q. Were you involved in the drafting of any
19 report with regard to the S-12 flow study?
20 A. No.
21 Q. During what period was that flow study
22 conducted?
23 A. 1980 -- I believe the study itself started
24 in 1982 and ran through late 1983, and then
25 continuation studies ran through 1984 and I believe
55
1 they were completed by the end of September 1984, the
2 start of the fiscal year.
3 Q. You say you were the principal
4 investigator of impacts of the minimum delivery and
5 flow-through schedules.
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. What does principal investigator mean?
8 A. It usually means you are the senior author
9 of the final report, that you designed and carried
10 out most of the design, analysis and report writing
11 functions. In this particular case I designed the
12 study, I performed most of the analysis and someone
13 else was responsible for writing up the final report.
14 Q. Who did write up the final report?
15 A. David Sikkema.
16 Q. During what period did that study proceed?
17 A. I believe it began in 1985 and ended
18 somewhere in 1987.
19 Q. When was the report finalized?
20 A. I would have to look at the date on the
21 report. Finalized, it has not ever been finalized.
22 It came out as a draft report and I don't believe it
23 has ever been released as a technical report. As far
24 as it went it was a draft report.
25 Q. Is there an intent to release it as
56
1 technical report publication?
2 A. I don't know if anyone will go back and
3 release that document itself as a technical report.
4 Parts of the work on that document will more than
5 likely come out in future documents done by the Park.
6 Q. What was the purpose of the study of
7 minimum delivery and the flow-through schedules?
8 A. It was essentially to document the
9 hydrologic impacts of the minimum delivery schedule
10 on the Shark Slough Basin and make recommendations to
11 future water management operational changes for
12 deliveries to Shark Slough, and to document what
13 happened under the two years of the flow-through
14 experiment.
15 Q. When you say what happened, are you again
16 referring hydrologically?
17 A. Hydrologic changes, changes in water
18 depths, hydroperiods, spatial and temporal extent of
19 flooding.
20 Q. Did that study involve at all a vegetative
21 change or vegetative impacts?
22 A. No.
23 Q. Did Dr. Sikkema -- is it Dr. Sikkema?
24 A. No.
25 Q. Did David Sikkema assist you in that study
57
1 other than drafting the report?
2 A. He was a co-investigator throughout the
3 study and then I was transferred off that on to
4 another project and he was responsible for finalizing
5 the report.
6 Q. What was the other project you transferred
7 to?
8 A. I believe I came back to do the final
9 report on the L-31W drawdown study.
10 Q. The next study you mentioned with regard
11 to the Shark River Slough was the impacts of rainfall
12 based delivery schedule and I believe you mentioned
13 you were the principal investigator with regard to
14 that study.
15 A. That's correct.
16 Q. What was the purpose of that study, sir?
17 A. Again, to document the hydrologic changes
18 that occurred in the Shark Slough Basin in response
19 to the initiation of the rainfall based delivery
20 formula and to focus specifically on the impacts of
21 redistribution of flow in the northeast Shark Slough.
22 Q. The redistribution of flows, are you
23 referring to the proposed redistribution under the
24 modified water delivery GDM?
25 A. No. The current redistribution that has
58
1 been in effect since 1985 under the rainfall based
2 delivery.
3 Q. During what period was this study being
4 conducted?
5 A. Essentially the project began, data
6 analysis and data collection began in 1985 when we
7 started on the new delivery formula and it has been
8 ongoing since the beginning of the formula.
9 Q. Have you published any reports as yet?
10 A. No. The annual report describing most of
11 the data analysis for the first either six or seven
12 years has been completed. Other than that, no final
13 technical reports have come out.
14 Q. Any draft reports other than the annual
15 reports you referred to?
16 A. Not done by the Park, no.
17 Q. Done by others?
18 A. Done by the Water Management District.
19 Q. Was that a cooperative study?
20 A. No, not directly. We assisted in data
21 collection but we had no real responsibility in
22 report writing other than reviewing of documents.
