STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATAIVE HEARINGS
Case Nos. 92-3038, 92-3039, 92-3040
_____________________________________
SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE
OF FLORIDA, a Florida Agricultural
Cooperative Marketing Association,
ROTH FARMS, INC., and
WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC.,
and
FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC. and
UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION;
and
FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE
ASSOCIATION, LEWIS POPE FARMS,
W.E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC.,
AND HUNDLEY FARMS, INC.,
Petitioners,
vs.
SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT
DISTRICT, an Agency of the State
of Florida.
and
MICCOSUKEE TRIBE OF INDIANS OF
FLORIDA, the UNITED STATES OF
AMERICA, and FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION, and
the FLORIDA WILDLIFE FEDERATION,
Intervenors.
______________________________________/
99 N.E. 4th Street, 3rd Floor
Miami, Florida
February 16, 1994, 9:00 a.m.
Deposition_of_Paul_Larsen_(Cont.) __________ __ ____ ______ _______
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
270
Taken before Joan Carol Ocker, Court Reporter in
and for the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice
of Taking Deposition filed in the above-entitled cause.
- - - - - - - - -
APPEARANCES: ____________
PEEPLES, EARL & BLANK, P.A,
BY: MARK KOBELINSKI, ESQ.,
One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3636,
Two South Biscayne Boulevard,
Miami, Florida 33131
appearing on behalf of the Petitioners.
UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE,
BY: SUSAN PONZOLI, Assistant United States Attorney,
99 N.E. 4th Street, 3rd Floor,
Miami, Florida 33132,
appearing on behalf of the Intervenors.
POPHAM HAIK SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN, LTD.,
BY: UBALDO J. PEREZ, ESQ.,
100 S.E. 2nd Street,
P.O. Box 019101,
Miami, Florida 33131,
appearing on behalf of South Florida Water
Management.
Also Present:
STEPHEN M. MACFARLANE, ESQ.,
United States Department of Justice.
ROBERT JOHNSON,
National Park Service.
- - - - - - - - -
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
271
I-N-D-E-X _ _ _ _ _
WITNESS: PAGE_ _______ ____
Paul Larsen
Examination by Ms. Ponzoli ................ 271
Examination by Mr. Perez .................. 355
EXHIBITS ________
GOVERNMENT'S: PAGE ____________ ____
Exhibit No.'s 237 and 238 (documents) ........... 271
Exhibit No.'s 239 through 247 (photographs) ..... 271
Exhibit No.'s 248 and 249 (reports) ............. 273
Exhibit No. 250 (document) ...................... 276
Exhibit No. 251 (document) ......................
Exhibit No. 252 (document) ...................... 345
Exhibit No. 253 (document) ...................... 347
- - - - - - - - -
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
272
1 Thereupon:
2 PAUL LARSEN
3 a witness, having been first duly sworn to testify in the
4 above-entitled cause, testified under oath as follows:
5 EXAMINATION
6 BY MS. PONZOLI:
7 Q. Mr. Larsen, in response to several documents that
8 you have identified over the last several days, the United
9 States would like copies of or duplicate copies of them.
10 You have produced some documents this morning. I
11 would like to have you identify them for the record and
12 then I'll either ask you questions now or this afternoon
13 about them.
14 The first group of documents involve satellite
15 imagery by Erim.
16 (Thereupon, the documents were marked for
17 identification as Government's Exhibit No.'s 237 and
18 238.)
19 (Thereupon, photographs were marked for
20 identification as Government's Exhibit No.'s 239
21 through 247.)
22 BY MS. PONZOLI:
23 Q. Mr. Larsen, I'm going to ask you to please
24 identify them. Larsen number 237.
25 A. Larsen Exhibit 237 is an executive summary
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
273
1 prepared by Erim, E-R-I-M. And it also includes maps,
2 which are based on Erim's work.
3 Q. Okay. Is it self-explanatory, the time frame for
4 this when this work was done?
5 A. It was done --
6 MR. KOBELINSKI: I can answer that, yes. I don't
7 know if Paul read that last night. I did. It
8 actually tells you the time this was done, et cetera.
9 MS. PONZOLI: That's all I'm looking for.
10 BY MS. PONZOLI:
11 Q. Let me hand you Larsen 238, Mr. Larsen, and ask
12 you what those are.
13 A. These are also lines prepared by Erim based on
14 satellite imagery, which are summarized in the exhibit.
15 MR. KOBELINSKI: 237?
16 A. I should point out this is Exhibit 238.
17 Q. I'm going to hand you a number of what I believe
18 are Erim satellite imageries. Mr. Larsen, if you would
19 read the numbers into the record and tell us, with each,
20 identify it for the record for us please?
21 A. These are Exhibit No.'s 239, 240, 241, 242, 243,
22 244, 245, and 246 and 247. These are graphics prepared by
23 Erim based on their analysis of satellite imagery.
24 Q. Do you believe that you will be relying upon any
25 of this, Mr. Larsen, in your opinions? Any of the Erim
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
274
1 work?
2 MR. KOBELINSKI: For the sake of the record,
3 objection. Asked and answered.
4 Q. And the answer was no, as I recall. I didn't
5 know, based on what you said this morning, if that answer
6 had shifted or altered.
7 MR. KOBELINSKI: Not with regard to Paul.
8 But Paul, you should be responding.
9 A. I don't anticipate using them.
10 (Thereupon, documents were marked for
11 identification as Plaintiff's Exhibit No.'s 248 and
12 249.)
13 Q. I would like to hand you Larsen 248 and 249. And
14 if you would please identify those.
15 A. Exhibit 248 is a report prepared by me providing
16 a vegetation survey in the north end of conservation area
17 2-A. And 249 is a report prepared by me showing
18 vegetation in the area north of the ten structures, the
19 S-10 structures.
20 Q. And you are not relying upon these either, Mr.
21 Larsen?
22 A. I don't anticipate to.
23 Q. I may ask you a few questions on them later
24 today, though.
25 Just to clean up the record so I don't forget
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
275
1 something as we move through the day, you have indicated
2 that you may after reading two additional sources rely
3 upon the materials in those for your opinions. Would you
4 read those two sources into the record for us, please?
5 A. The first source is a book called the Everglades,
6 the Ecosystem and Restoration, by Steve Davis and John
7 Ogden. And the second book is called Civic
8 Environmentalism, by Dewitt John (phonetic).
9 Q. You have and also produced this morning an ASCII
10 disk for the United States, which we believe that we can
11 reduplicate for the Water Management District so they will
12 have one. If there is some problem, you indicated you
13 would help us with another one.
14 What does that disk contain, Mr. Larsen?
15 A. It contains an ASCII file of coordinates used to
16 produce a contour map, the topographic map.
17 Q. The historical topographical map?
18 A. Right.
19 Q. Do you anticipate that you will include further
20 data in that historical topographical map?
21 A. In the historic map, no.
22 Q. And you also produced for me the users' guides
23 for several computer systems, Autocad Release 12. Do we
24 need the MS DOS 6 to use your file?
25 A. I believe it was prepared on a machine that uses
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
276
1 MS DOS 6.
2 Q. Would you tell us briefly on the record - I'm not
3 computer literate - how to produce these files.
4 MR. KOBELINSKI: This is an ASCII file here.
5 Q. Yes?
6 A. Put it in and you say "type," and then the file
7 name.
8 Q. Do we need to use it on what, Autocad?
9 A. To reproduce the coordinates you simply need DOS.
10 And it's a DOS file, ASCII. ASCII is DOS --
11 Q. If we were to want to do a map, such as you are
12 going to be doing, we will be able to do it from that
13 disk?
14 A. That will be the source information and you will
15 require an operator that is familiar with Autocad 12 to
16 bring that data set into Autocad 12.
17 Q. What is Quick Surf for?
18 A. As well as Quick Surf. I think I pointed out
19 yesterday that there were many, many programs that will do
20 this.
21 Q. Okay. It's my understanding, Mr. Larsen, that
22 one piece of your testimony at trial will focus on two
23 topographical maps; is that accurate?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. And one will be a historical topographical map
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
277
1 reflecting your reconstruction of the topography of
2 Florida to Orlando to Florida Bay pre-1880?
3 A. In general, yes. The actual top points are
4 indicated on this map.
5 Q. You are pointing, but I'm not quite sure. You
6 produced some hard copies this morning. Oh, it goes
7 further in Orlando?
