365 1 Division of Administrative Hearings 2 Department of Administration, State of Florida 3 SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE ) 4 of FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; and ) WEDGWORTH FARMS, Inc., ) 5 Petitioners ) V ) DOAH 6 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3038 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) 7 of Florida; et al., ) Respondents. ) 8 ) FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC.; ) 9 UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION; ) and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC., ) 10 Petitioners, ) V ) DOAH 11 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3039 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) 12 of Florida; et al., ) Respondents. ) 13 ) FLORIDA FRUIT and VEGETABLE ) 14 ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS; ) W. E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., ) 15 and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., ) Petitioners, ) 16 V ) DOAH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3040 17 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) of Florida; et al., ) 18 Respondents. ) 19 Deposition of Peter Rhoads 20 VOLUME III 21 Taken before Elaine V. Williams, Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for 22 the State of Florida at large, pursuant to notice of taking deposition filed by the Petitioner in the 23 above cause. - - - 24 Thursday, October 1, 1992 3301 Gun Club Road 25 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 10:20 a.m. - 12:05 p.m. 366 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Petitioners Florida Sugar 3 Cane League, Inc., United States Sugar Corp., and New South Hope, Inc.: 4 Peeples, Earl & Blank, P.A. One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3636 5 Two South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131 6 By: WILLIAM EARL, ESQUIRE JONATHAN L. GAINES, ESQUIRE 7 On behalf of the Respondent SFWMD: 8 South Florida Water Management District 3301 Gun Club Road 9 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680 By: JACQUELYN W. BIRCH, ESQUIRE 10 On behalf of the Intervenor, United States of America: 11 Department of Justice 155 South Miami Avenue, Suite 627 12 Miami, Florida 33130-1693 BY: SUZAN HILL PONZOLI, ESQUIRE 13 14 - - - 367 1 - - - 2 I N D E X 3 - - - 4 5 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 6 Peter Rhoads 7 BY MR. EARL: 369 (continued) 8 368 1 - - - 2 E X H I B I T S 3 - - - 4 NUMBER PAGE NO. DESCRIPTION 5 VOLUME I 6 EXB. NO. 1 66 CV 7 VOLUME III 8 EXB. NO. 2 369 synopsis SWIM plan 9 EXB. NO. 3 403 Rhoads memo EXB. NO. 4 406 key elements ERP 10 VOLUME IV 11 EXB. NO. 5 456 4/3/89 Rhoads memo from Gerner EXB. NO. 6 461 7/7/89 Rhoads memo to Jason 12 EXB. NO. 7 471 6/29/89 Dineen memo to Branscome EXB. NO. 8 493 7/27/89 Rhoads report to Garner 13 EXB. NO. 9 503 9/29/89 Rhoads memo to MacVicar EXB. NO. 10 505 10/4/89 Smith memo to Rhoads 14 EXB. NO. 11 507 3/30/90 Maceina memo to List EXB. NO. 12 516 5/21/90 Input Memo 15 EXB. NO. 13COMPOSITE 520 8/23/90 Reisa letter to Wodraska 8/16/90 Parker letter to Stewart 16 EXB. NO. 14 525 11/19/90 MacVicar memo to Wodraska EXB. NO. 15 528 6/26/91 Newman memo to List 17 EXB. NO. 16 532 11/17/91 Rhoads memo to STA Design EXB. NO. 17 543 12/5/91 Mierau memo to Bearzotti 18 EXB. No. 18 553 undated Quincey memo to Rhoads EXB. NO. 19 554 Key points memo 19 EXB. NO. 20 557 2 page handwritten notes 369 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 - - - 3 Thereupon, 4 Peter Rhoads, 5 being by the undersigned Notary Public previously duly 6 sworn, was examined and testified as follows: 7 THE WITNESS: I do. 8 CONTINUED DIRECT (Peter Rhoads) 9 - - - 10 MR. EARL: Are we ready? Back on the 11 record. 12 BY MR. EARL: 13 Q. Good morning, Mr. Rhoads. 14 A. Good morning, Mr. Earl. 15 Q. Mr. Rhoads, you indicated, or counsel 16 indicated, you were going to bring some schedules 17 this morning. 18 MS. BIRCH: Yes. 19 MR. EARL: Could I look at those? 20 MS. BIRCH: Yes. 21 MR. EARL: Would you mark that? 22 (The document was marked 23 Rhoads Depo Exb. No. 2.) 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. Let me hand you now what has been marked as 370 1 Exhibit 2 to your deposition, which your counsel 2 provided the other morning. What is that, 3 Mr. Rhoads? 4 A. This is a draft manuscript entitled 5 Synopsis of Everglades SWIM Plan Alternative 6 Development, dated September, 1992. 7 Q. And who prepared that? 8 A. It was authored by Paul Whalen and edited 9 by myself. 10 Q. And for what purpose was that prepared? 11 A. This was prepared in response to a 12 Governing Board request. 13 Q. Was it presented to the Governing Board? 14 A. No, it is undergoing technical review at 15 this point in time. It has not been presented to the 16 board yet. 17 Q. Okay. What's the scope and purpose of that 18 document? 19 A. The purpose was to provide an overview of 20 the alternatives that were considered in preparing 21 the Everglades SWIM Plan. 22 Q. Have you done your editing yet on it? 23 A. It will probably need more, but yes, I have 24 done some. 25 Q. Does it, in your judgment, accurately 371 1 describe the status and nature of the alternatives to 2 date? 3 A. I think it does a reasonably good job of 4 describing those alternatives, yes. 5 Q. Are there any specific deficiencies of 6 which you are aware? 7 A. Not that I am aware at this point in time, 8 but some may emerge from the technical review 9 process. 10 Q. Okay. Mr. Rhoads, is it your 11 understanding, Mr. Rhoads, that the spread of exotic 12 species in Everglades wetlands is attributable 13 primarily to the decline in vigor and health of the 14 natural community? 15 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form of the 16 question. Mr. Rhoads is not being presented by 17 the District as an expert witness, and to the 18 extent it calls for expert testimony, I am 19 objecting. If Mr. Rhoads has personal 20 understanding of the question that you are 21 proposing to him, he can answer. 22 MR. EARL: I'm asking him, in his capacity 23 and understanding of Everglades issues, in view 24 of his Everglades restoration responsibility -- 25 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question 372 1 for me, please. 2 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 3 was read by the reporter.) 4 MR. EARL: Let me rephrase it. I want to 5 add something to it. 6 MS. BIRCH: Even before you ask Mr. Rhoads 7 the question, I wanted also the record to 8 reflect that while Mr. Rhoads is Director of 9 Everglades restoration, he is not, nor has he 10 testified during the course of his deposition 11 that he's familiar with all of the technical and 12 scientific aspects of the many broad issues that 13 arise in Everglades Restoration Program. 14 MR. EARL: Okay. 15 BY MR. EARL: 16 Q. Mr. Rhoads, is it true that exotic species 17 invade a variety of natural vegetation communities in 18 the Everglades and their spread in wetlands is 19 attributable primarily to the decline in vigor and 20 health of the natural community, mostly associated 21 with reductions in hydroperiod and water depths? 22 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. Mr. Earl, if 23 you're going to read from the publication, can 24 you share a copy of that with us or tell us what 25 you're reading from? 373 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Go ahead, sir, if you can answer. 3 MS. PONZOLI: I think you can at least 4 answer my questions, Mr. Earl. 5 MR. EARL: I'll read from whatever I desire 6 to read from, and when it becomes appropriate, I 7 will share it with you. 8 MS. PONZOLI: Okay. Then Miss Court 9 Reporter, would you read back again what 10 Mr. Earl just read to us. 11 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 12 was read by the reporter.) 13 MS. PONZOLI: I'm going to object to the 14 form. 15 THE WITNESS: To the extent I am familiar 16 with this area, that sounds like a correct 17 statement, yes. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Mr. Rhoads, is it true, in your 20 understanding of Everglades ecology, that shortened 21 hydroperiods reduce soil organic matter? 22 MS. PONZOLI: I'm going to have a 23 continuing objection to Mr. Earl's reading 24 passages that he will not cite to us from what 25 he's reading, and then I won't have to object 374 1 each and every time. 2 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 3 THE WITNESS: Would you please repeat the 4 question for me. 5 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 6 was read by the reporter.) 7 THE WITNESS: That's a rather complex 8 question because it involves several possible 9 different ways of looking at it. In the sense 10 that the Everglades has been altered from its 11 original condition and, if applied to a specific 12 area that once had a longer period and now has a 13 shorter hydroperiod, it is probably a generally 14 valid statement. However, to the extent that it 15 compares portions of the Everglades with 16 different hydroperiods, it is probably not a 17 valid statement. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Same areas with a shortened hydroperiod? 20 It would be valid? 21 A. Within that context, I believe that is 22 correct, to the extent I understand this area. 23 Q. Okay. Mr. Rhoads, is it also correct in 24 your understanding of Everglades ecology that 25 shortened hydroperiods have adversely impacted the 375 1 structure and function of the Everglades periphyton 2 community? 3 MS. PONZOLI: Continuing objection. 4 MS. BIRCH: I'm going to object to the form 5 of the question. 6 MR. EARL: Grounds? 7 MS. BIRCH: Mr. Rhoads, as I stated 8 earlier, does not have, and has not been 9 presented as, an expert witness and he has not 10 testified in his deposition that he is a 11 hydrologist or that he is an ecologist, and if 12 he can answer the question based upon his 13 general knowledge, I have no objection to that, 14 but I object to your trying to make Mr. Rhoads 15 an expert in areas which he clearly doesn't have 16 expertise in. 17 MR. EARL: I think you are going to have to 18 read it back to the witness after that. 19 THE WITNESS: If would you, please. 20 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 21 was read by the reporter.) 22 THE WITNESS: Probably so, but I'm not 23 really sure in that area. 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. Have long term reductions, to your 376 1 knowledge, in the hydroperiod in the Northeast Shark 2 River Slough Area resulted in lower densities in fish 3 communities, aquatic animals? 4 MS. PONZOLI: Same objection as before. 5 MS. BIRCH: Same objection. 6 THE WITNESS: It is my general 7 understanding that that is the case, yes. 8 BY MR. EARL: 9 Q. In the Northeast Shark River Slough Area, 10 is it also your understanding that long term 11 reductions in the hydroperiods, since 1962, have also 12 resulted in the deposition of a layer of marl on top 13 of the original peat substrate? 