23 Q. So the project, this particular study you
24 are referring to was essentially supervised by the
25 Water Management District?
59
1 A. No. The Water Management District did a
2 study of a 30 day field test in 1984, a 90 day field
3 test in 1984 and the first two years of the
4 experimental water delivery program. And then they
5 stopped doing an analysis on that.
6 What we did was, we have been analyzing
7 the entire seven plus years of the current rainfall
8 formula. So we have picked up from essentially with
9 the start of their two year reporting and continued
10 analyses onward.
11 Q. Does this study again focus on the
12 hydrologic impacts upon Shark River Slough?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Does the study include any vegetative
15 impacts or vegetative studies?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Who else is working with you on that
18 study?
19 A. Sue Von Hatten, Dr. David Moon and a
20 Gordon Anderson.
21 MR. PERKO: Could you repeat that?
22 THE WITNESS: Sue Von Hatten, Gordon --
23 MR. PERKO: Just the last one.
24 THE WITNESS: Gordon Anderson.
25 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:
60
1 Q. Are those all with the Park Service?
2 A. Dr. Moon has left the Park Service. Sue
3 Von Hatten is on maternity leave and Gordon Anderson
4 is still at the Park.
5 Q. What are their particular specialties?
6 A. Dr. Moon was brought in to do the spatial
7 and temporal analysis of hydropatterns, and Gordon
8 Anderson was brought in based on his surveying and
9 GIS skills. And Sue Von Hatten does primarily
10 graphics and statistical analysis on hydrology
11 projects.
12 Q. Is it intended that there will be a final
13 technical publication or final report from this
14 study?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. Is there a projected day as to when that
17 will be completed?
18 A. I am hoping it will be in 1993, probably
19 late 1993.
20 Q. Will you be the principal author of that,
21 sir?
22 A. Yes, I will.
23 Q. The final study you mentioned with regard
24 to the Shark River Slough was that you helped set up
25 a hydropattern study?
61
1 A. That's correct.
2 Q. What does that consist of?
3 A. That was the project I was just referring
4 to that David Moon was the principal investigator on
5 and it is an analysis of spatial and temporal
6 patterns of rainfall and water levels in hydroperiods
7 within the Shark Slough and northern Taylor Slough
8 Basins.
9 Q. Is that study complete?
10 A. No.
11 Q. What was the period of time that that
12 study was conducted?
13 A. It began in 1988 and ran through 1991.
14 Q. Is that when Dr. Moon left the Park
15 Service?
16 A. He left in late 1990, I believe.
17 Q. Is there any intent to continue on with
18 that study?
19 A. I am trying to convince the new project
20 leader to take over and finish up the project.
21 Q. That is, you are attempting to convince --
22 A. It would be Dr. Thomas Van Lent.
23 Q. Why was that study halted?
24 A. Because the project leader left.
25 Q. Dr. Moon?
62
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. Who did Dr. Moon have assist him with that
3 project?
4 A. Gordon Anderson and then a large number of
5 volunteers and VIPs to do the field work. VIPs are
6 volunteers in park, it is sort of an official
7 category of people who come into parks that are
8 provided a small stipend and housing, usually.
9 Q. Did that study at all include a vegetative
10 impact analysis?
11 A. I don't believe as part of that study, but
12 there were vegetation mapping studies being done in
13 conjunction with the hydropattern study.
14 Q. Were those also being conducted by Dr.
15 Moon?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Who was doing the vegetative mapping?
18 A. I believe it was initially work that Lance
19 Gunderson and John Stenberg was involved with, and I
20 am not sure if anything ever, any final reports came
21 out on that?
22 A. Essentially the hydropattern study was
23 part of an overall project consisting of vegetation
24 and soils and topography and hydrology studies all
25 being done.
63
1 Q. Did that have a title?
2 A. I don't know what the individual titles
3 for particular parts were but the hydropattern study
4 which was the only part I was involved with dealt
5 with elevations and hydrologic patterns.
6 Q. Did you mention the overall study? Does
7 that overall project have a name or study have a
8 name?