8 A. No. It goes almost up to Orlando.
9 MS. PONZOLI: Let's mark that one.
10 (Thereupon, the document was marked for
11 identification as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 250.)
12 BY MS. PONZOLI:
13 Q. I'm going to hand you 250, Mr. Larson, and ask
14 you to please explain what that reflects.
15 A. This exhibit is a plot of the X and Y coordinates
16 of the various points that appear in the data.
17 Q. And each of those dots is a coordinate that you
18 see?
19 A. It's a pair of coordinates, X and Y.
20 Q. And it goes almost to Orlando and down to Florida
21 Bay?
22 A. That's correct. And it will also -- You will see
23 a set of dots form a square.
24 Q. That's right.
25 A. These are the boundaries of the drawing and those
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
278
1 are set at an elevation of sea level.
2 You will also find that the vertical exaggeration
3 that we decided on is a factor of a thousand. And what
4 you will find is that almost all of the points end at 000,
5 therefore. But some of the points on the boundaries are
6 interpolations between this point and this point, for
7 example. And so in the machine then will be some numbers
8 instead of ending at 000 will end in a series of three
9 digits. And those are interpolated numbers.
10 Q. I don't understand what you mean by a factor of a
11 thousand. Would you explain?
12 A. In other words, in order to see the difference in
13 elevation, since Florida is too flat, we had to exaggerate
14 the verticals. It's very common in engineering.
15 Q. That's why we have the drawings that have
16 something that look like from outer space, mountains
17 stacking up in the terrain?
18 A. Exactly. The main idea was to see topography in
19 the area where it was very flat. We selected accelerated
20 versions of a thousand. That then makes the area north of
21 the lake where there is more relief appear like mountains.
22 Q. Sure. It's my understanding that you intend to
23 rely upon the Keith and Schnars topographical map of water
24 conservation area 2-A and a portion of 3-A in conjunction
25 with your historical map. Is that accurate?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
279
1 A. I think that was simply used as background
2 information. Any differences between this map and
3 historical conditions are slight in terms of my overall
4 map. And I don't think that we changed -- I would have to
5 check -- These elevations from the historical to the
6 modern situation, those changes were mainly in the area
7 south in the EAA.
8 Q. Let me just make sure I'm understanding you
9 correctly, because I somewhat misunderstood it from the
10 other day.
11 You are saying the Keith and Schnars' present
12 topographical map is extremely similar in the area of 2-A,
13 and is it west of the S-9 and 3-A to your historical
14 topographical map?
15 A. In the context of the scale that which is an
16 overall map of Southeast Florida, it doesn't provide, at
17 that scale, a visible change.
18 Q. So at the scale that you and Keith and Schnars
19 have chosen to present your maps, we will not visibly see
20 much difference?
21 A. I didn't say that.
22 Q. I'm trying to understand what you are saying.
23 I'm not trying to misstate it or distort it or anything.
24 I'm just trying to understand.
25 Would it be easier for you to show me?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
280
1 A. No. The concept is that you use one map if you
2 are going to drive your car from Miami to Seattle on the
3 Turnpike system. And it is probably a map that shows the
4 whole United States. You use a completely different map
5 if you are trying to find a house of somebody in Coral
6 Gables. So that concept of the scale and level of detail
7 of the map being commensurate with the scale of the area
8 selected is what I'm talking about.
9 And for the map that shows the entire system from
10 Orlando to Florida Bay, the differences in conservation
11 area 2-A would not be visibly apparent. However, if you
12 were simply focusing on conservation area 2-A by itself,
13 then those changes may be apparent.
14 Q. Then let me repeat back to you to make sure I'm
15 understanding it. I understand your scale now, Miami to
16 Seattle and Coral Gables. But your testimony at trial
17 would probably be that there are differences in the
18 topography of 2-A and 3-A from the historical condition to
19 the present conditions?
20 A. It's my understanding that I will not be
21 testifying about those fine differences.
22 Q. Do you know who will be?
23 A. I don't know.
24 Q. Will it be someone testifying on hydrology?
25 A. It's my understanding that John Davis and someone
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
281
1 else has done an analysis. But I'm not -- I don't have
2 any details on that. My job is simply to provide the
3 modern topo.
4 Q. Now, the modern topo is the Keith and Schnars,
5 right?
6 A. I'm talking about conservation area 2-A.
7 Q. You helped Keith and Schnars do the modern topo
8 and you constructed a historical topo also, correct?
9 A. In two separate efforts.
10 Q. I understand.
11 A. The historical topo was an effort to depict
12 changes in the big picture of the Everglades. And based
13 on information, historical information and then some
14 modern information on the EAA where the changes had been
15 somewhat large, the conservation area 2-A project was a
16 separate project.
17 Q. Oh. In other words, these two topos really
18 aren't going to be put side-by-side and used for
19 comparison purposes?
20 A. My job --
21 Q. Right?
22 A. -- is to compare the big scale maps, modern
23 versus historical.
24 Q. You have done two, you personally. So there were
25 three topographical maps?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
282
1 A. No.
2 Q. There were only two?
3 A. Let's go back. We're talking about one effort,
4 which is the Orlando to Florida Bay effort.
5 Q. Right. Pre-1880 historical conditions
6 reconstructed, and you are going to explain to us how you
7 did that?
8 A. Right. And then a modern map of the same area,
9 Orlando to Florida Bay.
10 Q. Will they be on a single presentation to the
11 court?
12 A. I would assume that at some point they will
13 appear together.
14 Q. All right. Then in the ASCII disk that you
15 provided to us, do we have the coordinates for both of
16 those maps?
17 A. No. As Mark was indicating, you have the
18 historical coordinates. And we are working on giving you
19 similar information for those coordinates that have
20 changed.
21 Q. And then this Keith and Schnars 2-A and 3-A is
22 simply something that you helped prepare but is not going
23 to be part of your testimony at all?
24 A. Other than I might testify about how it was
25 prepared.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
283
1 MR. KOBELINSKI: That would be, just so I may
2 advise. As you know during the hearing, we are asked
3 to see if there are witnesses we can cut out to the
4 extent that we can avoid calling the two overviewing
5 surveyors, who literally one is in hydrology. If we
6 can get stipulations to that, we don't need anyone to
7 present this, and Paul may explain that, again, a
8 survey was taken and in a few minutes explain how
9 that survey was taken. That's the stipulations on
10 Jim Owens and Tom Jennings that you received.
11 MS. PONZOLI: It is my understanding that Mr.
12 Garver already questioned him on how this was
13 prepared.
14 MR. KOBELINSKI: As a matter of fact, Jeff Garver
15 also went into questioning on the historic also. But
16 again, Paul has the stuff available.
17 MS. PONZOLI: Right.
18 BY MS. PONZOLI:
19 Q. The Keith and Schnars topo of water conservation
20 area 2-A and 3-A, how is that going to be used, Mr.
21 Larsen, at trial?
22 A. I'm not sure, specifically. I understand that
23 people have done a topo analysis of it and that they plan
24 to use that in conjunction with water flow analysis. But
25 I'm not doing that.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
284
1 Q. Is that Dr. Davis or is that actually someone
2 else, to the best of your recollection?
3 A. To my understanding, Dr. Davis has done the
4 analysis on his computer. However, I haven't seen it.
5 Q. We'll put that one aside for a minute and get the
6 one that you worked on, specifically.
7 You prepared Larsen 233, and it has the original one
8 on top and then A through P inside. Since I'm not
9 familiar with this kind of work, would you just walk me
10 through generally, Mr. Larsen, one time through and then
11 look at the most useful hard copies of this information
12 and tell me what you're looking at. If you can indicate
13 to me if I'm looking at the historical or modern topo,
14 that would be helpful to me.
15 A. 233-A, B, and C are examples of an analysis of
16 the data in the form of a contour map. And that analysis
17 of the data is done by the computer programmer.
18 Q. Are these the historical or the modern contours?
19 A. These are the historical contours.
20 Q. Is that whole 233 historical contours?
21 A. Well, let me explain.
22 Q. Okay.
23 A. 233-D is labeled "work in progress." And it is
24 an integration and shows Soil Conservation Service
25 topography south of the lake from 1942 and quad sheet
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
285
1 topography north of the lake.
2 And I can point out that for the sake of this
3 analysis, we used the best information available for the
4 modern topography. And that includes changes primarily in
5 the EAA and in the area immediately adjacent to it. And
6 because there are changes there, they are visibly
7 apparent, because we indicated yesterday there were some
8 places where it's changed as much as six feet.