14 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 15 THE WITNESS: I don't have any personal 16 knowledge of that, Counsel. 17 BY MR. EARL: 18 Q. What is marl? 19 A. Marl is a calcium carbonate deposit 20 produced in hard water, normally by periphytic 21 action. 22 Q. Is it your understanding marl deposition is 23 indicative of a shift of the species dominance of the 24 periphyton community from green algae and diatomes to 25 blue/green algae? 377 1 A. I need a repeat on that question, please. 2 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 3 was read by the reporter.) 4 THE WITNESS: Marl deposition is a natural 5 phenomenon in some portions of the Everglades, 6 and blue/green algae are often a major component 7 of the community that generated marl deposition. 8 Whether a change in marl depo -- I lost the 9 train of the question again. I need -- 10 BY MR. EARL: 11 Q. I'm sorry. The thrust of it is whether 12 marl deposition is indicative of a shift in the 13 species dominance. 14 A. In and of itself, I don't believe marl 15 deposition, the process of depositing marl, is 16 necessarily indicative of a shift in species 17 composition, no. 18 Q. Has shortened hydroperiod in the Northeast 19 Shark River Slough, to your knowledge, resulted in a 20 decrease in forage fish populations? 21 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. Same 22 objection as previously stated. 23 THE WITNESS: I suspect that that statement 24 is correct, yes. 378 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Is it your understanding that the major 3 problem facing alligators in Shark River Slough, 4 since scheduled water deliveries to the park began in 5 1971, is excessive flooding from untimely release of 6 flood water out of Water Conservation Area 3A in late 7 summer? 8 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 9 THE WITNESS: I would suspect that that is 10 one of the top two problems. 11 BY MR. EARL: 12 Q. What would the other be? 13 A. Poaching during the early '70's. 14 Q. That is no longer a problem? 15 A. No, it isn't. Not generally anyway. 16 Q. So the major problem now would be the 17 untimely release of flood water; correct? 18 MS. PONZOLI: Asked and answered. 19 BY MR. EARL: 20 Q. Correct? 21 A. The question was since scheduled releases 22 began in 1971. 23 Q. Yes. And now I'm asking at the present 24 time. 25 A. At the present time, I'm not sure, 379 1 Counselor. I'm not sure. 2 Q. Not sure of what? 3 A. Whether at the present time that 4 constitutes the most substantial problem facing the 5 alligator population. 6 Q. Are there still untimely flood releases in 7 WCA 3A in late summer? 8 A. They have been substantially altered under 9 the current operating regime, discharging from 10 Conservation Area 3, from what existed previously 11 during the '70's and early '80's. 12 Q. Are they still significant in terms of 13 alligators? 14 A. I'm not sure, Counselor. 15 Q. Is it your understanding, historically, 16 that Water Conservation Area 3B was a very important 17 dry season feeding habitat for wading birds? 18 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. Mr. Rhoads 19 previously testified that he did not have 20 sufficient current knowledge as to the history 21 and ongoing studies related to wading birds or 22 birds in the Everglades. 23 MR. EARL: I would also suggest, Counsel, 24 he spent a lot of time out there. He spent more 25 time, other than Mr. Dineen, than anyone I know. 380 1 He's listened to at least three presentations 2 that Mr. Dineen did, that I was there, when 3 Mr. Dineen talked about this situation. I'm 4 asking him his understanding as an Everglades 5 restoration specialist, whether he understands 6 that to be true. 7 MS. BIRCH: He is not a specialist. He 8 hasn't presented himself as a specialist, 9 Mr. Earl, but if he has personal knowledge, and 10 that is his understanding from recent review, 11 and can answer the question, he should proceed. 12 THE WITNESS: Would you please repeat the 13 question. 14 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 15 was read by the reporter.) 16 THE WITNESS: Yes, I suspect that statement 17 is correct. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. And is it also your understanding, 20 Mr. Rhoads, that the periphyt and forage fish and 21 wading bird food chain has virtually collapsed in 22 Water Conservation Area 3B since it was impounded? 23 A. No. I believe that is an overstatement. 24 Q. Well, what is your understanding of the 25 impact of the impoundment of 3B on the periphyt and 381 1 forage fish and wading bird food chain? 2 A. I would suspect that that food chain has 3 been adversely impacted by the reduced hydroperiod, 4 however, significant wading bird foraging continues 5 to occur in Conservation Area 3B, so I don't think it 6 would be appropriate to state that the food chain had 7 collapsed in that area. 8 Q. It's been adversely impacted, though? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And would that be a significant impact, in 11 your judgment? 12 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form of the 13 question. I'm going to have a standing 14 objection, Mr. Earl, as you continue to read 15 these many scientific and technical statements, 16 from whatever document you're reading from, to 17 Mr. Rhoads. 18 MR. EARL: Okay. 19 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Could you please 20 repeat the question. 21 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 22 was read by the reporter.) 23 THE WITNESS: I think it would be 24 appropriate to call it a significant impact, 25 yes. 382 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Okay. How big is Water Conservation Area 3 3B, sir? 4 A. I do not remember a figure on that. 5 Q. Order of magnitude? 6 A. 100,000. 7 Q. In these impacts you are talking about, the 8 impoundments in Water Conservation Area 3B, that is a 9 result of design and construction modifications to 10 the Federal project; is that correct? 11 A. In addition -- 12 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 13 MR. EARL: Grounds? 14 MS. PONZOLI: I don't think you have named 15 all the elements that go into the operation of 16 the Central and Southern Florida Flood Control 17 Project; all the key components. 18 THE WITNESS: In addition to the works that 19 were constructed prior to the C&SF project, yes. 20 BY MR. EARL: 21 Q. Okay. Let's talk, since you brought it up, 22 let's talk about the modifications that created Water 23 Conservation Area 3B, sir. When were those 24 constructed? 25 A. Generally, during the '50's and '60's. 383 1 Some work was done during the '70's. 2 Q. And would you chronologically describe the 3 changes from the original project that were added to 4 create Water Conservation Area 3B? 5 A. By original project -- 6 Q. The original project designs. Wasn't 7 there, in fact, a leakage problem out of that area? 8 Wasn't the project losing water to the east? 9 MS. BIRCH: Objection. What is the 10 question? And also again, Mr. Earl, Mr. Rhoads 11 is not, as he told you earlier in response to 12 the question, he said he's generally familiar 13 with the project, but he has not said that he 14 has any expertise, or any claimed expertise, in 15 the history and development and chronological 16 dates of how the project developed. 17 MR. EARL: I'm not asking for expertise, 18 I'm asking for facts of which I believe he's 19 aware. 20 MS. BIRCH: Well, if he knows, he can 21 answer. 22 THE WITNESS: Please repeat the question. 23 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 24 was read by the reporter.) 25 THE WITNESS: The original Water 384 1 Conservation Area 3, constructed under the C&SF 2 project, did have a significant leakage problem. 3 BY MR. EARL: 4 Q. To the east? 5 A. Along its eastern and southern boundary. 6 Construction of the L-67A and L-67C borrow canals, 7 and seepage levees were designed to alleviate that 8 problem. 9 Q. And when were they constructed? 10 A. During the '60's. 11 Q. And you said there was other construction 12 in the '70's. What else happened? 13 A. The L-67A borrow canal was improved for 14 conveyance purposes during the late '60's and early 15 '70's. 16 Q. Any other changes to the project design? 17 A. Yes. There were changes made in the South 18 Dade conveyance system. 19 Q. Are those relevant to the impoundment in 20 3A? 21 A. To a limited degree, yes. 22 Q. To what degree? 23 A. To the degree that the enlargement of the 24 L-29 borrow canal altered seepage rates from 25 Conservation Area 3B. 385 1 Q. Altered. L-29 borrow canal altered seepage 2 rates. Increased or decreased them? 3 A. Increased. 4 Q. When was L-29 borrow canal? 5 A. During the mid '70's, I believe. 6 Q. Any other changes relating to the 7 impoundment in 3B? 8 A. Those are the only ones that I can think 9 of. 10 Q. And those were all modifications to the 11 Federal project, were they not, sir? 12 A. That is correct. 13 Q. And are those the factors that resulted in 14 the impoundment in Water Conservation Area 3B that we 15 have been talking about? 16 A. Generally, yes. 17 Q. You say generally. What else? 18 A. The works constructed previously within 19 this century by the Everglades Drainage District and 20 private interests also impacted Conservation Area 3B; 21 what is now Conservation Area 3B. 22 Q. But they didn't create the impoundments 23 that we have been talking about, did they, sir? 24 A. To a limited degree, the private works that 25 were constructed in Dade County did affect 386 1 hydroperiods in Conservation Area 3B, in all 2 likelihood. 3 Q. What private works? 4 A. The canals and levees that are evident in 5 that area today that were constructed during the 6 '20's and '30's. 7 Q. Were they in existence at the -- obviously, 8 they were in existence, were they not, at the time 9 the project was constructed. 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. And a project design contemplated and 12 incorporated those, did it not? 13 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form. 14 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 15 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 16 BY MR. EARL: 17 Q. When the Federal Government designed the 18 project, they were aware of those structures and 19 canals, were they not? 20 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form. 21 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 22 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 23 BY MR. EARL: 24 Q. Has the impoundment problem, in terms of 25 ecological effects that you have been talking 387 1 about -- when did it come to the notice of the 2 District, in your understanding of the evolvement of 3 this area? 4 A. Sometime in the 1960's. 5 Q. After construction of the project; correct? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Were the modifications you have just talked 8 about successful, in the L-67, successful in stemming 9 the flow of water down into Water Conservation Area 10 3B? 11 A. To a considerable degree, yes. 12 Q. And isn't that why L-67 was designed; to 13 dike off Conservation Area 3B to prevent water from 14 flowing down? 15 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 16 MS. BIRCH: Asked and answered. 