9 A. Not that I know of. Essentially
10 evaluation of the experimental water delivery program
11 for the Shark Slough Basin.
12 Q. What is the geographical extent of the
13 hydropattern study?
14 A. It covered all of the freshwater marshes
15 in Shark Slough, essentially from Tamiami Trail
16 southward and westward until you reach the mangrove
17 fringe and all of northern Taylor Slough down to the
18 main park road which would be Route 9336, essentially
19 all the area where the original topographic surveying
20 had been done.
21 Q. I believe that covered all the studies
22 that you participated in with regard to Shark River
23 Slough?
24 A. Except for analysis of the alternatives
25 for the modified water delivery project.
64
1 Q. Which you mentioned as one of the other
2 studies you had been involved in. Do you --
3 A. It is a project specifically on Shark
4 Slough.
5 Q. What is the purpose of the modified GDM
6 study, modified water delivery GDM study?
7 A. The project that I did was to look at
8 hydrologic effects of a series of proposed
9 alternatives for the Shark Slough Basin.
10 Q. What period of time has that study been
11 ongoing?
12 A. I believe my work started in the summer of
13 1989 and I completed most of my reports by late 1990.
14 Q. And the overall modified water delivery
15 GDM study itself, what period has that been ongoing?
16 A. The studies have been, I believe the first
17 proposed structural modifications would go back to
18 1983 for the Shark Slough Basin, immediately after
19 the original environmental impact study was done on
20 Shark Slough. That was when the Park, Water
21 Management District and the Corps first started
22 looking at modified water delivery and the time when
23 the experimental water delivery program was
24 authorized by Congress so our studies started in
25 1983.
65
1 Q. Was there a formal modified water delivery
2 GDM study, though?
3 A. Yes, that was the report that came out in
4 June of 1990.
5 Q. Did you assist in drafting that report?
6 A. Yes. I wrote all of the hydrology
7 components and I was the, one of the two editors of
8 the document.
9 Q. Did your participation in that study
10 involve any type of vegetative studies?
11 A. No.
12 Q. Or vegetative impacts resulting from the
13 modified water delivery?
14 A. No.
15 Q. You then listed for me six and one of
16 which was this modified water delivery GDM which we
17 have now discussed and with regard to Shark River
18 Slough, but you then listed five additional studies
19 that you have been involved with, the first of which
20 was the lower C-111 basin study.
21 A. That's correct.
22 Q. What was the purpose of that study, sir?
23 A. To look at the impacts of canal discharges
24 on the hydrology of the eastern panhandle basin and
25 to a limited extent the salinity of the near shore
66
1 basin of North Florida Bay.
2 MR. KOBELINSKI: Can you repeat that
3 answer?
4 (The question referred to was
5 thereupon read by the reporter
6 as above recorded)
7 Q. During what period has that study been
8 ongoing?
9 A. It was established in 1985 and the project
10 will continue for several more years.
11 Q. What is your role in that study?
12 A. I am a co-investigator along with Dr.
13 Robert Fennema on a joint project between the
14 District, in this case the South Florida Water
15 Management District, and Everglades National Park, as
16 part of the impact assessment for the C-111 interim
17 project. And then we had a previous project ongoing
18 with the District prior to that to look at the
19 development of a water budget for the lower part of
20 the C-111 canal system.
21 Q. With regard to the lower C-111 basin study
22 that we have been referring to, were you involved
23 from 1985 to present?
24 A. Not on a continuous basis, but, yes, I was
25 involved.
67
1 Q. What aspects of the study have you been
2 involved in?
3 A. I installed most of the original
4 monitoring network in 1985. In 1988 we began our
5 first major research effort out there with a joint
6 funded project between the Park Service and the
7 District. And I was a principal investigator along
8 with Dr. Robert Fennema on that project.
9 Q. What specific impacts were you looking at,
10 again, similar to the prior with the impacts on the
11 hydrology, water levels, et cetera?
12 A. Impacts on hydrology, meaning water
13 levels, hydroperiod, length of inundation and also
14 minor impacts on salinities in the downstream basin.