9 Q. Right. Six to seven feet, I think you indicated,
10 from eighteen down to twelve. Eleven or twelve was the
11 most dramatic?
12 A. Yes. So that's enough to be able to see at this
13 scale. And then the modern map will show that topography
14 plus superimpose the locations of levies and canals.
15 Q. But I'm still confused as to 233-D. Are we just
16 looking -- Is one single time frame reflected there so one
17 time frame superimposed on the other?
18 A. This is work in progress en route to arriving at,
19 going backwards to 1880.
20 Q. Okay. We're working backwards?
21 A. So it's labeled "work in progress." And this is
22 a map that was done by us in working our way back to
23 attempt to define the contours in 1880 before there was --
24 Q. Have you produced a hard copy of an 1880 map?
25 A. We have it here in this data set.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
286
1 Q. But a hard copy? Have you produced a hard copy
2 of the 1880 map?
3 A. Yes. It's here in 3-D form.
4 Q. Pardon?
5 A. In 3-dimensional form. 233-E, F, G, H.
6 Q. Uh-huh.
7 A. 233-I appears to be a simplified contour map of
8 historical data. 233-J also historical date, which is a
9 contour map. K --
10 Q. What is K?
11 A. It's a 3-dimensional view.
12 Q. E, F, G and H are 3-D. And I and J are
13 simplified contours. Is that the proper terminology?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. Okay.
16 A. And then K is a historical map. L --
17 Q. Is a 3-D. K is 3-D.
18 A. 3-D. Is a historical map of the area south of
19 the lake with more vertical exaggeration.
20 Q. Another 3-D?
21 A. Yes. M is a 3-D map of the historical condition
22 on which we have superimposed the limits of the historical
23 drainage basin of the Everglades. N is the same,
24 different view historical map.
25 Q. These are all 3-D?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
287
1 A. All 3-D. O is a 3-D map. And P is a vertical
2 map, which is not terribly useful.
3 Q. It looks like some graph.
4 A. Yes.
5 Q. These are all historical?
6 A. Yes.
7 Q. When I come to the trial, Mr. Larsen -- I hate
8 surprises. So I would like to know when you get up on the
9 stand and Mr. Earl presents you, or whoever, will we be
10 facing a 3-D map of the entire system from short of
11 Orlando down to Florida Bay with the contours in 3-D?
12 A. The only problem I have is that will be a 3-D
13 depiction like this.
14 Q. Right.
15 A. These are not contours. These are called wire
16 frame.
17 Q. But it will be the whole system put together?
18 A. That's correct, in a 3-D view.
19 Q. And will there also be a contour of the
20 historical or one or the other?
21 A. I think it will be a 3-D view rather than a
22 contour map. Contour map to me means a vertical view with
23 contour lines showing elevation. And I think they are not
24 as easy to understand as a 3-D view.
25 MR. KOBELINSKI: Just because I don't want this,
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
288
1 again, a claim of surprise, as I'm sure is true of
2 all parties, petitioners have yet to turn over all of
3 their trial exhibits. We are producing work today,
4 but we have not decided upon the format of all the
5 exhibits. So if it turns out we also are producing a
6 contour in addition to what he is referring to is a
7 wire map --
8 THE WITNESS: 3-D view.
9 MR. KOBELINSKI: So that may well happen. But
10 you are getting the data that creates both. And we
11 will see what we finally decide upon.
12 MS. PONZOLI: May I speak with my expert for just
13 a second?
14 MR. KOBELINSKI: Can we take a quick break?
15 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken, after which
16 the deposition continued as follows:)
17 BY MS. PONZOLI:
18 Q. You listed sources that you had used to create --
19 And I guess I will have to be honest, Mr. Larsen. I
20 haven't been able to separate out which sources you used
21 for your historical topographical map and which ones you
22 used for your modern topographical map. Can you list
23 those for me to the best of your recollection?
24 A. Maybe the easiest thing is to list those sources
25 at this scale that would not change.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
289
1 Q. You mean from the modern to the historical?
2 A. Right.
3 Q. Can we start with the historical, what you used
4 to create the historical map?
5 A. Fine.
6 Q. Which were those?
7 A. For essentially all of the areas, except for the
8 lands immediately north of Lake Okeechobee extending
9 around the lake and south to the southern limits of the
10 EAA and a bit beyond, it was assumed that the topography
11 had not changed significantly from 1880 to the present.
12 Therefore, the source information for those areas was the
13 most recent USGS quad sheet when it was available.
14 The source of information for the Everglades south of
15 the EAA was based on the best information I had, which was
16 the 1942 survey by the Soil Conservation Service. And in
17 general, there is not good topo available for those areas
18 in the middle of the Everglades on the quad sheets.
19 Q. On the USGS quad sheets?
20 A. Right.
21 Q. So you believe that the center of your map may be
22 a little less accurate than other portions?
23 A. It's based on older data. And I'm not aware of
24 any surveys whatsoever since 1942.
25 Q. All right. So those are the three sources - the
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
290
1 four sources, actually. Because you said you assume no
2 change north and around the lake. You use the -- I'm
3 sorry. Three sources. You used the USGS quad sheets?
4 A. Rights.
5 Q. And then for the Everglades south of the EAA you
6 used the 1942 Soil Conservation Service survey. That's
7 two sources; is that right?
8 A. We're talking about those areas that I assumed
9 did not change significantly.
10 Q. Okay. So you assumed that things had not changed
11 from '42 back to 1880. You felt those were in the same
12 condition?
13 A. Well, it was the best available information.
14 Q. All right.
15 A. For the areas along the coast we used the USGS
16 quad sheets.
17 Q. Anything else for the historical?
18 A. No.
19 Q. Again, assuming no change?
20 A. In the areas where there was no change, we
21 referred to a topo map in Davis report from 1943. If it
22 had been available, I understand that the Water Management
23 District has data that they are using for the north end of
24 conservation area three, which were a few spot elevations.
25 And I'm trying to get that information. But I can't so
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
291
1 far.
2 Q. I suspect, Mr. Larsen, that we are thinking
3 differently. I'm thinking only historical and I think you
4 are making that transition from modern to historical as
5 you are explaining it.
6 A. No.
7 Q. You are talking only historical now?
8 A. Obviously, there is no mandated 1880.
9 Q. I know you had to recreate --
10 A. We're talking about now just those areas that I
11 assume didn't change.
12 Q. All right. And we're still in areas that did not
13 change in the Davis '43 topo?
14 A. That's correct.
15 Q. All right. I'm with you now. Any more that you
16 thought had not changed?
17 A. I believe that I referred to Dade County, a
18 series of topo maps from Dade County from about 1938. And
19 there may be one or two other sources that I referred to
20 as reference material.
21 Q. But you don't recall as you sit here?
22 A. I don't recall as I sit here. But the primary
23 sources of information for those areas that did not change
24 was the quad sheets in the 1942 Soil Conservation Service
25 survey.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
292
1 Q. Did you find contradictions upon your sources?
2 A. For the areas that did not change, there was
3 general agreement.
4 Q. Within what range? Was there a range of a foot
5 or three feet or something that you would not consider a
6 significant change?
7 A. Probably one or two feet being a change that
8 would not be visibly apparent at that scale of the overall
9 map.
10 Q. So a contradiction of that amount would not
11 particularly concern you?
12 A. No.
13 Q. If it got to three feet, did that concern you?
14 A. Yes. But I don't think I find contradictions
15 that were.
16 Q. That were three feet apart?
17 A. In the areas that did not change.
18 Q. In the areas that did not change were north of
19 the lake, around the lake, the coastal ridge and what
20 else?
21 A. Basically, all the areas except for the area in
22 the immediate vicinity of the lake, the EAA and an area, a
23 strip around the edge of the EAA.
24 Q. You assume that all areas are pretty much the
25 same as they are in these sources, the quad sheets, the
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
293
1 '43 Davis topo, the soil conservation '42. You assume
2 that everything but the EAA and the edge around the EAA
3 was in a similar condition within one or two feet?
4 A. Within one or two feet.
5 Q. Okay. Were the source maps provided as part of
6 your supporting documents?
7 A. Yes. We supplied boxes of those source maps.
8 Q. But you supplied the Davis '43 topo and Soil
9 Conservation Service '42 survey?
10 A. Yes. They have been provided probably in several
11 different contexts.
12 Q. I mean, not just from you but from your experts?
13 A. From me, from others. The '42 conservation
14 service map is pretty much a standard document that
15 everyone would use.