17 THE WITNESS: Yes. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Okay. If that was designed to cut off the 20 flow of water, Mr. Rhoads, what is your understanding 21 why -- what resulted in the impoundment down there? 22 A. I don't understand the question, Counselor. 23 Q. L-67 was put in there to intercept the flow 24 of water; correct? 25 A. Correct. 388 1 Q. Okay. And subsequent to that, there was an 2 impoundment water problem in Water Conservation Area 3 3B; correct? I'm sorry. Let me go back. Tell me 4 what the problem is in 3B that we have been talking 5 about. It is an impoundment, but is it a shortening 6 of the hydroperiod, a lengthening, a pooling? What 7 is the problem there? 8 A. The primary problem in conservation Area 3B 9 is that it's been cut off from its historical 10 overland flow into the area. There is a limited 11 impounding that has occurred in portions, the 12 southern portion, but it is a relatively limited 13 phenomenon. The primary problem is that the 14 hydroperiod has been shortened by a reduction of 15 surface water inflows; overland flow. 16 Q. And that was by design; correct? 17 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. It's the reason L-67 was put in; correct? 20 A. Essentially, yes. 21 Q. You say essentially. 22 A. The extent to which the designers 23 recognized the adverse impacts of their actions is 24 not clear in my mind. 25 Q. So as I understand what you have told me, 389 1 the ecological problem right now in 3B is a drying 2 out in what proportion? The northern three- 3 quarters? 4 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. You're 5 mischaracterizing his testimony. 6 MS. BIRCH: Join the objection. 7 BY MR. EARL: 8 Q. Explain. You said there was a shortening 9 of the hydroperiod and a cutoff of the historical 10 flow; correct, sir? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And that resulted in a drying out? 13 A. Generally, the hydroperiod is shorter 14 throughout the area. 15 Q. Okay. And you told me this is about 16 100,000? 17 A. Order of magnitude, yes. 18 Q. What percentage of that, or fraction of 19 that, 100,000 acres is impacted by this cutoff of 20 flow; this drying out? 21 A. The entire area. 22 Q. Okay, sir. Is there some pooling or 23 impoundment down there in the southern portion? 24 A. There is a very limited pooling in the 25 southeastern corner of Conservation Area 3B under 390 1 certain rainfall conditions, yes. 2 Q. Down around -- what is that -- 335? 3 A. In the vicinity of structure 335. However, 4 that is an area of very high seepage, so the ponding 5 there is not as you would typically expect, and as we 6 discussed earlier, say in the southern end of 7 Conservation Area 3A or in the southern end of 8 Conservation Area 1. 9 Q. Did the SWIM plan address this problem in 10 Water Conservation Area 3B? 11 A. In general terms, it did. 12 Q. What remedies did it propose? 13 A. It proposed to study the problem and 14 develop future remedies. 15 Q. But there are no specific remedial measures 16 proposed? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Mr. Rhoads, what is your understanding of 19 the total area in the Everglades, what is called the 20 ENP in the SWIM plan, impacted by nutrient induced 21 cattails? How many acres? 22 A. I don't know. 23 Q. Do you have any idea? 24 A. I really don't, no. 25 Q. In your understanding of Everglades 391 1 ecology, do you believe the wood stork is a sensitive 2 bioindicator? 3 A. Yes, I believe that is correct. 4 Q. Would a restoration of hydroperiod, let's 5 pick Water Conservation Area 3B, would that have -- a 6 natural hydroperiod back there -- have a positive 7 impact on the alligator population? 8 A. I don't know. 9 Q. How about on the population of wood stork 10 and nesting, breeding? 11 A. The term restoration is a very broad term. 12 Depending on how it were restored, the extent of the 13 restoration and whether the restoration had any 14 adverse impacts in other areas would determine the 15 validity of that statement. 16 Q. So you have no idea of whether there would 17 be a positive effect? 18 MS. PONZOLI: It's been answered. 19 BY MR. EARL: 20 Q. In Water Conservation Area 3B? 21 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 22 MS. BIRCH: Objection. Its argumentative. 23 He's answered the question. 24 THE WITNESS: In very general terms, yes. 392 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Okay, sir. What was, from your 3 understanding of the evolution of the Everglades, 4 what was the dominant vegetation, vegetative 5 community, in Water Conservation Area 3B? 6 A. Sawgrass. 7 Q. Is sawgrass still dominant in that area? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Has that area been invaded by exotic 10 species? 11 A. Yes, it has. 12 Q. Would that invasion be significant in terms 13 of the magnitude of it? 14 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes, I would say so. 16 BY MR. EARL: 17 Q. Has that area seen an increased incidence 18 of brushy vegetation? 19 A. In some areas, yes. 20 Q. And again, is that significant in terms of 21 the extent of it? 22 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 23 THE WITNESS: Perhaps. 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. You say perhaps. Under what circumstances? 393 1 A. I think it is debatable; the extent to 2 which the brushy vegetation in 3B constitutes a 3 significant problem. 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. There has been a hydroperiod shortening in 6 the area and it has had an impact on vegetation. 7 Q. Willow and myrtle in there now? 8 A. In some areas, yes. 9 Q. Are you aware of any quantification, 10 vegetative analysis or mapping that has been done in 11 that area in terms of displacement of sawgrass? 12 A. There has been some work done by Dr. Taylor 13 Alexander in his vegetation transects in that area. 14 Q. You mean in 1949? 15 A. No. No. This was work conducted in 16 1970's. 17 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. '79. Anything more 18 recent? 19 A. No, I don't believe so. 20 Q. The District owns, or the state owns, Water 21 Conservation Area 3B; is that correct? 22 A. As is the case in other portions of the 23 conservation area, the District has certain rights to 24 flow and store water within Conservation Area 3B. In 25 some cases the District has fee title to the land. 394 1 In other cases, that title is held by private 2 parties. 3 Q. They have flowage easements? 4 A. Flowage easements. 5 Q. Does the Federal Government, to your 6 knowledge, address the adverse ecological impacts in 7 Water Conservation Area 3B? 8 A. I believe they are proposing to, yes. 9 Q. Is that in the modified water deliveries? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What is your understanding of what they are 12 proposing to do? 13 A. They are proposing to length, then to 14 divert, water from the L-67A borrow canal through the 15 seepage control levees into Conservation Area 3B, and 16 then with modifications of the L-29 levee, to move 17 that water south into the North Shark River Slough. 18 Q. That is the fundamental premise of the 19 modifications; correct? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Is it your understanding that cattails 22 aggressively colonize disturbed areas? 23 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form of the 24 question. 25 THE WITNESS: I would say that cattails can 395 1 aggressively colonize disturbed areas; yes. 2 BY MR. EARL: 3 Q. And do they, in your experience, in what is 4 called the ENP, do cattails frequently emerge on 5 disturbed areas, such as levees and canals? 6 A. My experience within Everglades National 7 Park has been very limited. As I indicated yesterday 8 when we were discussing Everglades National Park, I 9 have very little direct familiarity with that. 10 Q. I'm sorry. I meant to say the EPA. Your 11 experience in the EPA. 12 A. Could you repeat the question for me. 13 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 14 was read by the reporter.) 15 THE WITNESS: Okay. And the subsequent 16 portion of the question changed that to the 17 Everglades Protection Area? 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Yes, sir. 20 A. Yes. In my experience, cattails are 21 relatively common at the toe of the berm of levees 22 and in disturbed areas within the Everglades 23 Protection Area. 24 Q. And would that be true in situations where 25 nutrients would not be a factor? 396 1 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. I don't 2 think it is clear what you mean; nutrients not a 3 factor. 4 THE WITNESS: One of the most likely 5 theories for why cattails colonize recently 6 disturbed areas is that the disturbance has 7 altered the soil chemistry and has released 8 nutrients, so by definition, a disturbed area 9 is, at least theoretically, an area of altered 10 nutrient composition and variability. 11 BY MR. EARL: 12 Q. Nutrients mobilized how? 13 A. A number of potentially different 14 mechanisms. One being the actual physical 15 disturbance of the soil, making that soil available 16 for aerial oxidation and, thereby, the increase in 17 the availability of the inherent nutrients within 18 that soil because of the oxidation of the organic 19 material in which the nutrients are partially bound. 20 Q. Do you subscribe to that hypothesis? 21 A. I think it is a reasonable hypothesis, yes. 22 Q. I am just trying to understand whether or 23 not you concur with the viewpoint that where you do 24 work and disturbance in the EPA, where nutrients 25 would not be a factor, surface water nutrients, 397 1 cattails would aggressively colonize disturbed areas? 2 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. It's been 3 asked and answered. You got the answer you 4 didn't like. Now you are trying to get one you 5 do like. 6 MS. BIRCH: I join the objection. Same 7 grounds. 8 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the last 9 question, please. 10 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 11 was read by the reporter.) 12 THE WITNESS: I doubt that you can disturb 13 any area within the Everglades Protection Area 14 without altering the nutrient dynamics of the 15 soil. 16 BY MR. EARL: 17 Q. And you believe that is a responsible 18 keying factor; correct? 19 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 20 BY MR. EARL: 21 Q. You believe that is the primary factor 22 resulting in the appearance of the cattails in a 23 disturbed area; is that correct? 24 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. You have 25 changed your question and you're arguing with 398 1 the witness. 2 MS. BIRCH: I join the objection. 3 THE WITNESS: I don't understand the 4 question. 5 BY MR. EARL: 6 Q. Let me try and make it a little clearer. 7 You're accepting a hypothesis, and I'm asking you, 8 but for that hypothesis, in your experience, do 9 cattails emerge -- are you attributing that 10 hypothesis that you have just described to me to be 11 the primary factor in the emergence of cattails in 12 disturbed areas where surface water nutrients are not 13 of concern? 