15 Q. Did this study include any type of
16 analysis or study of vegetative impacts?
17 A. No.
18 I would like to take a break somewhere
19 around now.
20 Q. Sure. As I am sure you heard us before in
21 other depositions, any time you want to take a break,
22 give a shout and we will accommodate you.
23 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken,
24 after which the following proceedings
25 were had)
68
1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:
2 Q. Mr. Johnson, I believe where we left off,
3 you had just given a somewhat brief mention of the
4 water budget study of the C-111 canal system, is that
5 correct?
6 A. That's correct.
7 Q. During what period was this water budget
8 study?
9 A. The project began in I believe October of
10 1988 and it continues through sometime in 1994.
11 Q. To present at this point?
12 A. Right, to present.
13 Q. What is your participation in that study?
14 A. I am one of the principal investigators on
15 the project along with Dr. Robert Fennema.
16 Q. Have you developed a water budget for the
17 C-111 canal system as yet?
18 A. We have developed budgets for limited
19 periods of time when we had flow measurements.
20 Q. Is there a reason why you do not have flow
21 measurements for all the periods of time that you
22 have been looking?
23 A. The published record for the structures in
24 the lower C-111 canal is inadequate for doing a
25 continuous water budget or at least it has been until
69
1 recently.
2 Q. What is the purpose of the study,
3 preparing the water budget?
4 A. Essentially to document the distribution
5 of flows out of the lower C-111 canal system of the
6 water that passes through the upstream structure, how
7 much of it goes into the marshes and where.
8 Q. Have you prepared any draft reports?
9 A. We have prepared I believe three major
10 reports, all as portions of the contract requirements
11 with the Water Management District.
12 Q. Is this something you are doing on behalf
13 of the Water Management District?
14 A. It is a jointly funded project with the
15 Water Management District. Basically it is part of
16 the permitting requirements for the C-111 interim
17 project.
18 Q. Who are you working with at the District
19 on this?
20 A. It has changed over the years. Currently
21 it is Dr. Janet Ley.
22 Q. You had mentioned several times previously
23 a Dr. David Moon and I believe you said he left in
24 late 1990. When did he join the Park Service?
25 A. I believe 1988.
70
1 Q. Did he come from a particular university?
2 A. He came from Harvard.
3 Q. Do you know where he is employed now?
4 A. He has been traveling in Europe and South
5 America and I believe he is currently employed in
6 Germany, but I am not sure.
7 MR. KOBELINSKI: Off the record.
8 (Discussion off the record)
9 MR. KOBELINSKI: On the record.
10 BY MR. KOBELINSKI:
11 Q. Did you prepare a water budget model, a
12 computer water budget model for the C-111 study?
13 A. There is a model being prepared.
14 Q. Had you participated in that?
15 A. Dr. Robert Fennema is the modeler on the
16 project. I am assisting.
17 Q. What is the status of that model?
18 A. Essentially the work is primarily using
19 the one-dimensional version of the South Florida
20 Water Management Model and the primary effort is to
21 use the natural system version of that model and
22 include the single C-111 canal and then incorporate
23 the historical discharge record and see if we can
24 reproduce the historical patterns of water depths and
25 hydroperiods.
71
1 Q. Have you been successful to date with any
2 degree of accuracy?
3 A. I don't know the current status. I don't
4 believe any simulations have been run on it yet. He
5 is still in the process of fitting the canal system
6 and historical flows to the Natural System Model.
7 Q. Drawing your attention back a moment to
8 what has been marked as Exhibit 1, does that include
9 a complete bibliography of your papers or studies
10 that you have drafted?
11 A. No. The list of publications I believe
12 here starts in 1990. So there are a number of
13 publications prior to 1990.
14 Q. Do you have a complete bibliography?
15 A. I have never sat down and developed one,
16 no.
17 Q. Do you have a bibliography which includes
18 reports and papers that precede the ones contained on
19 Exhibit 1?
20 A. No, I never sat down and prepared one.
21 Q. So this is then the only bibliography that
22 you have?