16 Q. And the quad sheets, these would similarly be
17 standard documents?
18 A. Yes. In fact, we got a lot of quad sheets from
19 the Water Management District. Some of the cases we got
20 them in electronic format.
21 MR. KOBELINSKI: Were you able to access the
22 disk?
23 MR. MAFFEI: (Nods head.)
24 MR. KOBELINSKI: Okay.
25 BY MS. PONZOLI:
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
294
1 Q. Do you have corroboration from other sources that
2 predominantly the area south of the lake and edge around
3 the EAA are the only areas where subsidence has been in
4 excess of one to two feet?
5 A. For the purpose of this map I would say yes.
6 However, I don't think that the actual degree of
7 subsidence, for example the so called subsidence values,
8 is well known. And where most of that subsidence probably
9 occurred before 1960. And those areas may have filled
10 back in. I think there has been indicate an increase of
11 soil in those areas since about 1960. And I can't
12 remember what that total amount is. Maybe ten centimeters
13 or so.
14 Q. Things have been going down and coming back up?
15 A. Going down and coming back up, yes.
16 Q. Do you have other corroboration that, in fact,
17 the topography other than the edge of the lake and EAA
18 was -- Have you found written materials in your historical
19 searches that would corroborate that?
20 A. The answer to that is I didn't find things to
21 contradict that idea.
22 Q. Okay. And are you aware of any body of work that
23 would tend to indicate that the fires that we have
24 discussed over the last several days have not brought the
25 elevations down more than one or two feet?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
295
1 A. Well, I have seen references in the northern part
2 of the conservation area 3-A of the fires burning down to
3 underlying rock.
4 Q. Right.
5 A. And assuming that the depth of the muck there was
6 three feet, that would be an indication that there were
7 indications of a three-foot change. But it's my
8 understanding that the depth of the muck doesn't get much
9 beyond three feet in those areas south of the EAA. So
10 even if all the muck was burned down to the rock, the
11 change wouldn't be more than three feet, and would
12 probably be particularly in the one- to two-foot range.
13 Q. Do you think that one to two feet up to three
14 feet would have significance for the reasons that you have
15 done your comparison of historical and modern topography?
16 A. Not visibly at the scale of the map that goes all
17 the way from Orlando to Florida Bay. I think that it has
18 major impact on hydrology periods and modeling that will
19 be focused on a smaller geographical area.
20 Q. In the real world, that one- to three-feet
21 difference, in your opinion, has major impacts. Just
22 visibly on your map it would not necessarily show?
23 A. That's correct
24 Q. So when we see your comparison between the
25 historical and the modern map, we're going to see a
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
296
1 dramatic difference in the EAA and the edge of the EAA; is
2 that right?
3 A. I don't know that it's going to be very dramatic,
4 but it will be visible.
5 Q. All right. And what will be the purpose for
6 showing that?
7 A. Simply for the sake of being correct. If you are
8 going to show a topo map of 1880 and one of 1990, it's my
9 opinion that you should show things where that the scale
10 of the map there would be a visual change. However, the
11 major change would be the levies and canals.
12 Q. Okay.
13 A. Which are well known.
14 Q. Right. You had finished listing for me, before I
15 began to ask you other questions, the sources that you had
16 used for the areas that in your opinion had not changed.
17 Was that correct?
18 A. That's correct.
19 Q. Had you finished listing those? The last was
20 Dade County topo map from 1938, which may have been used.
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. You said might have been?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. And then talked about whether you had found any
25 contradictions and you hadn't. Were there any other
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
297
1 sources that you used?
2 A. In terms of the areas that have not changed?
3 Q. Right.
4 A. Not that I can recall.
5 Q. In the areas that had changed, what were your
6 sources?
7 A. The Corps of Engineers in their GDM on
8 conservation area three produced a report that showed
9 their interpretation of historical topograph and modern
10 topograph in the form of cross sections of north to south
11 in the EAA. I also used other depictions that said that
12 the historical level of Lake Okeechobee, therefore, the
13 elevation of the perimeter of the lake, was somewhere
14 around twenty-one feet.
15 Q. What were those sources?
16 A. The corps documents as well.
17 Q. Do you have those? Can you locate those for me?
18 I mean, if you could tell me it's the GDM for the, you
19 know, the Hoover Dike or something, that's fine.
20 A. I believe it's the same GDM.
21 Q. For three?
22 A. For conservation area three.
23 Q. What is the date of that?
24 A. In the 1950's. And then there were various other
25 references to lake levels, which I can't recall at the
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
298
1 moment, indicating that Lake Okeechobee was historically
2 at an elevation of twenty-one feet.
3 Q. As I remember, the elevation of Lake Okeechobee
4 was a source of dialogue between you and Mr. Garver; was
5 it not?
6 A. It's been a year, so it may have been.
7 Q. Well, on page seventy-nine he said, "Am I correct
8 in understanding Larsen Exhibit 100 just shows the level
9 of Lake Okeechobee to be fourteen feet?"
10 You answer, "That's probably true, because this is
11 based on more modern data than 1880."
12 How do you go from fourteen to twenty-one?
13 A. On historical documents, Corps of Engineers
14 reports.
15 Q. And you believe the main source for the
16 twenty-one-foot level is the GDM written in the 1950's for
17 water conservation area three?
18 A. That's my recollection.
19 Q. Do you have any other sources that you can recall
20 that would support the twenty-one-foot level?
21 A. I recall other sources associated with the
22 twenty-one-foot level, but I can't recall them.
23 Q. Do you feel pretty confident of that
24 twenty-one-foot level?
25 A. Yes, I do.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
299
1 Q. Have you corroborated that with other experts on
2 the lake or people with the corps or the Water Management
3 District?
4 A. I don't know that there is a consensus among
5 people who work for the government. But my
6 corroboration -- I mean, I corroborated with Brad Waller,
7 who is of the same general opinion.
8 Q. Does he have a range, or does he feel pretty good
9 about the twenty-one feet?
10 A. I think he feels pretty good about it. But this
11 was done six or eight months ago.
12 Q. Sure.
13 A. So I don't recall all the specifics.
14 Q. Is there controversy over that lake level, what
15 it was historically?
16 A. If there is, I'm not aware of it. Some people
17 may say twenty feet. Some people say as high as
18 twenty-two. Twenty-one, in my opinion, is generally
19 accepted.
20 Q. Okay.
21 A. It may not be, but that's my understanding.
22 Q. All right. So your main source for the areas of
23 change were corps documents and you think predominantly
24 the GDM for conservation area three?
25 A. For areas changed, we were still proceeding on
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
300
1 that. We spent a lot of time talking about Lake
2 Okeechobee.
3 Q. Right. I want to talk about the dominant
4 question of what areas that changed.
5 A. The more modern quad sheets show elevations in
6 the EAA that are substantially different than the
7 historical elevations.
8 You have to, as the corps did, assume that the
9 elevation changes were somewhat gradual from the lake
10 leading south. And that the topography around the lake
11 was twenty to twenty-one feet, and then sloped from the
12 south without any abrupt hills or valleys. Then change
13 would be change from that general historical slope.
14 Q. Are there written narratives that would support
15 that interpretation of the topography?
16 A. I think there were in terms of reports on
17 subsidence and Bulletin 442 discusses changes in land
18 elevation in the EAA.
19 Q. So you used the corps and the modern quad sheets.
20 What else?
21 A. Then I asked the U.S. Sugar Engineering
22 Department and Hutchin Engineers, I believe, to provide me
23 with any modern topos that they might have collected in
24 conjunction with other engineering studies that they had
25 done. And they provided me some information, which is
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
301
1 included here in the materials on modern elevations in the
2 EAA.
3 Q. You said it's included here in the materials. Is
4 Hutchin Engineers a cooperative for the Water Management
5 District?
6 A. I don't remember who they were working for,
7 exactly.
8 Q. You guys. Anything else you used for the areas
9 that you thought had changed?
10 A. We listed the modern quad sheets for the EAA.
11 Q. Right.
12 A. The engineers companies, and then corps of
13 reports. That show changes as of the time that report was
14 prepared. And then I recall that there was other
15 corroborating stuff, that I can't recall the source of,
16 for lake levels. And then there is the general
17 understanding that the land slopes gently from the lake to
18 the south and that there were no abrupt hills or valleys
19 in that area. It's very flat.
20 Q. Are there sloughs or anything running through
21 there?
