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 335 1 A. If you look at cattail seventy -- 2 Q. It's within your kidney shape? 3 A. So they match perfectly. 4 Q. Okay. Let's look at Larsen number 249, which was 5 done in Water Conservation area one. 6 Who were the two botanists in the prior, the 248? Do 7 you recall? 8 A. I don't recall, but I think they are listed on 9 page one. 10 Q. Uh-huh. Actually page one. 11 MR. KOBELINSKI: Number one I think he is 12 referring to. 13 A. Can you repeat the question, please? 14 Q. I was asking for the botanists. 15 A. Which survey? 16 Q. The first one we just finished with, that would 17 be Mike Drummond and Pat Garber (phonetic). 18 A. Roman numeral two method one. Helicopter, Mike 19 Drummond, Environmental Services, permitting botanists in 20 theback seat, et cetera. 21 Q. Okay. Let's look on the next one. This time, 22 Mike Dennis was along with Bill Gray. And then evidently 23 Erim participated. This was one of two studies that 24 Erim -- 25 A. She was along. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 336 1 Q. Was this some effort at ground truthing? 2 A. It was background information for her. If you 3 look at the jet ranger, there is room for three people in 4 the back seat. She sat in the middle. 5 Q. I assume in this survey you were flying in 6 illegal air space? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Have you subsequently become aware of that? 9 A. When you arrested Dr. Richardson. 10 Q. I personally did not arrest Dr. Richardson, but 11 the United States did. But you became aware at that time 12 that you could not fly under five hundred feet? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. What was the purpose of this survey? 15 A. The same as the prior survey. To get an idea of 16 what the vegetation was on the north side of the canal. 17 Q. Were you aware of fires in these areas during 18 these times? 19 A. I don't recall the issue of fires pursuant to 20 these reports. 21 Q. Okay. What did these reports tell you that you 22 thought you needed to know about the vegetative 23 communities and the refuge in conservation area 2-A? 24 A. At the time the issue was, I guess it still is, 25 where the cattails were. And this is an attempt to JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 337 1 determine where the cattails were. 2 Q. Have you done similar vegetative work in the area 3 of water conservation areas? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Have you done overflights attempting to determine 6 if other vegetative work might be useful in the other 7 water conservation areas? 8 A. I have done overflights, many overflights, but 9 not for the purpose of determining if this kind of survey 10 would be appropriate. 11 Q. And what were the conclusions that you drew from 12 these vegetative surveys? 13 A. I'm sorry. I don't understand which vegetative 14 surveys. 15 Q. The two that you did the mapping of Larsen 248 16 and 249? 17 A. My conclusions are represented by the maps and 18 the data that is within the report. I would say that a 19 summary of what we found is provided on page sixteen of 20 the December 29th report, Exhibit 249. 21 Q. Okay. You, in your own words, just tell me now 22 what that basically stated. 23 A. I would let the figures speak for themselves. It 24 shows areas with more than fifty-percent cattail, areas 25 with more than fifty-percent sawgrass, and then other JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 338 1 vegetative associations. 2 Q. Have you ever had reason to doubt the accuracy of 3 these maps? 4 A. Given the methods, and again we're into an issue 5 of scale, that the methods used were appropriate. 6 Q. I wasn't questioning the methods used. Assuming 7 the methods were appropriate methods, have you 8 subsequently come to a conclusion that perhaps your 9 numbers or your boundaries might be somewhat off? 10 A. I haven't reviewed further vegetative work to 11 lead me to think this was not right. 12 Q. So you believe they are accurate as they stand 13 today? 14 A. Accurate as of the time that the survey was made, 15 given the constraints of the methods used to carry out the 16 survey. 17 Q. Did you reach no conclusions, Mr. Larsen, other 18 than you had percentage coverage of a certain, you know, 19 pig weed or cattail in certain areas? Did you reach no 20 conclusions beyond that? 21 A. The report stands on its own. It's a survey that 22 provides a numerical depiction of what we measured. 23 Q. Right. But you reached no conclusions beyond 24 that? No analysis? 