23 A. That's correct, although the list of
24 publications prior to 1990 would not be very long.
25 MR. FITZGERALD: One second.
72
1 (The witness and his counsel confer off
2 the record)
3 A. I had provided as part of the duces tecum
4 a folder of I believe all of my major publications
5 since working with the Park Service.
6 Q. The folder then that you provided had
7 everything that you did?
8 A. I believe so, except for some documents
9 that were provided as part of the modified water
10 delivery GDM which was a separate disclosure done I
11 believe in response to the April '92 FOIA. There
12 were one or two publications in there but all the
13 publications would be in here except for quarterly
14 reports or something like that that were responsive
15 to the District on certain projects, but all the
16 major annual reports and publications would be in
17 that folder.
18 Q. Just to finish off the studies that you
19 had told us, you also stated you were involved in a
20 review of the water management changes, is that the
21 Everglades National Park or Everglades in general
22 from 1940 through 1990?
23 A. That would be the efforts in general.
24 Q. During what period of time has this study
25 been ongoing?
73
1 A. I began work on that in 1990 as part of
2 the Everglades Symposium and I am still doing some of
3 the data analysis and report writing.
4 Q. This is a Park project, though, is that
5 correct?
6 A. No. It is a Park project in that I am a
7 Park employee and I am working on it. It is not an
8 assigned project to me. It is something I am
9 primarily doing on my own time as is most of my
10 research.
11 Q. What is the purpose of the review of the
12 water management changes?
13 A. Simply to document the changes in the
14 hydrology of the Everglades Protection Area since the
15 1940s, essentially it is a review of the flow history
16 and water level, water depth variations in the Water
17 Conservation Areas, Everglades National Park and then
18 some peripheral wetlands.
19 Q. When do you anticipate completing this
20 review?
21 A. It was supposed to be completed by the end
22 of February '93, but I don't anticipate getting it
23 completed by that date.
24 Q. When do you now anticipate having it
25 complete?
74
1 A. Sometime during the summer of 1993.
2 Q. As part of this review are you also
3 reviewing any type of vegetative patterns or
4 vegetative studies?
5 A. No.
6 Q. The next to last study you mentioned was a
7 hydrologic changes in the Everglades basin using the,
8 I believe it is the District's natural system
9 simulation model.
10 A. That's correct.
11 Q. What is the purpose of this study?
12 A. To document the changes in the hydrology
13 of the system between pre- and post-water management
14 eras.
15 Q. Is this a Park study?
16 A. Yes.
17 Q. What is the period of time that this study
18 has been ongoing?
19 A. We began work on the project in 1990.
20 Q. Is it ongoing at this time?
21 A. Yes, it is.
22 Q. Who is working with you on that project?
23 A. The principal investigator is Dr. Robert
24 Fennema, Dr. Thomas Van Lent is assisting on the
25 project as well as several people from the Water
75
1 Management District.
2 Q. Dr. Van --
3 A. Dr. Thomas Van Lent.
4 Q. Could you spell that?
5 A. V A N, cap L E N T.
6 Q. The Everglades basin you referred to, what
7 comprised the Everglades basin?
8 A. Essentially the area covered by the South
9 Florida Water Management District Model under the
10 natural system scenario, essentially extends from
11 Lake Okeechobee southward and goes to the Atlantic
12 coast on the east and goes roughly to the extension
13 of Route 29 on the west up to the Caloosahatchee
14 River and southward down to the mangrove fringe along
15 Florida Bay and Whitewater Bay.
16 Q. Are you actually assisting in developing a
17 model?
18 A. I am primarily working with compiling the
19 data and assisting with analysis of the model output.
20 I am not doing any of the modeling.
21 Q. Is the purpose of this particular study to
22 improve the NSM model, the Natural System Model?
23 A. That's correct, improve the Natural System
24 Model and allow it to be more user friendly for
25 applications.
76
1 Q. Is there a projected period of time that
2 this study or this improvement is intended to be
3 complete?