22 A. If there were sloughs, they would not have been
23 at the elevation much different than the general
24 elevation, probably. Again, within the scale of the map
25 that we're talking about that you can't see differences of
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
302
1 one to two feet, there wouldn't be historical variations,
2 you know, in the 1880 condition. The lands that changed
3 though, I mean, I spent a lot of time out there and the
4 area is very flat and you don't see any very big hills or
5 valleys.
6 Q. Anything else?
7 A. That's my recollection at this time.
8 Q. I believe you and Mr. Garver discussed that there
9 were gaps and you had to fill those gaps in. Is that
10 accurate?
11 A. If you say so.
12 Q. Okay. Were there gaps?
13 A. At the time of that deposition a year ago?
14 Q. Right. Were there gaps?
15 A. There were gaps.
16 Q. Were you subsequently able to find data to fill
17 those gaps?
18 A. Yes.
19 Q. What was it?
20 A. That was the information that I just provided to
21 you.
22 Q. Okay. So there really, in your maps, there were
23 no places where you guesstimated?
24 A. I had a reason for every elevation, every point
25 that is provided.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
303
1 Q. Well, a reason could still be an estimate of what
2 it should be based upon, you know, some rationale that is
3 highly supportable. But did you actually have some
4 historical topographical information or modern
5 topographical numbers? I'm talking numbers for your
6 various coordinates.
7 A. We used the best available data. We had data for
8 all the areas. We used engineering judgment to fill in
9 gaps. Which by engineering judgment, I mean that assuming
10 an area was flat, one data point provides you with a
11 substantial area that you can rely on. So I wouldn't say
12 that we guessed about anything.
13 Q. Okay. I didn't mean to -- What percentage of
14 your data points do you believe represent where if there
15 was one here and one here and you had to provide the one
16 in the middle, what percentage were the ones in the middle
17 that you had to provide based on whatever your reason of
18 judgment was?
19 A. I would say none.
20 Q. And you were going to use this to illustrate to
21 the judge the difference that has occurred between the
22 historical conditions and the present conditions; is that
23 right?
24 A. That's correct.
25 Q. Beyond the interest, just purely intellectual
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
304
1 interest of what has happened, which is substantial, what
2 do you believe that information contributes to resolving
3 the controversy surrounding the swamp land?
4 A. The magnitude of change, which is primarily a
5 result of the works of man over the last hundred years, is
6 substantial, and perhaps overwhelming.
7 Q. How does that contribute to resolving our
8 large-scale quarrel over the swamp land?
9 A. Well --
10 Q. I don't think that there is a party in the room
11 who would deny that there have been substantial changes.
12 The canals, the levies alone might represent change. You
13 can bicker over what the adjective should be, but there
14 were definitely changes.
15 So the meat of what I'm trying to get at is the
16 significance for determining whether water quality
17 remediation procedures should be put in place to help
18 improve the quality of the Everglades, and potentially
19 hydro period should be addressed simultaneously,
20 previously. However, what does this add?
21 A. I don't think that, assuming that the hearing
22 officer comes to this with somewhat of a blank slate, that
23 he can make a reasonable judgment without understanding
24 the history of the project and how the project has changed
25 South Florida. And a three-dimensional depiction, I
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
305
1 think, would be useful to him in understanding what he is
2 doing.
3 Q. What do you think he actually is doing, in your
4 view?
5 A. Well, you are asking my opinion, a legal opinion
6 on the case.
7 Q. I'm almost asking for sort of a factual opinion.
8 What is it you think he is doing?
9 A. My understanding is that at issue is the adequacy
10 of the swamp land. And it's my opinion that the swamp
11 land is not adequate. And to explain that, I think
12 someone needs to understand how we got to where we are
13 today.
14 Q. Now, you have told me that it's not adequate
15 because it doesn't address the big picture. And I believe
16 you told me it's not adequate because it doesn't address
17 hydro periods sufficiently, in your judgment, as you think
18 it should have. And I don't mean to denigrate any other
19 inadequacies that you pointed out. But I'm still
20 struggling how the topo maps contribute to pointing out
21 the inadequacies?
22 A. It's my assumption that the idea here behind all
23 of this effort is to restore the Everglades.
24 Q. That certainly is the federal government's cause.
25 A. And that restoration has to be done in the
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
306
1 context of an understanding the history of the system and
2 an understanding of how the components of the system come
3 together and work together. And with an understanding,
4 you can't look at components in isolation.
5 Q. So your goal is to help him understand the
6 history more adequately of what has gone on?
7 A. And by history I mean not just when structures
8 were built, but what happened politically, engineering
9 wise, operationally. So that he can understand the
10 possibilities and the importance of looking at the big
11 picture if the goal is to restore the Everglades.
12 Q. Let me ask you --
13 MR. KOBELINSKI: I need a break, when you get to
14 a good spot.
15 Q. Is it your intent to give testimony on the
16 political history of South Florida from roughly 1880 to
17 the present time?
18 A. I think there are some key events that are
19 necessary to be part of the proceeding.
20 Q. So you would give the agricultural interest view
21 on those historical events what you believe politically
22 was going on at that time?
23 A. I wouldn't pretend to give the agricultural
24 viewpoints. I think I would just rely on document
25 selection results, transcripts of public hearings and so
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
307
1 forth, statements made by elected officials, to
2 demonstrate what the mood of the people of the state was.
3 I believe that's relevant.
4 Q. So you do intend to give testimony on the
5 political history from 1880 to the present time?
6 A. Yes. As well as history on the changes in
7 population.
8 Q. Anything else?
9 A. Changes in operational strategies.
10 Q. Of the Army Corps of Engineers or the Water
11 Management District?
12 A. Both.
13 Q. What else? You said engineering previously. Or
14 are you just going to discuss what engineering structures
15 were added to the system at various time frames?
16 A. I think that there is an interrelationship of all
17 of these factors that affect operation, that affect
18 engineering, that affect the action of the Corps of
19 Engineers. And those are all relevant to where we happen
20 to be today.
21 Q. So you are going to interface the politics, the
22 science, the law and everything in your historical
23 overview?
24 A. In an overview in a sense.
25 MS. PONZOLI: Let's take a break.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
308
1 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken, after which
2 the deposition continued as follows:)
3 BY MS. PONZOLI:
4 Q. Mr. Larsen, are you familiar with a concept
5 called short circuiting in water conservation area 2-A?
6 A. The concept, yes.
7 Q. This is a hydrologic phenomenon that some people
8 believe occurs in 2-A. Is that accurate?
9 A. Yes.
10 Q. Have you done any work that would tend to support
11 this concept?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Which work is that?
14 A. I participated in the topo survey. And I also
15 located a berm on the south side of the canal that
16 receives water from the S-10 structures.
17 Q. Were you the originator of this idea?
18 A. I may have been the one who first pointed out the
19 berm. Whether that makes me the originator of the idea or
20 not, I don't know.
21 Q. Is it your understanding that U.S. Sugar intends
22 to present this concept in time of trial that there is a
23 short circuit in 2-A of the water?
24 A. I don't know.
25 Q. Do you think that there is, in your opinion?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
309
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. And that is supported by what, the berm short
3 circuit of the water?
4 A. The berm keeps the water from flowing across the
5 marsh. When you are there you can see the water flowing
6 to the east instead of south.
7 Q. You actually observe the water flows so that you
8 could visibly see it, is that what you are saying?
9 A. Definitely.
10 Q. Do you have other people who will testify that
11 they can visibly see it?
12 A. I believe that the topo survey includes a survey
13 of the berm.
14 Q. The Keith and --
15 A. Schnars.
16 Q. -- Schnars. Can you show me where this berm is?
17 We're looking at Composite No. 1, Owens, 7793. Can you
18 show me?
19 A. The last pages.
20 Q. Is this --
21 A. The last several pages.
22 Q. Have I gone far enough, or do I need to go back
23 farther?
24 A. Keep going. You have gone too far.
25 Q. Is this the berm that we're looking at on
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
310
1 1159171? Is that the proper number?
2 A. Those are cross sections across the berm.
3 Q. Would you show me the berm, Mr. Larsen? This is
4 the top of the levy from water conservation area one going
5 into two. Would that be accurate or not?
6 A. That's correct. This berm goes in a general
7 north-south direction, top of the levy. And it describes
8 the canal on the south side of the levy. And then shows
9 the elevation on the south side of the canal.
10 MR. KOBELINSKI: You have said this berm. You
11 are referring to this cross section?
12 THE WITNESS: This cross section.
13 BY MS. PONZOLI:
14 Q. I'm having difficulty understanding where the
15 berm is. That's the part I'm not understanding.