25 A. Whatever analysis there is is invited within the JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 339 1 figures that show various percentage coverage of the 2 different types of vegetation. That information is 3 provided in detail in the reports of what we saw along 4 each line, and then summarized in the figures at the end 5 of the Report. 6 Q. I'm not making my question clear to you. 7 Normally, you gather data and then you do some analysis of 8 it and reach some, you know, here's my data which is so 9 much cattail, so much pig weed. And this is what I found. 10 And I understand you are saying you found more cattail, 11 less cattail, more pig weed, less pig weed and the 12 numbers. I understand that. But I would find it strange 13 that you would do that activity and reach no analysis or 14 conclusions. 15 A. Again, the report speaks for itself. Roman 16 numeral three says results on page three. And then page 17 four provides acreages of areas with more than 18 fifty-percent cattail. 19 Q. Did you make any effort to correlate this to 20 hydrology or nutrient enrichment? 21 A. If it doesn't come in the report, it doesn't. 22 Q. I'm not compelled to take your written report. 23 The report stands on its own. I am allowed to ask you 24 questions and you are really more or less compelled to 25 answer my questions the best you can. So to tell me the JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 340 1 report speaks for itself is basically a refusal -- 2 MR. KOBELINSKI: I believe he stated if it's not 3 reflected in the report. His last answer was simply 4 that. If it's not in the report, then I didn't do 5 it. 6 MS. PONZOLI: I'm asking him and he can say no, I 7 reached nothing beyond this. I gave no more thought 8 to it. This is a mechanical exercise and here are 9 the mechanics, which is sort of the answer I'm 10 getting. 11 MR. KOBELINSKI: Yes. 12 BY MS. PONZOLI: 13 Q. Is that your answer, this is a mechanical 14 exercise and you did nothing more than the mechanics? 15 A. That's right. 16 Q. Did you have any course work in biology when you 17 did your undergraduate or your masters degree? 18 A. No. 19 Q. So you were mainly along to do the loran 20 readings? 21 A. I have considerable experience in mapping. 22 Q. Uh-huh. As part of your civic engineering? 23 A. As part of my civic engineering. And then five 24 years as a commissioned officer in the coast guard and 25 geodetic survey. I have been around the world twice doing JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 341 1 graphing for ships. And I consider myself confident to 2 map anything, whether it be geophysical parameters, 3 biological parameters. Preparation of maps is, I would 4 say, an area where I have a lot of experience. 5 In this case, we married the ability of botanists to 6 measure and identify plants with my ability to prepare a 7 map. And what I have done is to prepare a map. 8 Q. All right. So if I wanted to ask conclusions, 9 perhaps Mr. Dennis or Mr. Drummond or Barbara would be a 10 better candidate? 11 A. I can't speak for them, but I would say so. 12 Q. Okay. Have you been in this case sort of a 13 consultant and environmental organizer for Peeples, Blank 14 Kavenaugh and Scotts? Do you understand what I mean? 15 MR. KOBELINSKI: Earl, Blank, Kavenaugh -- 16 MS. PONZOLI: I'm sorry. 17 A. I have done a lot of different things. I have 18 been asked to do a lot of things. I have done a lot of 19 different things. And so I guess the answer is yes, I 20 have done a lot of different things associated with the 21 case. 22 Q. Have you organized the experts and brought 23 experts together and sent information from one to the 24 other? Have you performed that type of task? 25 A. No. No. They have done all the coordination of JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 342 1 experts. 2 Q. So when you went and did things with other 3 experts, it was because they wanted to bring your 4 particular - the firm chose to bring your particular 5 skills, to the best of your knowledge, your particular 6 skills in contact with the skills of some other expert? 7 A. Well, I may have suggested that this could be 8 done in the form of a proposal. And then they decided to 9 have me do it. Or in other cases they might ask me how 10 could we do this, that or the other thing. 11 Q. And you made suggestions as to how it might be 12 done? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. And you might have helped the other person do it, 15 if it were a botanist or whatever? 16 A. Yes. I consider myself pretty much of a team 17 player. So I would help out where I could. 