4 A. April of 1993.
5 Q. I gather from your testimony you work a
6 fair amount with Dr. Fennema?
7 A. That is correct.
8 Q. Is he in a supervisory position or just at
9 the same level as you?
10 A. He works under me.
11 Q. The final study you mentioned was water
12 allocations in Everglades, I have written down 1992.
13 Could you explain a little further what that study
14 is?
15 A. Essentially what we are looking at is the
16 history of water use and water allocations in the
17 system from 1965 through 1989.
18 Q. What geographic area?
19 A. Essentially from Lake Okeechobee
20 southward.
21 Q. Would it essentially be the same area that
22 is covered by the NSM model?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. During what period of time has that study
25 been ongoing?
77
1 A. I think we began some work on the project
2 in 1991 and put out a brief report in 1992, and then
3 we anticipate doing most of the work during 1993.
4 Q. It is ongoing at present, then?
5 A. That's correct.
6 Q. Who is working with you on this study?
7 A. Dr. Robert Fennema, Trupti Bhatt and Fred
8 James. And I believe Dr. Thomas Van Lent will be
9 involved to some extent.
10 Q. He is not involved as yet?
11 A. No. We are not really doing much on the
12 project currently.
13 Q. What has been done to date?
14 A. The data bases have been compiled,
15 preliminary report was written in I believe May of
16 1992, some water budget analysis by sub-basins has
17 been completed, there has been a couple of
18 presentations done on some of the results, but we
19 have not started to do a detailed assessment
20 associated with the project.
21 Q. What sub-basins has the water budget
22 analysis been completed for?
23 A. The EAA, the Water Conservation Areas, the
24 Lower East Coast which would include Palm Beach,
25 Broward and Dade Counties and Everglades National
78
1 Park.
2 Q. What sub-basins still need to be
3 completed?
4 A. Those are the only sub-basins that will be
5 analyzed.
6 Q. Perhaps you misunderstood my prior
7 question. What water budget analysis for the
8 sub-basins has been completed?
9 A. We have looked at the annual water budgets
10 in all of those basins and we are starting to look at
11 or we will be starting to look at seasonal and
12 monthly variability in those four sub-basins.
13 Q. With regard to the annual water budgets,
14 did you use a particular computer model for this?
15 A. No, it is simply spreadsheet calculations.
16 Some of the analysis that is used for the water
17 budgets is a result of what comes out of the South
18 Florida Water Management District Model, particularly
19 parameters such as evapotranspiration, rainfall
20 inputs, groundwater seepage, those numbers would come
21 out of the South Florida Water Management District
22 Model. Most of the other parameters are the
23 historical flows going to the basins and the
24 historical rainfall.
25 Q. Who authored the preliminary report in May
79
1 of 1992?
2 A. I was the senior author and Robert Fennema
3 and Trupti Bhatt were coauthors.
4 Q. Did that report include the water budgets,
5 the annual water budgets for the four basins you
6 mentioned?
7 A. Yes. I should say it is not the, the
8 report doesn't include the complete water budget.
9 What it does is compares inflows and outflows in each
10 of those basins over the period from 1965 to 1989.
11 So it doesn't account for all the changes in storage.
12 Q. Did your annual water budgets that you
13 stated were complete account for changes in storage?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. Are they put together in any particular
16 report?
17 A. No.
18 Q. Who is doing the modeling for this
19 particular study?
20 A. Some of it is, has been done by staff at
21 the Water Management District. Most of the
22 additional work would be done by Dr. Robert Fennema.
23 Q. Who at the Water Management District?
24 A. The people that have been involved with it
25 so far are Calvin Neidrauer, Jayantha Obeysekera.
80
1 Those are the primary people at the District.
2 We have also gotten some assistance on
3 data bases from Lehar Brion and Randy Van Zee, I
4 believe. And those I believe are the major people at
5 the District who have been providing us data for the
6 study.
7 Q. Mr. Brion and Van Zee are also at the
8 District?
9 A. Yes, in different departments.
10 Q. You mentioned a few moments ago, I believe
11 you said most, but you say you do other research
12 outside of your employment activities for the Park,
13 is that correct?