16 A. The berm is on the south side of the canal. It
17 doesn't appear to be a distinct feature like a levy. But
18 it is an elevation on the south side of the canal that is
19 generally higher than the elevation, say three or four
20 hundred feet further to the south. And so it doesn't
21 appear to be a distinct feature. However, it is an
22 elevation such that --
23 Q. How much is the difference between on the south
24 side of the canal and several hundred feet further south?
25 What is the distinction to the elevation, to the best of
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
311
1 your knowledge?
2 A. I haven't seen this for awhile, but I recall it's
3 one or two feet higher.
4 Q. What does that one- or two-foot difference cause
5 the water to do?
6 A. It causes the water to flow through the canal,
7 which conveys water much more efficiently than the marsh
8 does. And causes a large portion of the water to go
9 through the canal through the east following land
10 gradients to down hill in that direction.
11 Q. Roughly speaking, is there one of these earlier
12 ones that we can look at and you can show me where this
13 occurs, such as 1159167? Just by pointing with your
14 finger approximately where you think the berm is.
15 A. This shows -- We are looking at 1159167.
16 Q. Right.
17 A. Shows the location of the cross sections.
18 Q. Right.
19 A. Which go from the top of the levy across the
20 canal and then proceed across this berm. If you notice
21 land elevations here -- I think you are looking at the
22 wrong one.
23 Q. If you can help me get to the right one. That's
24 what I'm trying to do. I'm trying to understand. Is this
25 the right one?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
312
1 A. Let's see.
2 Q. Why does this say revised destroy -- Oh. Destroy
3 all previous prints. Okay. I was wondering if we had one
4 that was useless.
5 So is this the right one?
6 A. Yes. We're now looking at 1159168. This shows
7 topography in the vicinity of the ten structures as being
8 at an elevation of generally ten point two, nine point
9 eight, ten point nine, ten point seven, ten point zero, et
10 cetera. And you can get a general idea by looking at any
11 particular cross section, which are numbered one through
12 eleven, of what the topography is in the area generally
13 south of the location of the cross section by looking at
14 this data, which is the topographic data done using the
15 Keith and Schnars GPS and hydro-graphic techniques.
16 And for example, if you look at cross section two,
17 you can see that the general elevation of the land in the
18 area down stream is about ten feet. And then if you turn
19 to cross section two, you can see that the general
20 elevation that the south side of the canal is twelve point
21 seven. So there is a substantial difference in the edge,
22 the lip of the canal, if you would, and the land
23 elevations further south of about two feet.
24 Q. I'm having difficulty putting those two together.
25 Let me just tell you, because I'm not seeing the same
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
313
1 types of numbers appearing on this cross section that I
2 saw on the overall map of two. And so that's what I need
3 to reconcile. When we were at 1159168, I don't see any of
4 these twelve numbers.
5 A. That's the point.
6 Q. Where are they? Why aren't they here?
7 A. They are on these pages. This is an enhanced
8 detail of the area immediately south of the canal.
9 Q. But this is the area immediately south of the
10 canal and I see numbers, eleven three, eleven one, ten
11 nine, ten zero. Those are not immediately south?
12 A. Again, we are in the problem of scale.
13 Q. These are a couple hundred feet?
14 A. Three or four hundred feet south of the canal,
15 because it was impossible to get access because of the
16 thickness of the vegetation in those areas.
17 MR. KOBELINSKI: I point out that the scale on
18 this map is one inch is equal to three thousand feet,
19 1159168.
20 Q. I'm seeing numbers that are right along the levy.
21 I'm seeing elevens. There are no twelves. It seems that
22 there ought to be a twelve somewhere here.
23 A. The information off 1159171 is in addition to
24 those numbers that appear.
25 Q. How were the vertical elevations calculated for
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
314
1 the cross sections?
2 A. They were using normal survey leveling
3 techniques.
4 Q. So you are doing two entirely different
5 measurements for levels from these measurements to the one
6 in 1159168; is that right?
7 A. They are references to the same data. So many of
8 the numbers are comparable.
9 Q. Are these derived from differential levels from
10 1159168?
11 A. These are acquired from GPS and hydro-graphic
12 techniques. Where these cross sections are based on
13 normal leveling survey standard techniques using an
14 instrument called a level.
15 Q. May I ask why that was not used on 1159168?
16 A. It would have been extraordinarily expensive and
17 inaccurate in that we mentioned the problems with the 1942
18 survey.
19 Q. Refresh my memory.
20 A. The technique of using a level requires - and I
21 could explain --
22 Q. I think you did this with Mr. Garver. The
23 quaking --
24 A. And shaking and all that.
25 Q. And going down to the rock.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
315
1 A. Where they were able to have the level on solid
2 ground on the levy. Shooting then from the levy across
3 the canal to the berm on the south side of the canal, they
4 were able to use normal leveling techniques in a cost
5 effective way. Normal leveling techniques wouldn't work
6 or would be extremely difficult to employ on a cost
7 effective basis in the center of conservation area 2-A.
8 Q. It would have been helpful, however, had the same
9 technique that was used in the cross section for 1159171
10 been used along the upper north edge because there would
11 be a substantial differential of a foot to two feet
12 between what is reflected here and what is reflected here,
13 and we have no way of putting the two together.
14 A. Other than the work was done by registered
15 surveys using --
16 Q. Two different techniques.
17 A. Accepted techniques. Both of which are
18 considered to be accurate.
19 Q. I understand. Within some range of accuracy?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. Okay. And the significance of this short
22 circuiting of water conservation area 2-A is what?
23 A. That a large portion of water delivered by the
24 ten structure flows to the east through that canal under
25 the corner of conservation area 2-A.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
316
1 Q. Right.
2 A. And then spreads out from there. So it's a
3 different pattern of water delivery than most people would
4 think.
5 Q. Dr. Richardson relied on theory in estimating his
6 work, has he not?
7 A. I don't know.
8 Q. You had indicated previously, Mr. Larsen, on page
9 seventy-seven of your iteration of the topographical map
10 today that that version we were discussing with Mr. Garver
11 in March of 1993 was a simplification of the Soil
12 Conservation data in their report of 1940 and carried out
13 from '40 to '42. You said your interpretation of
14 subsidence may change. It didn't represent the final
15 version of the map that represented the EAA area.
16 Did you, in fact, change your interpretation of
17 subsidence from the time you discussed it with Mr. Garver
18 in March of '93? Do you recall that conversation?
19 A. I think all that's saying is subsidence is not
20 necessarily something that you interpret. It's something
21 that you measure. The difference between what it was and
22 what it is now, we at that time had not done our analysis
23 of our interpretation of what the EAA looks like now. So
24 now that that's done, the difference can be measured.
25 Q. And that's from the modern quad sheets that you
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
317
1 used as your main source of information?
2 A. For the EAA.
3 Q. Right. Have you done any comparison yet of the
4 Keith and Schnars to other topographical maps?
5 A. No, I haven't.
6 Q. Do you intend to?
7 A. I don't intend to.
8 Q. Okay. Mr. Larsen, in addition to the elevation
9 information that you took from the 1948 Soil Conservation
10 Service survey, what other information did you use from
11 that report?
12 A. I don't understand the question. For what
13 purpose about --
14 Q. Did you use other information other than just
15 elevations and information from the Soil Conservation '48
16 report?
17 A. Not in preparing the topo map.
18 Q. Did you use it for anything else?
19 A. For general understanding of areas which consist
20 of Loxahatchee peat instead of Everglades peat.
21 Q. But you don't intend to testify about soil?
22 A. No, I don't.
23 Q. Who, to the best of your knowledge, will be
24 testifying about soil?
25 A. I'm not sure, but I imagine that Dr. Patrick
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
318
1 would be one.
2 Q. Have you provided that '48 Soil Conversation
3 report to him?
4 A. Not directly.
5 Q. But he has it. As far as to the best of your
6 knowledge he has it?
7 A. To the best of my knowledge he has it.
8 Q. Has any of the soil data been computerized?
9 A. I don't know. I haven't done it.
10 Q. To the best of your knowledge is Dr. Patrick the
11 person who will address soils for U.S. Sugar and the
12 league?
13 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. There may be
14 others, but I'm not -- He is a recognized soil expert, so
15 it seems logical he would be the one.
16 Q. Okay.
17 MS. PONZOLI: Do you want to stop now, or do you
18 want me to start and go about forty-five minutes.