14 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. It is a 15 compound question. 16 MS. BIRCH: Objection. Object to the form 17 of the question. 18 Do you understand the question, Mr. Rhoads? 19 THE WITNESS: No, I don't. 20 MR. EARL: Read it back to him, please. 21 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 22 was read by the reporter.) 23 BY MR. EARL: 24 Q. Let me just take the last half of that. 25 Counsel's correct. That was a compound question. 399 1 You have described a hypothesis for me that 2 the disturbance of the soil results in increase of 3 nutrients; correct, sir? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. Okay, sir. Now I'm asking you in an area 6 of the Everglades Protection Area that is disturbed 7 through a canal or levee construction, where there is 8 no surface water nutrient impact, do you attribute 9 the emergence of cattails primarily to this nutrient 10 hypothesis you have just described for me? 11 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 12 THE WITNESS: In a situation such as that, 13 cattails are invading because of the disturbance 14 of the area. 15 BY MR. EARL: 16 Q. So that would be -- the disturbance would 17 be the primary factor? 18 A. To the extent I understand your question, 19 yes. 20 Q. Thank you. What don't you understand about 21 my question? 22 A. I'm not sure I fully understood the 23 question. 24 Q. Okay. Tell me what you didn't understand. 25 A. I'm not sure what I didn't understand. 400 1 Q. Okay. You understood your hypothesis, did 2 you not, Mr. Rhoads? 3 A. Correct. 4 Q. Okay. And you understood that the question 5 I asked you assumed that there was no surface water 6 nutrient impacts; correct? 7 A. Okay. 8 Q. Do you understand that? 9 A. I understand what you're saying now. 10 Q. Okay. And you just told me that the 11 disturbance was the primary cause, the disturbance, 12 it was the primary cause of the cattail emergence; is 13 that correct? 14 A. That is correct. 15 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. I think 16 you're asking the same question in a different 17 form over and over again. I think he's already 18 indicated that disturbance in lost nutrient 19 release, in his experience, or his 20 understanding, or whatever it was, he qualified 21 it, so you're asking the same question again and 22 again and again, and I object to it. 23 MR. EARL: When the witness is going to 24 tell me he is going to qualify an answer, I'm 25 going to inquire as to the qualification of what 401 1 he doesn't understand. 2 MS. PONZOLI: I don't think you're 3 qualifying the answer, Mr. Earl. 4 MR. EARL: Counsel, you may want to 5 describe how you want this witness to answer, 6 but I would appreciate it, particularly if it is 7 not your witness, if you would give an objection 8 and not go on with a narrative of how you would 9 like the question answered. 10 MS. PONZOLI: I would appreciate it if you 11 wouldn't waste our time. We are in our third 12 day of this deposition and we are asking the 13 same question probably 15 times. 14 MR. EARL: If I get an unqualified answer, 15 I won't have to ask about the qualifications. 16 Let's go on, Mr. Rhoads. 17 BY MR. EARL: 18 Q. Stephen Davis, is he on -- is that Steve 19 Davis of your staff, the District staff? 20 A. We have an employee by the name of Stephen 21 Davis, known as Steve Davis, yes. 22 Q. Who is Lance Gunderson? Do you know? 23 A. Lance Gunderson was formerly a biologist on 24 the staff of Everglades National Park; currently a 25 graduate student at the University of Florida, I 402 1 believe. 2 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that 3 sawgrass density, in abundance, has been altered due 4 to prolonged flooding and fire impacts associated 5 with shortened hydroperiods in Water Conservation 6 Area 3A? 7 MS. PONZOLI: May we have the question 8 again? You're reading statements from whatever 9 you're reading from, and they are difficult to 10 follow. 11 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 12 was read by the reporter.) 13 MS. PONZOLI: I'm going to object to form. 14 MS. BIRCH: I'm going to object to the 15 form. And to the extent that it calls for 16 expert opinion, I'll object to Mr. Earl trying 17 to elicit expert testimony from Mr. Rhoads. 18 MR. EARL: I am just asking him his 19 understanding of the facts. 20 MS. PONZOLI: These facts are multiple 21 facts, multiple assumptions of a great deal of 22 expertise; each of these statements you're 23 reading from that document. 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. Go ahead, sir. 403 1 A. I suspect that that statement is generally 2 correct. 3 Q. Is it also your understanding that sawgrass 4 density has decreased in Northeast Shark River Slough 5 due to shortened hydroperiod, peat oxidation and 6 increased fire frequency and severity? 7 MS. PONZOLI: Same objection. 8 MS. BIRCH: Same objection. 9 THE WITNESS: Same response. Yes. 10 BY MR. EARL: 11 Q. Yes? 12 A. Generally. 13 Q. And would the same be true of sawgrass; 14 that sawgrass density, sir, has decreased in Water 15 Conservation Area 3A due to shortened hydroperiods, 16 peat oxidation and increased fire frequency and 17 severity? 18 MS. PONZOLI: Same objection. 19 MS. BIRCH: Same objection. 20 THE WITNESS: In some areas, yes. 21 MR. EARL: Let's mark this, if you can, as 22 Number 3, please. 23 (The document was marked 24 Rhoads Depo Exb. No. 3.) 25 MS. PONZOLI: What is it? 404 1 MR. EARL: This is a memorandum Mr. Rhoads 2 is named on. I have got one, if counsel wants 3 to look at it. 4 MS. PONZOLI: I would like a copy, 5 Mr. Earl. I think it is customary to hand all 6 counsel at the table a copy of exhibits. 7 MR. EARL: I have one. I'm asking you both -- 8 I don't have another one of this one. If you 9 would both like to look at it, you may take the 10 time. It is a one-page document. 11 MS. PONZOLI: Can you get a copy, 12 Ms. Birch? Let's just get copies. 13 MS. BIRCH: Do you have any more one-page 14 documents that you are going to be presenting 15 that you just have one copy of? 16 MR. EARL: He's looking right now. 17 MS. BIRCH: Maybe we can take a break so 18 that the ones you're using, we could all look at 19 while you're asking Mr. Rhoads questions. 20 MR. EARL: What we'll do is go through and 21 make a list. I'll go on to something else. 22 Mr. Gaines can go through and make a list and 23 we'll get you clean copies. 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. On Monday we talked about -- you limited 405 1 your expertise, present current expertise, on 2 Everglades matters to the Everglades crayfish; 3 correct, sir? 4 A. Specific scientific expertise, yes. 5 Q. And you do not contemplate, in this case, 6 testifying as an expert in any other area, do you? 7 A. No, I don't. 8 Q. Okay, sir. You mentioned a study that you 9 did with Pat Gleason back in the '70's; correct? 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. Can you tell me, other than that study, 12 what other conclusions or opinions do you have 13 regarding the Everglades crayfish, that you 14 identified, that would be relevant to this case? 15 A. I don't believe there are any. 16 Q. Okay, sir. 17 MR. EARL: Counsel, while we are making 18 copies, could you bring some other copies for 19 myself? 20 MS. PONZOLI: Do we have enough? 21 MS. BIRCH: Yes, I made copies. 22 MR. EARL: Okay. Thank you. Why don't we 23 go to that now, if we can. Can we mark this 24 one? 406 1 (The document was marked 2 Rhoads Depo Exb. No. 4.) 3 BY MR. EARL: 4 Q. I hand you now what we have marked as 5 Exhibit 4 to your deposition, and can you tell me 6 what that is, sir? 7 A. That is a copy of the schedule of the key 8 elements of the Everglades Restoration Program. 9 Q. And it consists of how many pages, sir? 10 A. Five pages. 11 Q. Okay. Is this the same document you 12 presented to the Governing Board? 13 A. Basically, yes. There have been a few word 14 changes on it, but it is essentially the same 15 document. 16 Q. What changes have been made? 17 A. I don't recollect. I think there was a 18 restatement to clarify one or two of the assumptions 19 without a change in substantive meaning, just to make 20 it clearer, so it was more easy to understand. There 21 may have been minor modifications made to some of the 22 scheduled completion dates. I don't remember. 23 Q. Okay. What is this? Is this just a 24 graphics presentation program that we are looking at 25 here, one of the graphics presentation? 407 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. You do this yourself, someone in your 3 office does it? 4 A. I do this. 5 Q. You do this on your own computer? 6 A. Personal. 7 Q. What is the program that generates this? 8 What software? 9 A. It is the Viewpoint. Xerox Viewpoint 10 software. 11 Q. And does it keep a chronological schedule 12 project planning or does it -- just what does it do? 13 A. No, it does not. It is not a program 14 management software package, it is simply a graphics 15 package. 16 Q. Okay. Now, if we can, let's go -- you have 17 told us previously that in May of 1993 you anticipate 18 that the constituents and staff will present to the 19 board an optimal plan; correct? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Okay. Tell me how that -- where does that 22 appear on this series of time lines? 23 A. On the first page down, the fourth line. 24 First page, fourth line down. The heading 25 alternatives slash optimal plan. 408 1 Q. Yes, sir. Shows up in May '93? 2 A. Correct. 3 Q. And it says preliminary design. What is 4 that preliminary design of? What? Starting in May 5 of '93. 6 A. That would be the preliminary design of 7 whatever public works component of that optimal plan 8 might be produced. 9 Q. And then implementation is to start in 10 March of '94; correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And what does implementation mean; 13 construction? 14 A. As indicated on the chart, it means 15 detailed design specifications, acquisition, 16 construction operations. 17 Q. Tell me how this relates -- what is your 18 understanding of, in this case -- what will the 19 hearing officer come back to the Governing Board, 20 what is the process; with a recommended order? Do 21 you understand that? 22 A. That is my general understanding of the 23 outcome. 24 Q. It is your understanding that will have 25 proposed findings of facts and conclusions in it? 409 1 A. Generally, yes, that is my understanding of 2 how the process works. 3 Q. And under your time frame here, what 4 happens when that recommended order comes back from 5 the hearing officer? When would it come back and 6 what then happens to it? 7 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form of the 8 question to the extent it calls for a legal 9 conclusion. Mr. Rhoads is not a lawyer. 10 MR. EARL: I am just asking him -- he 11 briefs the board every month in some detail, and 12 I'm asking him as it relates to his timing and 13 understanding. 