18 Q. I'm going to show you some documents that went 19 to -- I guess some of these look like they are Dr. 20 Richardson and of much these are Dr. Craft. But they may 21 have all gone to Dr. Richardson and then went to Dr. 22 Craft. I don't mean to misrepresent to whom they were 23 sent. These were exhibits in other depositions. And they 24 aren't in any particular order. I didn't have time over 25 lunch. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 343 1 The beginning of this, I don't imagine you recognize 2 the handwriting, do you? 3 A. I don't. 4 Q. Okay. This composite exhibit, as we get further 5 back in this though and we come to, I guess, the first 6 document that has your name on it, the one to Mr. Paul 7 Larsen, is this the same vegetative mapping exercise that 8 is reflected in Larsen 248? 9 A. It doesn't appear to be, no. 10 Q. What was this activity, to the best of your 11 recollection? 12 A. I don't remember. I point out that there is a 13 date on here that says September 27, 1989. 14 Q. I have a June 23, 1989 is where I'm starting. A 15 letter to Bill Earl from you, June 23, 1989. 16 I would like to refer you again, Mr. Larsen, to June 17 23, 1989. Larsen and Associates to Bill Earl from Paul 18 Larsen, referencing an aerial tour and sampling of water 19 conservation areas on June 16th. And ask you again, since 20 it seems that we may have been on different pages, was 21 this in connection with the vegetative sampling that went 22 on in Larsen 248? 23 A. You will notice that it says that I was out with 24 Mr. Earl on June 16th -- 25 Q. Right. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 344 1 A. -- 1989. 2 Q. Right. 3 A. And in this report it says July 12th, helicopter 4 surveil. So they were different. 5 Q. Okay. 6 MR. KOBELINSKI: July 21st? 7 A. (Indicating.) 8 Q. So in June, do you believe this was the first 9 trip you took out with Dr. Richardson? 10 A. I don't know. 11 Q. Do you recall going out with Dr. Richardson 12 sooner than June of 1989? 13 A. No, I don't know. Seems like it might have been 14 the first time. 15 Q. Is it possible that this was the first time? 16 A. It's possible, yes. 17 Q. You will note further back on 7/12/89 vegetative 18 survey, which would appear to reference Larsen 248, that 19 is your map; is it not? 20 A. The date on this, 7/12/89, coincides with the 21 date on the report, which is 7/12/89. 22 Q. Right. But the map is yours, isn't it? It says 23 Larsen and Associates. 24 A. The map is a reproduction of the map that is in 25 this report. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 345 1 Q. Right. 2 A. Down here this doesn't appear to be my 3 handwriting. It says September 27, 1989, which is a 4 different date again. 5 Q. Right. I agree. I agree completely. Was there 6 discussion when you went out with Dr. Richardson about 7 setting up his transects within your mapped area? 8 MR. KOBELINSKI: During which trip, counsel? 9 Q. I don't know. How many trips did you take with 10 Dr. Richardson? 11 A. No. There was none. 12 Q. You never had this discussion with Dr. 13 Richardson? 14 A. Not that I recall. 15 Q. Did you have this discussion with Dr. Craft? 16 A. Again, not that I recall. I don't recall having 17 any input whatsoever into their selection. 18 Q. All right. Do you recall supplying this map to 19 them? 20 A. I may have, but I don't recall specifically. The 21 report is dated July 21, 1989, so it was completed by the 22 date that's indicated here. 23 Q. Do you recall discussing your map with Dr. 24 Richardson? 25 A. No, not really. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 346 1 Q. Do you ever recall Dr. Richardson presenting your 2 map at a board meeting? 3 A. I believe it was used for that purpose. But as 4 to whether or not I transmitted to him or the law firm 5 transmitted it to him, I can't remember. 6 Q. But you don't recall ever discussing it with him? 7 A. I don't recall. I may have, you know, discussed 8 it peripherally with him, but I don't remember a 9 discussion with him. 10 Q. Let me hand you -- 11 MR. KOBELINSKI: Are we going to mark this as an 12 exhibit to this deposition? 13 MS. PONZOLI: Yes, I'm sorry. 14 MR. KOBELINSKI: It is identified. 15 MS. PONZOLI: Let's mark it as an exhibit. 16 (Thereupon, the document was marked for 17 identification as Government's Exhibit No. 252.) 18 BY. MS PONZOLI: 19 Q. I would like to hand you Craft No. 11, Mr. 20 Larsen, and ask you to look through there for documents 21 that would appear to belong to you. 22 MS. PONZOLII: I have not altered these, Mr. 23 Kobelinski. I started to pull them apart and then I 24 decided it would be cleaner to keep the originals 25 together. JACK BESONER AND ASSOCIATES (305) 371-1537 347 1