19 It's really everybody's pleasure.
20 MR. KOBELINSKI: You are going to a different
21 topic?
22 MS. PONZOLI: Yes.
23 MR. KOBELINSKI: You are going to vegetation or
24 something?
25 MS. PONZOLI: Yes.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
319
1 MR. KOBELINSKI: You stated you wanted to review
2 this, so would it be more logical for you to stop?
3 MS. PONZOLI: It would be more logical for me to
4 stop, but I don't mind.
5 MR. KOBELINSKI: I would note someone from Paul's
6 office is running over. The data points have
7 changed. I don't know if you need Bob to look at
8 that. I assume he would be getting here in the next
9 few minutes.
10 MS. PONZOLI: We'll have a substitute disk?
11 MR. KOBELINSKI: No. An additional disk where
12 the data points changed for modern. I don't know if
13 you need Bob here or not. You can make your own
14 decision on that.
15 MS. PONZOLI: I understand what you are saying.
16 I think Mr. Maffei took a look and said he could read
17 this when he was sitting here.
18 (Thereupon, a lunch recess was taken, after which
19 the deposition continued as follows:)
20 BY MS. PONZOLI:
21 Q. Mr. Larsen, Larsen 238, these are just
22 preliminary outlines. They have no particular
23 significance, do they?
24 A. Only that they appear later in that executive
25 summary.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
320
1 Q. Speaking of the executive summary, that's my next
2 exhibit. The executive summary is Larsen 237, which you
3 identified earlier. That would indicate that there is an
4 actual report somewhere. Do you recall the actual report?
5 A. I don't recall what is in the file. As I
6 mentioned, this is like four years ago or five years ago.
7 And this is what I found between yesterday and today.
8 Q. Sure. Okay.
9 MS. PONZOLI: Mark, could you search and see if
10 there is a report that went with the executive
11 summary?
12 MR. KOBELINSKI: I have no problem with Paul
13 searching and looking. But I'll tell you my
14 recollection. Of course I wasn't there, but from
15 what I understand right now, all there was was an
16 executive summary giving the results of their work.
17 BY MS. PONZOLI:
18 Q. You had indicated previously this work to be
19 inconclusive in the league's opinion; is that right?
20 A. No. It came to conclusions, but we didn't think
21 they would stand up in court.
22 Q. Okay. What were the problems with it standing up
23 in court in your opinion?
24 A. To be perfectly honest with you, it's four years
25 ago. I only have a vague recollection that the detail and
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
321
1 the ability to discern vegetation types was inconclusive
2 in that it was generally felt to be an unsuccessful effort
3 because of the problem with resolution.
4 Q. Was the problem with resolution that it was too
5 gross? Do you know what I mean by the word "gross?"
6 A. Pixels were too big.
7 Q. Right. Is that what the problem was with the
8 resolution?
9 MR. KOBELINSKI: I'm raising an objection that
10 you are asking about a report that he hasn't looked
11 at in four years. I know you handed it to him, but
12 if you want him to look at it -- Otherwise, you are
13 getting four years' old memory of it. If you would
14 like, he could take a quick look at it.
15 Q. But was that your recollection that it was too
16 gross?
17 A. That was my recollection.
18 Q. But you are welcome to refresh your memory with
19 the document.
20 A. It would take me more than one minute.
21 Q. All right.
22 MR. KOBELINSKI: Go ahead. Take five minutes.
23 Q. I was going to ask you, Mr. Larsen, do you have
24 any - after reviewing the document, do you have any other
25 recollection as to why the Erim satellite imagery was not
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
322
1 pursued? Do you understand my question?
2 A. Not other than that we didn't think it would hold
3 up, pointing out two methods were used for analysis of
4 vegetation changes, visual delineation of boundaries south
5 of the S-10 structures.
6 Q. That was your work?
7 A. Not by satellite but by eye.
8 Q. And that was your work?
9 A. That. And I recall being up in a helicopter with
10 people looking at it. Two greenness-brightness change
11 images. And as we sit here, I'm not sure I know what
12 greenness-brightness change images are. But I would point
13 out that the results were cattails shifted in location.
14 Q. And you find that in the report?
15 A. That's in the report on page five.
16 Q. Is there anything in this report that, to your
17 knowledge, is inaccurate?
18 A. No, I don't think so. It's just that they have
19 trouble.
20 Q. Okay. Let me ask you this: They made
21 recommendations at the end, Erim did. I take it you chose
22 not to follow those recommendations; is that right?
23 A. That's correct.
24 Q. Do you recall anything more about why you didn't
25 think it would hold up in court?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
323
1 A. No, not really. It's just, thinking about it
2 now, whatever greenness-brightness change images might be,
3 it certainly wasn't sort of a clear-cut process.
4 Q. All right. I have what I believe to be the Erim
5 images. This is Larsen 239 through 247. Is that right?
6 Is that what these are? They identified them this
7 morning.
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I'm going to ask you to tell me to the best of
10 your recollection what each of those reflects. Have you
11 done satellite imagery interpretation or reading?
12 A. I have looked at satellite imagery, but I don't
13 consider myself to be a person who analyzes satellite data
14 in a computer. It is data which is provided pixel by
15 pixel. And the analysis of pixel by pixel from one
16 imagine to another is a specialized process in a
17 specialized field. I don't consider myself knowledgeable
18 in that computer analysis.
19 Q. I would ask you to start with Larsen number 239
20 and tell me, to the best of your recollection, what the
21 interpretation of that satellite image was at the time you
22 received it.
23 MR. KOBELINSKI: Object to lack of foundation for
24 the question. Just saying you are assuming he knows.
25 A. On Exhibit 239 I don't know.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
324
1 Q. You don't recall what that imagine was supposed
2 to reflect?
3 A. What it reflects -- You can see canals and you
4 can see different shadings of different things.
5 Q. Sure.
6 A. In the area south of the ten structures, there is
7 a different shade that may or may not coincide with
8 cattails. But I don't recall, specifically.
9 Q. Would you look at the next one?
10 A. The next one is Exhibit 240. It's the same.
11 Same kind of exhibit.
12 Q. Right.
13 A. Again, I don't recall.
14 Q. Okay. You can just, if you don't recall, then
15 you can move rapidly through them.
16 A. The next one is labeled Larsen 241. It says
17 "Change image." Again, I don't know what color on here
18 indicates change. So I really can't comment on it.
19 Larsen Exhibit 242 is similar to Exhibit 239.
20 Q. Are there any numbers on those?
21 A. This one says PCT4.
22 Q. I'm thinking of numbers on such as Larsen 245.
23 We have ten and eleven. Do you know what those numbers
24 reflect?
25 A. Those numbers may reflect locations that were
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
325
1 identified in a helicopter.
2 Q. Again, on Larsen 247 we see one, four, six,
3 seven, five and eight. Do you think those were efforts at
4 ground truthing (phonetic)?
5 A. They may have been.
6 Q. Do you think you participated in that, in the
7 ground truthing?
8 A. Yes.
9 Q. I would appreciate if we go through your
10 documents, Mr. Larsen, if the ground truthing, if that
11 information which reflects the ground truthing appears in
12 some other document that I handed you, would you tell me
13 please?
14 A. Okay. Larsen Exhibit 243 is a satellite image
15 and with different colors, different shades of yellow and
16 purple. Some green. Again, I don't remember what is
17 what.
18 Q. That's fine.
19 A. It depicts the area generally north and south of
20 the Hillsborough Canal showing the south end, conservation
21 number one and conservation area number two.
22 Larsen 244 areas, again, is a processed satellite
23 image. I don't know what the colors mean.
24 Q. If it's the same for each one --
25 A. It's all the same.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
326
1 Q. If it's all the same, we don't need to spend a
2 long time creating a record, if you don't have a
3 recollection of what those mean.
4 MS. PONZOLI: I think we can stipulate, Mr.
5 Kobelinski, that the originals will be returned to
6 the league. I guess the court reporter will have
7 color duplicates made of them for the parties. And
8 then you will get the originals back. Is that all
9 right with you?
10 MR. KOBELINSKI: These may be the only ones we
11 have. And as such, I just assume perhaps we make
12 copies of them, if that's all right with you. And we
13 can -- Because they are originals, I would like the
14 originals back, as I stated. But I believe they may
15 be the only set we have. I'm somewhat hesitant to
16 let them out.
17 MS. PONZOLI: On Larsen 239 through 247 and at
18 the various parties' expense, if they want, you will
19 have good qualities made of these?