14 BY MR. EARL: 15 Q. You have turned to page 2, I see. 16 A. I have turned to page 2. 17 Could you repeat the question for me, 18 please? 19 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 20 was read by the reporter.) 21 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure of the details 22 of the process from that point on. Generally, I 23 believe the recommended order is considered, and 24 ultimately action is taken on it on the part of 25 the Governing Board. 410 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. And you show adoption of final order; 3 correct? When is that? 4 A. There is a program element that shows 5 adoption of the final order by November, mid 6 November, 1993. 7 Q. And does that contemplate both the DER 8 permit the District has applied for and the SWIM 9 plan? 10 A. Yes, that is the concept. You should note, 11 however, that the next two blocks entitled unexpected 12 delays and permit consolidation delays are generally 13 applicable at some point in the process, so where 14 they will occur, no one knows, to the best of my 15 knowledge. But they are, in all likelihood, we have 16 assumed, a part of the process. 17 Q. Okay. Under your category permit 18 consolidation delays, what does that mean? 19 MS. BIRCH: I'm going to have a standing 20 objection to questions regarding the process of 21 administrative challenge as to scheduling. I 22 see no relevance to the scheduling of the 23 administrative process, which is the challenge 24 that we are now in administrative hearings on. 25 But to the extent that Mr. Rhoads can answer 411 1 those questions and does not disclose any 2 attorney/client privileges, he can answer those 3 questions. 4 MR. EARL: I am just asking him for what 5 he's put on a public document that he's talked 6 about with the board. I am trying to understand 7 what that category means. 8 MS. BIRCH: I understand that, Mr. Earl, 9 but my objection is to the relevancy of the 10 purpose of this deposition. I understood that 11 this deposition related to the League's 12 challenge to the Everglades SWIM plan and not 13 the District scheduling process related to the 14 hearing itself. 15 MR. EARL: Well, I understand that the DER 16 and the District wants to consolidate the 17 permit, and I'm asking him about something here, 18 as a senior staff member of the District here, 19 what consolidation delay means. 20 MS. BIRCH: I don't know where you get that 21 understanding from. I haven't heard Mr. Rhoads 22 testify as to that. 23 BY MR. EARL: 24 Q. Okay. Tell me, when you wrote permit 25 consolidation delay, what do you mean by that? 412 1 A. It was assumed in putting that down that 2 the DER interim permit would be challenged by third 3 parties, that that challenge would be consolidated 4 with the Everglades SWIM plan challenge. Those were 5 the assumptions inherent in the scheduling. 6 Q. And that that would cause a delay in the 7 overall time schedule? 8 A. Yes, that is correct. 9 Q. Of -- what do you have here? 10 A. Approximately two months. 11 Q. Go ahead, sir. 12 A. Counselor, it should be noted that the 13 schedule is a draft, and that the schedules change as 14 time goes on. 15 Q. But you did present it to the Governing 16 Board? 17 A. That is correct. 18 Q. And then you have permit and plan final. 19 What does that mean? What plan are you talking about 20 there? 21 A. The best estimate of District staff is that 22 the SWIM plan and the DER permit would be final in 23 February of 1994. 24 MR. EARL: Could you read back that answer, 25 please? 413 1 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 2 was read by the reporter.) 3 BY MR. EARL: 4 Q. And that, as I see on your overall chart, 5 is when implementation would begin of the plan; 6 correct? 7 A. That is correct. 8 Q. What is on -- if we can go to the third 9 page, sir -- let me just ask you a question, please, 10 back on page 2. 11 The 120.68 appeals, as I understood you to 12 say yesterday, it is the judgment of the District, I 13 guess, counsel that those appeals would not delay 14 implementation; correct? 15 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form. 16 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form and 17 mischaracterization of Mr. Rhoads' testimony. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. What is your understanding -- I'm just 20 trying to save some time. I apologize. 21 Mr. Rhoads, what is your understanding of 22 whether the District can proceed or not during the 23 120.68 appeals you have on your chart? 24 A. We have assumed for scheduling purposes 25 that such an appeal would not stay implementation. 414 1 Q. And by implementation, sir, you mean detail 2 design specifications, construction and management; 3 correct? 4 A. Among other tasks, yes. 5 Q. Would you please go to page 3 of your chart 6 and tell me generally what this depicts? 7 A. This schedule chart depicts the various 8 components of the public works elements of the 9 project involving evaluation of alternatives, plan 10 formulation, engineering design, land acquisition, et 11 cetera. 12 Q. Okay. And as I read this, the preliminary 13 assessments of alternatives has been completed; 14 correct? September? 15 A. Essentially, yes. 16 Q. And that is a document we earlier 17 identified as an exhibit to your deposition; correct? 18 A. No, that is not correct. 19 Q. Oh, okay. Does that not relate to the same 20 subject? 21 A. No, different subject. 22 Q. I'm sorry. Okay. This says preliminary 23 assessment of alternatives, correct, on your chart? 24 A. That is a task on the chart, yes. 25 Q. Okay. And this September 1992 draft 415 1 document we have identified as Exhibit Number 2 is a 2 synopsis of Everglades SWIM plan alternatives 3 development. Explain to me the difference, please. 4 A. The work element on the schedule chart is a 5 consultant's report that's been contracted for. It 6 is the first step in the evaluation of the 7 preliminary assessment of alternatives. 8 Q. Okay. Has that been received yet? 9 A. Not to my knowledge, no, sir. 10 Q. Would you be aware if it had been? 11 A. Within a couple days lag time, yes. 12 Q. It is due in September, isn't it? 13 A. Around October 1st is indicated on the 14 chart. 15 Q. Who is the contractor on that? 16 A. That work is being conducted for us, I 17 believe, by Brown & Caldwell. 18 Q. Okay. That is the contractor's assessment. 19 What is the Exhibit 2 to your deposition? What is 20 that document? 21 A. Exhibit 2 is a document prepared, as I 22 indicated earlier, in response to the Governing 23 Board's request for an evaluation of the alternatives 24 that were examined in development of the Everglades 25 SWIM plan. 416 1 Q. Now, does this reflect consultation with 2 the consultants? 3 A. I don't believe so, no. 4 Q. So this is independent of any analysis by 5 the consultants? 6 A. That is correct. 7 Q. Okay. Evaluation of BMPs, that goes from 8 September, October, November, December to, looks 9 like, mid January; correct? 10 A. That is generally correct. 11 Q. And is that also being done by 12 Brown & Caldwell? 13 A. Yes, that is correct. 14 Q. When is that report due? 15 A. It is currently scheduled for the middle of 16 January. 17 Q. From the consultants? 18 A. From the contractor, yes. 19 Q. And where will that report next go? Does 20 that go to the Governing Board, does it go to SAGE, 21 TOC, what happens to that report? 22 A. During the development of that report, 23 various status reports will be presented to the SAGE 24 committee. The final report would go to the SAGE 25 committee. It would also be presented to the 417 1 Governing Board. 2 Q. Am I correct in understanding that BMPs as 3 a component of the SWIM plan were supposed to remove 4 about 25 percent of the phosphorus load? 5 A. The Everglades SWIM plan essentially calls 6 for 25 percent of the phosphorus load being reduced 7 by on farm best management practices. 8 Q. Am I also correct in understanding there 9 has been additional information and analysis and 10 staff now believes it may be higher than that? 11 A. I think that is an open question, 12 counselor. I don't think, to my knowledge, that's 13 been resolved. 14 Q. Okay. Tell me, there have been some 15 presentations to the board to that effect, haven't 16 there? 17 A. Yes. The Florida Sugar Cane League made a 18 presentation of the Governing Board in April of this 19 year. 20 Q. Didn't Mr. Federico before or after that 21 also discuss their review of that data? 22 A. He may have. 23 Q. Who internally is analyzing that? What 24 kind of load reduction can be expected from BMPs? 25 A. To the best of my knowledge, that work is 418 1 being carried out by Brown & Caldwell by our 2 contractor. 3 Q. Who in-house would have the most knowledge 4 of that subject? 5 A. That is a difficult question because there 6 are a number of people who have knowledge on that 7 subject. It is hard to pick. 8 Q. Okay. Well, name them. 9 A. Dr. Eric Flaig, Mr. Zan Kugler. 10 Q. Those would be the two most knowledgeable? 11 A. Yeah, I suspect so. 12 Q. Now, there has been some discussion at the 13 District internally staffwise, has there not, sir, 14 regarding the impacts if the BMPs take out more than 15 25 percent, what's that going to do to the other 16 components of the plan? 17 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. It assumes 18 facts not previously testified to by Mr. Rhoads. 19 Seems to me it is just a statement, not a 20 question. 21 MR. EARL: No, I'm asking him if he is 22 aware of any discussions, memorandums by the 23 staff of what impact an increased efficiency of 24 BMPs would have on the other components of 25 restoration. 419 1 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form; as to 2 what "impact" means. 3 THE WITNESS: Could you re-read the 4 question for me, please. 5 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 6 was read by the reporter.) 7 THE WITNESS: Discussions, memoranda. I 8 can't remember any specific discussions or 9 memoranda on that topic at this point in time. 10 BY MR. EARL: 11 Q. You have never discussed with anyone at the 12 District what would happen to the STAs, for example, 13 if the load reduction would be 50 percent? 14 A. Oh, we have discussed that subject. 15 Q. That's what I was trying to elicit. I'm 16 sorry I didn't phrase it right. 17 A. Yes, that subject's been discussed. 18 Q. Tell me about who you had those discussions 19 with. 20 A. I can't remember a specific discussion in 21 that regard. While I know that subject's been 22 discussed, I don't remember who I specifically 23 discussed it with. 24 Q. How about Mr. Federico? 25 A. That is possible. 420 1 Q. How about Mr. MacVicar? 2 A. That's possible. 3 Q. And you're aware of no memorandum dealing 4 with that issue? 5 MS. BIRCH: Objection; asked and answered. 6 BY MR. EARL: 7 Q. Is that correct? 8 A. To the best of my recollection at the 9 moment counselor, no, I do not remember any memoranda 10 dealing with that question. 11 Q. Is anybody doing any analysis that you know 12 about whatsoever on staff regarding that issue? 