14 A. I won't say it is outside of my employment
15 activities, it is outside of the time that the agency
16 pays me.
17 Q. Does this research, is it basically with
18 regard to the various studies we have already
19 discussed or is it in addition to that?
20 A. Several of the studies that were done are
21 projects that I have worked on outside of normal
22 business hours.
23 Q. Let's just quickly run through them. The
24 water use in the Everglades basin 1965 to 1989, I
25 believe you mentioned that is actually a Park study,
81
1 is that correct?
2 A. That's correct.
3 Q. The NSM hydrologic changes in the
4 Everglades Basin 19 which goes through 1989, that is
5 also a Park study, is that correct?
6 A. Right, but in both cases I have papers
7 that have come out that were not part of the original
8 project requirements.
9 Q. So those would not be Park publications?
10 A. They are not part of our technical report
11 series, they are simply publications that myself and
12 the other investigators would have put out.
13 Q. Were those included in the group of
14 reports that you provided?
15 A. In that case, both of those were included.
16 Q. Then I don't need to ask about those. The
17 review of water management changes in the Everglades
18 1940 to 1990 you actually testified is not a Park
19 study.
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. The water budget C-111 canal study, is
22 that a park study?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. The lower C-111 basin study, is that a
25 Park study?
82
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. The modified water delivery GDM study, is
3 that a Park study?
4 A. That is but I have two publications I have
5 on that that are separate from the work I did as a
6 specific Park project.
7 Q. And those were produced in that binder
8 that we referred to a few moments ago.
9 The hydropattern study you referred to, is
10 that a park study?
11 A. Yes.
12 Q. The impacts of rainfall driven delivery
13 schedule, is that a park study?
14 A. Yes.
15 Q. The minimum delivery and flow-through
16 schedule, is that a Park study?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Your review of documents with regard to
19 the S-12 flows, was that with regard to a Park study?
20 A. Yes.
21 Q. Going then to your studies related to
22 Taylor Slough, the fish study that you participated
23 in with Mr. Loftus.
24 A. That was not a Park study.
25 Q. That was not a Park study.
83
1 Is that fish study in any way related to
2 the review of water management changes in the
3 Everglades 1940 to 1990?
4 A. No.
5 A. It is related in that some of the stations
6 that were analyzed for the Taylor Slough study are
7 included in the larger water management study of the
8 Everglades.
9 Q. But the fish study was not done as part of
10 the Everglades Symposium that you referred to before,
11 was it?
12 A. No.
13 Q. The water delivery impacts on marshes in
14 Taylor Slough study, was that a Park study?
15 A. Neither one of the projects were official
16 Park projects, no, neither one of the reports.
17 Q. Was the study itself though a Park study?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. When you say they weren't Park reports,
20 are you saying they were not technical publications?
21 A. They weren't assigned tasks where we were
22 supposed to produce a final technical report. They
23 were usually spinoffs from Park research that we
24 produced an outside publication of some type that was
25 not a requirement of the project. So it doesn't mean
84
1 that they weren't done as part of a Park project.
2 Q. But the reports themselves, for instance,
3 is it considered a Park report or on Park, for
4 instance, stationery?
5 A. No.
6 Q. Then in the true sense it would be a
7 private publication?
8 A. That is correct.
9 Q. And those two reports, were they included
10 in the binder that you referred to a few minutes ago
11 that was produced?
12 A. Yes. I take that back. One of those two,
13 the most recent one in 1993 is going to come out as a
14 technical report so it would be a normal Park Service
15 work element. It was just something that was not an
16 assigned work task.
17 Q. But even though it wasn't assigned in this
18 case it will be a technical report?
19 A. It will become a technical report.
20 Q. Is there a distinction between that and
21 the other ones to you?
22 A. Not specifically that. That report came
23 out, a spinoff based on a request to me to do a
24 presentation before the governing board on the Taylor
25 Slough water management issues rel