20 MR. KOBELINSKI: Right. I would have my copying
21 people do them instead of someone else's copying
22 people do them.
23 BY MS. PONZOLI:
24 Q. Mr. Larsen, I'm going to hand you what appears to
25 be two of the vegetative surveys. One of area 2-A dated
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
327
1 July 21, 1989. And then a second one water conservation
2 area number one or Loxahatchee of December 29, 1989 and
3 ask you a couple questions of those.
4 Let's start with the earlier one, July 21, 1989,
5 Larsen number 248. Was there ever a final report prepared
6 on this, Mr. Larsen? It says preliminary report.
7 A. No.
8 Q. And who asked you to do this survey?
9 A. I recall that I was asked to do this by the law
10 firm.
11 Q. When we get to page five, do these reflect places
12 that you landed in a helicopter?
13 A. No.
14 MR. KOBELINSKI: Counsel, you are referring to
15 the dots along the lines?
16 MS. PONZOLI: Yes.
17 BY MS. PONZOLI:
18 Q. Do the dots along the transect lines reflect
19 where you landed?
20 A. No.
21 Q. What do they reflect?
22 A. Places where we stopped while the helicopter
23 remained hovering stationed in the air.
24 Q. From the helicopter you did counts of vegetation?
25 A. As described in the document and the best I can
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
328
1 recall from 1989, we would, for example, start at a
2 location and proceed until the vegetation changed along a
3 line, the various lines that are indicated.
4 I had two botanists in the back of the helicopter and
5 I was sitting next to the pilot. When the vegetation
6 changed to a different association, they would indicate to
7 me to stop. And then they would read off to me or speak
8 to me over the intercom and I would write down the plants
9 and their percentage cover. When that was completed, the
10 helicopter would proceed along the line until the
11 vegetation changed again.
12 Q. If I understand you correctly, on page five each
13 time we see a dot, that's where your botanists felt the
14 vegetative community had changed enough so that they could
15 visibly determine that change?
16 A. And I would also point out that there is a line
17 where it says surveillance line.
18 Q. Right.
19 A. And that was a somewhat different procedure where
20 we flew along in a line which the botanists said
21 represented the extent of cattails of one percent cover or
22 more.
23 Q. Oh, all right. Now, every time you did a dot
24 there, what did that dot mean?
25 A. It probably meant that we did not stop the
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
329
1 helicopter, but that I took a loran reading.
2 Q. So the north-south dots reflect changes. But the
3 ones running along the curve line, surveillance line, are
4 just loran reading lines marking the outer limits of what
5 they believe was the cattail area, if I may use that term.
6 A. And I think that, as I recall, is that it was on
7 the outside of that line that was less than one percent
8 cattail and on the inside of that line was lower than one
9 percent cattail.
10 Q. Do you recall any particular significance for the
11 fact that you have fewer vegetative changes on the east
12 side of this map than you do on the west side? On the
13 west side it would appear the communities change more
14 frequently.
15 A. I don't concur with your interpretation.
16 Q. Well, are we both looking at page five?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. If we take line number eight, you have, I is
19 guess that an immediate change, almost immediately on line
20 number eight the first dot. And then there is a change
21 almost immediately. Is that fair?
22 A. Yes. That represents a change along the
23 immediate south side of the canal.
24 Q. Okay. But as we go down eight, I see three more
25 dots of almost expanding lengths.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
330
1 A. Yes.
2 Q. All right. I guess what I was sort of intimating
3 is that as you went across this map it would appear to me
4 that -- Let's look at line four. You see many more dots
5 along line four. Many more dots along line one.
6 A. If you look at line five, there are many less.
7 Q. Okay. Five is less?
8 A. So I don't agree with you.
9 Q. Then your interpretation is what?
10 A. That is --
11 Q. There is no discernible pattern?
12 A. That there is a vegetation pattern which has been
13 summarized in a vegetation map.
14 But your particular method of analysis I don't think
15 is correct.
16 Q. Let's look at page six. We're on that line
17 number five that you were indicating has less dots and
18 disproved my interpretation. How large an area is this
19 area that has cattail thirty, hibiscus five, pig weed
20 thirty, sawgrass seventy? How large a geographic area are
21 we looking at?
22 A. The line itself is approximately two and a half
23 miles long. And the method of this survey is the transect
24 method. And the method assumes that those conditions
25 apply halfway over to the next line.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
331
1 Q. Let me ask you this: If these are percent of
2 cover, how do they come to more than a hundred percent?
3 A. Standard biological practice, as I understand it,
4 is that there may be two leaves covering the same area.
5 Q. Right.
6 A. So that you can get a percentage cover greater
7 than a hundred percent.
8 MR. KOBELINSKI: Counsel, I would, just for the
9 sake of the record, object in the sense that Jeffrey
10 Garver went over these in detail asking specifically
11 that same question, how did they count for more than
12 a hundred percent. And Mr. Larsen gave a
13 similar-type answer. But again, if we're going to go
14 over the exact same questions, because they can be
15 found directly in the record --
16 MS. PONZOLI: I apologize. It's in the question.
17 I think you can concede I'm moving rapidly through
18 the material. I'm not belaboring the method or
19 anything. I apologize for the question.
20 MR. KOBELINSKI: For obvious reasons, if you ask
21 a witness the same question a year or more than a
22 year apart, you are going to get slightly different
23 answers. And I just don't see where that serves the
24 purpose, nor can it be used at trial to show a great
25 difference.
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
332
1 MS. PONZOLI: That wasn't my intent. I didn't
2 recall the question.
3 MR. KOBELINSKI: Okay.
4 MR. PEREZ: What was the answer he gave four
5 years ago?
6 MR. KOBELINSKI: Yes. He said the botanists saw
7 certain types of plants that were actually water
8 plants. As a result, they did cover X percent or
9 cattails or macrophytes cover a percent. But its's
10 similar to what he is saying now. It's sort of you
11 are going to get different answers a year apart on
12 the exact same area.
13 BY MS. PONZOLI:
14 Q. Have you done any work on this vegetative mapping
15 in recent years, Mr. Larsen?
16 A. No.
17 Q. Would you expect to find changes from your field
18 work?
19 A. Yes. That area fluctuates and changes rapidly.
20 It may even change seasonally. So a snapshot at a time.
21 Q. What kind of changes would you expect to see,
22 would you not be surprised to see?
23 A. If it was dry, I think that you would get a
24 reoccurrence of pig weed, for example. If it was very
25 wet, the pig weed would die out. So those sort of things
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
333
1 associated with the wetness or dryness you would expect.
2 Q. Do you have any idea if the area greater than one
3 percent cattail would have expended by now?
4 A. I don't know.
5 Q. You have no idea?
6 A. (Witness shakes head.)
7 Q. May I ask you why there was such an interest in
8 '89 with this type of vegetative mapping, but that type of
9 interest has diminished over the last five years?
10 A. I think at the time people were saying that there
11 was twenty-thousand acres of cattails and they were
12 expanding at some incredible rate per day. And I think it
13 was appropriate to go out and measure and see what the
14 story was in the area.
15 Q. Looking at page ten, how did you determine the
16 fifty-percent contour?
17 A. Based on the percentages.
18 Q. That your botanists in the back of the helicopter
19 were calling out?
20 A. That's correct.
21 Q. But it doesn't reconcile, it would appear. At
22 least it would appear with your map on page eight. Do you
23 see line three and line eight?
24 A. Yes.
25 Q. Did you account for that?
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537
334
1 MR. KOBELINSKI: Account for what?
2 MS. PONZOLI: I don't think that his
3 fifty-percent contour matches his map on page eight.
4 And I was just asking if there was a simple
5 explanation.
6 MR. KOBELINSKI: If you point out where it
7 doesn't match so I understand the question.
8 BY MS. PONZOLI:
9 Q. Inside on page ten in a kidney shape, is that a
10 greater than fifty-percent cattail inside that contour?
11 A. I simply point out these maps are different
12 scales. So the distance on one is not the same as the
13 distance on another. If you look at like line three --
14 Q. Yes?
15 A. You notice that there are points one, two, three,
16 four, five and six. If you turn to page ten --
17 MR. KOBELINSKI: I'm saying it matches. But I'm
18 confused with the question.
19 If you understand the question that's fine.
20 MS. PONZOLI: I think I understand his
21 explanation even.
22 THE WITNESS: If you look at line three on page
23 ten you can see the same six points.
24 BY MS. PONZOLI:
25 Q. Right. And cattail seventy is within your --
JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537