13 MS. BIRCH: Objection; asked and answered. 14 THE WITNESS: I know the consultant is 15 doing work on that issue. I don't know of 16 anyone specifically on staff who is working on 17 that issue. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Who at Brown and -- is it Brown & Caldwell 20 doing that work; correct? 21 A. That is correct. 22 Q. Who at Brown & Caldwell specifically is 23 most knowledgeable in the BMP? 24 A. The project manager Zack Fuller is the only 25 Brown & Caldwell employee that I know that has an 421 1 expertise in that area. He's the only 2 Brown & Caldwell employee I know. 3 Q. Okay, sir. So the evaluation of the BMPs 4 come back in mid January. How does that get put into 5 the equation? Is it mix of remedies then readjusted, 6 re-evaluated? Is that when the optimal plan -- 7 A. The intent is that both the output from the 8 best management practices work element, the detailed 9 evaluation of alternative technologies, the 10 assessment of the contribution from the sugar cane 11 mills, and the evaluation of the wetlands 12 alternatives all feed into the development of the 13 optimal plan. 14 Q. The preliminary engineering analysis down 15 one, two, three, four, five lines, preliminary 16 engineering analysis of what, sir? 17 A. As I understand it, and I do not profess 18 deep understanding on this issue, that is the 19 compilation of the data necessary to carry out some 20 of the analysis necessary in the optimal plan 21 formulation. In other words, the collection of data, 22 collection of topographic information, basin 23 boundaries, land use types, hydrologic information 24 that you need, in addition to the evaluation of the 25 alternatives, to put together an optimal plan. 422 1 Q. We are talking about what; STAs essentially 2 on that? 3 A. No. No, I think we are talking everything. 4 That information is basic to the formulation of an 5 understanding of the problem, where the basin 6 delineations are, where the flows are. 7 Q. Brown & Caldwell's doing that? 8 A. I believe that is a Burns & McDonnell work 9 element. 10 Q. The mills? Why don't we just go down? 11 A. From the top, the preliminary assessment of 12 alternatives, that is a Brown & Caldwell work 13 element, the BMPs are Brown & Caldwell, the detailed 14 evaluation is Brown & Caldwell, the assessment of the 15 mills is Brown & Caldwell, the preliminary 16 engineering analysis, I believe, is 17 Burns & McDonnell, the wetlands alternatives are 18 Burns & McDonnell. 19 Q. What is the wetlands alternatives, sir? 20 A. As we discussed either yesterday or on 21 Monday, the evaluation of alternative wetlands 22 treatment concepts, such as FTAs. 23 Q. Okay. FTAs and RTAs? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. That I understand. 423 1 A. And the optimal. 2 Q. Who is doing that? 3 A. That is a Burns & McDonnell activity. 4 Q. Okay. Optimal plan formulation, that is a 5 Burns & McDonnell? 6 A. Burns & McDonnell, yes. 7 Q. Okay. And that is presented, you told me 8 previously, in May. And then there is going to be a 9 site development. What does that mean; project? All 10 the projects? 11 A. In order to -- assuming there is a public 12 works component to the optimal plan, there will be 13 data that are needed, data being collected on the 14 areas where projects would be developed, and the 15 collection of that data, the assembly of that 16 information is what is called for in that work 17 element. 18 Q. Who is going to do that? 19 A. We don't know. That is an unassigned task. 20 It would be done by the contractor. 21 Q. When is the RFP going to go out on that? 22 A. I do not know. 23 Q. Okay. Preliminary design, this is for 24 whatever public works we wind up with? 25 A. Right. Absolutely. 424 1 Q. What is the detailed system design? 2 A. Normally in the construction process you 3 have at least two levels of design; a preliminary 4 design and then a detail design. That detailed 5 system design reflects the next level of engineering 6 design following the preliminary design. It normally 7 results in plans and specifications. 8 Q. Preliminary acquisition, I assume that is 9 activities? 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. And those, it appears, are on going now; 12 correct? 13 A. That is correct. 14 Q. Who is in charge of that; Mr. Malone? 15 A. Mr. Malone. 16 Q. Is that being done in-house? 17 A. In large measure, yes. 18 Q. Does he have appraisers out, or tell me 19 what this preliminary -- 20 A. This involves all the activities that would 21 lead to potential land acquisition within the 22 Everglades Aggricultural Area. It includes the 23 current state land program, the Closter Farms 24 program, it includes any other appraisal activities 25 and early land acquisition activities. 425 1 Q. Environmental assessments? 2 A. Environmental assessments, yes. 3 Q. Several of those have already been done, 4 haven't they? 5 A. That is correct. 6 Q. Land acquisition, you mean actually 7 acquiring title, fee? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. And that is scheduled for February? 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. What is Prep Construction Permit Ap? 12 A. That is the preparation of the construction 13 permit application that would be necessary to 14 construct what would be designed in the detailed 15 system design. 16 Q. Meaning a dredge and fill permit? 17 A. Whatever appropriate permits were necessary 18 to construct what is assumed to be the proposed 19 facilities. 20 Q. Can we go to page 4 of your document, sir? 21 MR. EARL: Would this be a good time -- do 22 you have those numbers identified? 23 MR. GAINES: Yes. 24 MR. EARL: Can you pull them? 25 (Discussion held off the record.) 426 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Page 4 of your exhibit is Everglades 3 Restoration Program finance economics. What is this, 4 sir? 5 A. This includes the work elements involved in 6 the financial and economic components of the 7 restoration program. 8 Q. Now, you have got on line two there 9 evaluate economic impact. We talked about this a 10 little bit Monday, as I recall. 11 A. I believe so. 12 Q. You said that wasn't going to even start 13 until May; correct? 14 A. That is our current plan. 15 Q. And when do you anticipate having the 16 recommended order back on your time line from the 17 hearing officer? Looks like the middle of June. 18 A. Roughly, yeah, middle of June to middle of 19 August. Sometime in that time frame. But remember, 20 however, that the delay, two delay components on that 21 schedule come into play somewhere in that sequence, 22 and where that three months of lag time appears in 23 that sequence is really not clear. We do not know 24 that. 25 Q. The three months you are talking about from 427 1 the consolidating of the DER permit? 2 A. And the one month of unexpected delays that 3 is on the schedule, yes. 4 Q. Now, the third line down is financial 5 assessment planning. That is what you talked about 6 the other day in terms of that won't start until May. 7 That won't even start until May. That would be the 8 what; the utility? 9 A. The actual formulation of the specific 10 financing plan. Assuming the public works program 11 were the components of the optimal plan, that this 12 would be how to finance those facilities. 13 Q. Okay. On page 5, please; regulatory 14 program implementation. What is this, sir? Tell me. 15 A. This is a schedule chart for the 16 implementation of the adopted Everglades Agricultural 17 Rule. It attempts to schedule out the various major 18 steps involved in the implementation of that rule. 19 Q. Phosphorous levels in Lake Okeechobee, 20 historically have they ranged from 30 to 50 parts per 21 billion? Is that your understanding? 22 A. And higher. 23 Q. Okay. Would you describe Lake Okeechobee 24 as a very large reservoir in comparison to other 25 lakes? 428 1 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 2 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat that 3 question for me please. 4 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 5 was read by the reporter.) 6 MS. BIRCH: Object to form. 7 THE WITNESS: Yes and no. In comparison to 8 the Great Lakes, it is not a very large 9 reservoir; in comparison to many Florida lakes, 10 it is a large -- would be a large reservoir. 11 BY MR. EARL: 12 Q. Is it your understanding that Lake 13 Okeechobee has been a relatively high nutrients lake 14 for much of its history? 15 A. In very general terms, yes. 16 Q. You qualified that so I need to ask you why 17 do you say in very general terms? 18 A. I don't think the science on that issue is 19 worked out very well. There have been papers 20 indicating that yes, it has had a long nutrophic 21 history. I believe there is debate in the scientific 22 community over the veracity of that position. 23 Q. That is Mr. Gleason's work you are talking 24 about? 25 A. Gleason's work, yes, and some of his 429 1 colleagues. 2 Q. You disagree with that? 3 A. No. No. But I am saying that I don't 4 believe there is a high level of scientific 5 exactitude in that finding. 6 Q. You were involved in the Lake Okeechobee 7 SWIM plan, were you not, sir? 8 A. That is correct. 9 Q. What are the -- the dairies are located, as 10 I understand it, in what basins up there? 11 MS. BIRCH: Objection to the line of these 12 questions as to relevancy to everything in the 13 SWIM plan, in the restoration program. 14 BY MR. EARL: 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. The dairies are located in several of the 17 basins on the north side of Lake Okeechobee. 18 Q. Taylor Creek and Evans Slough one of them? 19 A. That is correct. 20 Q. In parts per billion, what would be the 21 runoff coming into District waters from a dairy farm 22 runoff? 23 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 24 THE WITNESS: Quite variable. 430 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Give me the range. 3 A. From a high of perhaps 30 parts per million 4 phosphorus down to values less than one part per 5 million phosphorus. 6 Q. One part per million. So we are talking 7 300 parts per million from, on a dairy farm, to -- in 8 parts per billion -- I'm sorry -- converting to parts 9 per billion. 10 A. Add a thousand to your parts per million to 11 get parts per billion. Add three zeros after it. 12 MS. PONZOLI: Three thousand parts per 13 billion is what we should be saying. 14 THE WITNESS: No. I quoted -- 15 MS. BIRCH: Read the answer, the question 16 and the answer, we have thus far so we can see 17 where we are. 18 MR. EARL: Let me start over again. I'll 19 just save some time. 20 BY MR. EARL: 21 Q. You have said, Mr. Rhoads, that the range 22 of runoffs from dairy farms in the District waters 23 range anywhere from 30 parts per million to one part 24 per million; is that correct? 25 A. And below. It can go below that. 431 1 Q. Okay. And I have asked you, since in the 2 Everglades area we deal in parts per billion, what 3 that would be in parts per billion? 4 A. 30,000 down to less than a thousand parts 5 per billion. 6 Q. Now, is this after the application of dairy 7 BMP? 8 A. Those high figures are essentially raw 9 milking barn waste. The lower figures, below one 10 thousand parts per billion, could represent the 11 effluent quality coming off of BMPs installed on 12 dairy farms. 13 Q. What would the range of that discharge be, 14 in your understanding? 15 A. Of which? 16 Q. After application of BMPs. 17 A. On the order of one part per million or 18 lower. 19 Q. Okay. I'm asking -- you say "or lower". 20 Is there a range there? 21 A. I'm not familiar enough with the most 22 recent results from the BMP implementation sampling 23 to be comfortable in setting a lower limit on that 24 quality of that effluent. 25 Q. Who at the District is on top of that; 432 1 charged with that? 2 A. Either Dr. Fontaine or Al Goldstein. 3 Mr. Goldstein's in our Regulations Department. 4 Q. Okay. The Lake Okeechobee SWIM plan, as I 5 recall -- do you recall a device, an assimilation 6 capacity, that was utilized in that, in the dairy 7 farm areas? 8 MS. BIRCH: Object to relevancy. 9 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10 BY MR. EARL: 11 Q. What was that? 12 A. That was -- the assimilative capacity was a 13 factor that was assumed in the analysis. It 14 represented the ability of the conveyance system to 15 immobilize phosphorus, to take up phosphorus between 16 the source, for instance a dairy, and the outflow of 17 the water course to Lake Okeechobee. 18 Q. You mean the tributary canals? 19 A. The tributary, yes. 20 Q. Is that factor still a part of the Lake 21 Okeechobee SWIM plan? 22 A. I haven't had any substantive contact with 23 the implementation on Lake Okeechobee SWIM plan for 24 the past year, so I don't know the status of that. 25 Q. Okay. And what was the mechanism by which 433 1 that assimilative capacity derived its function? 2 A. I believe there were several alternate 3 mechanisms. 4 Q. What were they, sir? 5 A. Vegetative uptake, chemical immobilization, 6 sediment immobilization, those were the three that 7 come to mind right offhand. 8 Q. Now, this assimilative capacities that was 9 used for the dairy farms, that did not assume the 10 construction, did it, sir, of any chemical treatment 11 plans? 12 MS. BIRCH: Object to form. 13 THE WITNESS: The assimilative capacity 14 components of that calculation dealt with the 15 conveyance system itself without any other 16 appurtenances, to the best of my knowledge. 17 BY MR. EARL: 18 Q. It relied on the tributary canals 19 themselves going into the primary canals in the lake; 20 correct? 21 A. The conveyance, which includes the canals, 22 includes any vegetation in the canals, and includes 23 the cypress sloughs through which the water ran; 24 essentially all of the conveyance in the tributary. 25 Q. Okay. And what was the factor? Do you 434 1 remember, roughly? 2 A. It was in the vicinity of seven, but I 3 don't remember the exact figure. 4 Q. Seven what, sir? 5 A. A factor of seven. Seven times. Seven X. 6 Q. Tell me how that was applied, as you 7 understand it. 8 A. I don't remember how that was applied. I 9 don't remember the details of its application. 10 Q. Just seven. What did you do with the 11 factor of seven? I am just trying to -- 12 A. I don't remember how that was applied 13 counsel. 14 Q. Okay. Okay. What are the main 15 tributaries, in which waterways, in which this factor 16 would have been applicable? 17 MS. BIRCH: Object to the question. The 18 witness has stated previously that he doesn't 19 understand. Actually, he said he didn't 20 remember what the implementation of the number 21 seven was or the significance or use of it, and 22 object again to the relevancy of it. 23 MR. EARL: I agree with you, Counsel, and 24 I'm not asking about the seven now, I'm 25 asking -- I know he has a map of the District 435 1 there -- if you could tell me, sir, what canals 2 or works this factor was applied to. 3 THE WITNESS: Again, that was well over a 4 year ago that I was involved in that effort. In 5 fact, substantially before that. However, if I 6 remember correctly, that factor was to be 7 applied to all of the sand land tributaries to 8 Lake Okeechobee. Basically all of the north, 9 east and west side tributaries to Lake 10 Okeechobee. 11 BY MR. EARL: 12 Q. That would include Taylor Creek; right? 13 A. That is correct. 14 Q. And Evans Slough? 15 A. Evans Slough. 16 Q. What other tributaries are up there? 17 A. The S-154 basin and the lower basins of the 18 Kissimmee river, the Harney Pond Canal, Indian 19 Prairie Canal. 20 Q. Fish Eating Creek? 21 A. Yes, sir. If I remember correctly, yes, 22 Fish Eating Creek was included within that. 23 Q. Okay. How was that assimilative capacity 24 factor, how was it applied in the case of the 25 Everglades SWIM Plan for the canals and waterways and 436 1 works of the District? 2 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. The 3 witness hasn't testified any relationship 4 between the two. 5 BY MR. EARL: 6 Q. How, if at all, was it applied, Mr. Rhoads? 7 A. "It," referring to -- 8 Q. The assimilative factor. 9 A. An assimilative factor for the Everglades 10 Agricultural Area has not been considered in the 11 Everglades SWIM Plan. It is not felt that there was 12 such a factor appropriate for use in the organic 13 soils of the area. 14 Q. Why wasn't it appropriate for use in 15 organic soils? 16 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form; asked and 17 answered. 18 MS. BIRCH: Join the objection. 19 THE WITNESS: I don't remember the specific 20 logic behind that. 21 BY MR. EARL: 22 Q. Okay. You told me earlier that the 23 assimilative factor was based on several components 24 one of which was vegetative uptake; correct? 25 A. The assimilative factor as applied in the 437 1 Lake Okeechobee SWIM plan, yes. 2 Q. Okay. Vegetation in the canals, I assume 3 you are talking about. 4 A. That was one component that took nutrients 5 up, yes. 6 Q. Okay. What other vegetation? That was 7 what were you talking about, the vegetation in the 8 canals? 9 A. And the adjacent wetlands, the overflow 10 areas. For instance, north of the lake it is quite 11 common to have the tributaries -- essentially to have 12 former cypress sloughs, tributaries to Lake 13 Okeechobee -- so the canal was, in essence, cut 14 through a wetlands, so you do not have the classical 15 typical box cut canal or trapezoidal canal, you have 16 a canal that has an overbank overflow area, so you 17 have cypress areas and marshes that are essentially 18 components of the conveyance on most of the 19 tributaries, or at least many of the tributaries, 20 north of the lake. 21 Q. It is your understanding that the 22 assimilative factor was based on the shore 23 vegetation, not just the vegetation in the canals; 24 correct? 25 A. Assimilative factor for the Lake Okeechobee 438 1 SWIM plan was a composite factor that included all 2 those various mechanisms. 3 Q. Okay. One of the vegetative mechanisms was 4 canal vegetation; correct? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. In the canal. 7 A. In concept, yes. 8 Q. Aquatic vegetation? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. What aquatic vegetation is in those canals 11 to the north; the sand lands. 12 A. Typical ditch bank vegetation. 13 Q. I am talking about aquatic now. 14 A. Aquatic? 15 Q. Yes. 16 A. There are some water hyacinths and water 17 lettuce, on occasion, in many of those canals. 18 Q. Anything else? 19 A. Other aquatic vegetation? Yes, I am sure 20 there is a range of other rooted aquatic vegetation 21 in certain portions of those canals, yes. 22 Q. And you talked about normal bank 23 vegetation. What would that be? 24 A. The typical assemblage of weed species that 25 we find adjacent to most of the canals in the 439 1 District. It includes, often, cattails; it includes 2 many of the grasses. 3 Q. A couple of examples? I am just trying to 4 get -- 5 A. Cattails, panicum hemitomon, panicum 6 paludvagum, shrubs such as pigweed, myrtle, in some 7 cases, willow. A fairly broad assemblage occurs, 8 depending on the specifics there in the area. 9 Q. Okay. Now let's see if we can go to the 10 canals in the EAA. Do they have water hyacinth? 11 A. On occasion, yes. 12 Q. Do they have water lettuce? 13 A. On occasion, yes. 14 Q. Have they got the typical bank vegetation 15 you are talking about in Taylor Creek and Evans 16 Slough? 17 A. Yes. Yes. 18 Q. Would they function any differently, in 19 terms of nutrient uptake, than in the EAA vegetation 20 in and adjacent to the canals than would the 21 vegetation in and adjacent to the canals in the 22 Taylor Creek and Evans Slough, for example? 23 MS. BIRCH: Object to the nature of the 24 question. Again, Mr. Earl, Mr. Rhoads is not an 25 expert in nutrients and the area that you are 440 1 now eliciting testimony about, but if he has 2 personal knowledge that he can answer that 3 question, he should feel free to answer it. 4 THE WITNESS: The vegetation would probably 5 function in a similar manner; however, the 6 substrate in which that vegetation is growing is 7 generally different. Because of the organic 8 soils that are found in the Everglades 9 Agricultural Area, the predominant substrate is 10 the organic soil rather than the sandy soil 11 substrate that is found on the north, generally 12 on the north, east and west shores of Lake 13 Okeechobee, so the vegetation is similar, but 14 the substrate different. 15 BY MR. EARL: 16 Q. Would the vegetative uptake of phosphorus 17 be any different? 18 MS. BIRCH: Same objection. 19 THE WITNESS: My understanding, to the 20 extent I understand this field, is that the 21 chemistry of the organic soils are different 22 than the chemistry of the sandy soils. They are 23 different chemical processes that occur in the 24 two. While the basic nutrient uptake process of 25 the vegetation is physiologically the same 441 1 mechanism, the soil chemistry is different, and 2 the processes involved in the imposition of 3 phosphorus in a sandy soil are different than in 4 an organic soil. 5 BY MR. EARL: 6 Q. What if any tests or analysis did the 7 District do to determine that the assimilative 8 capacities factor shouldn't be applied in the EAA? 9 A. I don't remember any tests being performed 10 on that. 11 Q. Who was the -- weren't you in fact, 12 Mr. Rhoads, the creator of the assimilative 13 capacities factor? 14 A. I would not be comfortable accepting that 15 accolade. 16 Q. Okay. Who would you attribute the 17 fatherhood of the assimilative capacities factor to? 18 MS. BIRCH: What was that question? 19 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 20 was read by the reporter.) 21 MR. EARL: That is in response to the tone 22 of Mr. Rhoads' answer, counsel, where he 23 indicated in a jocular fashion that he declined 24 the fatherhood of that, so I'm asking him who 25 created this concept. 442 1 THE WITNESS: I believe Eric Flaig and Tony 2 Federico developed that concept. 3 BY MR. EARL: 4 Q. Did you have any input or involvement in 5 that? 6 A. I believe I concurred in its application. 7 Q. We have vegetative uptake as a component. 8 You gave me three. And what is the second one, sir? 9 A. I don't remember what the second one was I 10 gave you. The other two I gave you. 11 MS. PONZOLI: Chemical immobilization. 12 THE WITNESS: Chemical immobilization and 13 sediment processes. 14 BY MR. EARL: 15 Q. Let's go, if we can, to sediment processes. 16 How does that work, as you understand it, in the 17 dairy lands? 18 A. This is a very complex field of chemistry 19 that I don't profess particular good knowledge of, 20 Counselor. 21 Q. Okay. You don't -- I'm not asking you for 22 specific chemistry, but I'm asking you just the 23 process. Your understanding of the sedimentation 24 process that allows assimilation of phosphorus. 25 A. In very broad terms, the precipitation of 443 1 phosphorus in the water column, particularly 2 flocculent precipitation, it removes the phosphorus 3 from the water column and deposits some components of 4 the water column phosphorus into sediment. 5 Q. Where it was what, bound up? 6 A. Again, the sediments phosphorus chemistry 7 is an extremely complex subject. Sometimes it is 8 bound up, sometimes it is released. It is a function 9 of a whole series of variables that I don't clearly 10 understand. But yes, in general terms, the 11 precipitation of phosphorus from the water column 12 results in sediments that, to some degree, 13 immobilize, or can immobilize, the phosphorus under 14 certain conditions, for certain periods of time. 15 MS. PONZOLI: Immobilize or mobilize? 16 THE WITNESS: Immobilize. 17 MS. PONZOLI: Immobilize. 18 BY MR. EARL: 19 Q. Do you have an understanding, or do you 20 have to ask Mr. Federico or Mr. Flaig, between the 21 vegetative, the chemical immobilization, and the 22 sediment process, what percentage of phosphorus in 23 these factors are moved by each of those? 24 A. I can't help on you that one, Counselor. 25 Q. Okay. How about the chemical imposition, 444 1 Mr. Rhoads? What is that, in general terms; your 2 understanding of the process? 3 A. In very general terms, the adsorption and 4 absorption process of phosphorus in the water column 5 interacting with surfaces can result in the 6 immobilization of the phosphorus. For example, a 7 limestone bolder has a surface area that has a 8 potential to adsorb and absorb phosphorus onto it and 9 mobilize it to some extent. 10 Q. Again, you don't know what percentage the 11 chemical immobilization plays in the total 12 assimilative? 13 A. No, I don't have a feel for that, no. 14 Q. In your judgment, is this assimilative 15 factor that was used in Lake Okeechobee, is this 16 scientifically valid? 17 A. Based on how we prepared Lake Okeechobee 18 SWIM plan we felt it was an appropriate factor to 19 include. I think we were very up-front in indicating 20 that that assimilative capacities factor would have 21 to be monitored, that it would require checking as 22 the BMPs were implemented, as the program proceeded, 23 to determine whether the assimilative capacities 24 factor was appropriate, had been correctly selected. 25 It needed verification. 445 1 Q. Has it been verified, to your knowledge? 2 A. I don't know what follow-up work has been 3 done on that, no. 4 Q. You have indicated one reason for the 5 difference in the soil going from sandy soil to muck 6 soil. Any other reason you're aware of why this 7 assimilative factor wasn't applied in the Everglades 8 Agricultural Area? 9 A. My recollection is that that was the 10 primary fact. 11 Q. Who made the decision not to utilize it? 12 A. I don't remember who made that decision. 13 Q. You concurred, didn't you? 14 A. I concurred in that, yes. 15 Q. Okay. If it is convenient, Mr. Rhoads, 16 we'll take a break here. 17 A. Wonderful idea, Counselor. 18 Q. Come back at 1:00 o'clock? 19 MS. PONZOLI: All right. 20 (Thereupon, a luncheon recess was taken.) 21 446 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T E 3 The State of Florida ) 4 County of Palm Beach. ) 5 I, Elaine V. Williams, Professional 6 Reporter and Notary Public, State of Florida at large, do hereby certify that Peter Rhoads was by me 7 first duly sworn to testify the whole truth; that I was authorized to and did report said deposition in 8 stenotype; and that the foregoing pages, numbered from 365 to 446, inclusive, are a true and correct 9 transcription of my shorthand notes of said deposition. 10 I further certify that the said deposition 11 was taken at the time and place hereinabove set forth and that the taking of said deposition was commenced 12 and completed as hereinabove set out. 13 I further certify that I am not attorney or counsel of any of the parties, nor am I a relative or 14 employee of any attorney or counsel or party connected with the action, nor am I financially 15 interested in the action. 16 The foregoing certification of this transcript does not apply to any reproduction of the 17 same by any means unless under the direct control and/or direction of the certifying reporter. 18 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my 19 hand and seal this ____ day of_____________ 1992. 20 21 _______________________________ 22 Elaine V. Williams, CP, CM Notary Public, State of Florida 23 at large. My commission expires March 27, 1993. 447 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 - - - 3 4 The State of Florida, ) 5 County of Palm Beach. ) 6 7 8 I hereby certify that I have read the 9 foregoing deposition by me given, and that the 10 statements contained therein are true and correct to 11 the best of my knowledge and belief. 12 13 Dated this ____ day of______________ 1992. 14 15 16 17 18 _________________________ 19 Peter Rhoads 448 1 DATE: October 12, 1992 2 TO: Peter Rhoads South Florida Water Management District 3 3301 Gun Club Road West Palm Beach, Florida 33416 4 RE: Sugar Cane Growers v SFWM District 5 Please take notice that on October 1, 1992 you 6 gave your deposition in the above referred matter. At that time you did not waive signature. It is now 7 necessary that you sign your deposition. 8 Please come to our office, 319 Clematis Street, Suite 500, West Palm Beach, Florida, at any 9 time between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, to sign the deposition. 10 Notice that this address may be different than the one where you gave your deposition. 11 If you do not appear to sign your 12 deposition within thirty (30) days, the original will be forwarded to the attorney who requested your 13 appearance for deposition, for filing with the Clerk of the Court. If you wish to waive your signature, 14 sign your name in the blank at the bottom of this page and return to us. 15 Very truly yours, 16 MUDRICK, WITT, LEVY & CONSOR 17 REPORTING AGENCY, INC. 18 ____________________________ 19 Elaine V. Williams NOTARY PUBLIC 20 21 I do hereby waive my signature: 22 ______________________________ 23 Peter Rhoads 24 cc: cc: 25 cc: 449 1 Division of Administrative Hearings 2 Department of Administration, State of Florida 3 SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE ) 4 of FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; and ) WEDGWORTH FARMS, Inc., ) 5 Petitioners ) V ) DOAH 6 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3038 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) 7 of Florida; et al., ) Respondents. ) 8 ) FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC.; ) 9 UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION; ) and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC., ) 10 Petitioners, ) V ) DOAH 11 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3039 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) 12 of Florida; et al., ) Respondents. ) 13 ) FLORIDA FRUIT and VEGETABLE ) 14 ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS; ) W. E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., ) 15 and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., ) Petitioners, ) 16 V ) DOAH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) Case 92-3034 17 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) of Florida; et al., ) 18 Respondents. ) 19 Deposition of Peter Rhoads 20 VOLUME IV 21 Taken before Elaine V. Williams, Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for 22 the State of Florida at large, pursuant to notice of taking deposition filed by the Petitioner in the 23 above cause. - - - 24 Thursday, October 1, 1992 3301 Gun Club Road 25 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 1:00 p.m. - 6:10 p.m. 450 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Petitioners Florida Sugar 3 Cane League, Inc., United States Sugar Corp., and New South Hope, Inc.: 4 Peeples, Earl & Blank, P.A. One Biscayne Tower, Suite 3636 5 Two South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33131 6 By: WILLIAM EARL, ESQUIRE JONATHAN L. GAINES, ESQUIRE 7 On behalf of the Respondent SFWMD: 8 South Florida Water Management District 3301 Gun Club Road 9 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4680 By: JACQUELYN W. BIRCH, ESQUIRE 10 RUTH CLEMMONS, ESQUIRE 11 On behalf of the Intervenor, United States of America: Department of Justice 12 155 South Miami Avenue, Suite 627 Miami, Florida 33130-1693 13 BY: SUZAN HILL PONZOLI, ESQUIRE 14 15 - - - 451 1 - - - 2 I N D E X 3 - - - 4 5 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 6 Peter Rhoads 7 BY MR. EARL: 453 (continued) 625 8 BY MS. PONZOLI: 617 9 452 1 - - - 2 E X H I B I T S 3 - - - 4 5 NUMBER PAGE NO. DESCRIPTION 6 7 VOLUME I 8 EXB. NO. 1 66 CV 9 VOLUME III EXB. NO. 2 369 synopsis SWIM plan 10 EXB. NO. 3 403 Rhoads memo 4 405 key elements ERP 11 VOLUME IV 12 EXB. NO. 5 465 4/3/89 Rhoads memo from Gerner EXB. NO. 6 461 7/7/89 Rhoads memo to Jason 13 EXB. NO. 7 470 6/29/89 Dineen memo to Branscome EXB. NO. 8 493 7/27/89 Rhoads report to Garner 14 EXB. NO. 9 503 9/29/89 Rhoads memo to MacVicar EXB. NO. 10 505 10/4/89 Smith memo to Rhoads 15 EXB. NO. 11 509 3/30/90 Maceina memo to List EXB. NO. 12 516 5/21/90 Input Memo 16 EXB. NO. 13COMPOSITE 520 8/23/90 Reisa letter to Wodraska 8/16/90 Parker letter to Stewart 17 EXB. NO. 14 525 11/19/90 MacVicar memo to Wodraska EXB. NO. 15 528 6/26/91 Newman memo to List 18 EXB. NO. 16 532 11/17/91 Rhoads memo to STA Design EXB. NO. 17 543 12/5/91 Mierau memo to Bearzotti 19 EXB. NO. 18 550 undated Quincey memo to Rhoads EXB. NO. 19 554 key points memo 20 EXB. NO. 20 557 2 page handwritten notes 453 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 - - - 3 CONTINUED DIRECT (Peter Rhoads) 4 BY MR. EARL: 5 Q. I'll hand you now, sir, what has been 6 marked as Exhibit Number 3 to your deposition. Have 7 you ever seen this before? 8 A. Yes, I believe I have. 9 Q. What is it? 10 A. It is a memorandum prepared by Jocelyn 11 Branscome, dated June 5, 1989 dealing with the 12 subject of a task group for hydroperiod Everglades 13 SWIM Plan. 14 Q. Were you, in fact, on that date the program 15 manager, SWIM? 16 A. Yes, I was. 17 Q. This talks about to develop a task group 18 for hydroperiod. Was there a special task group on 19 that? 20 A. The purpose of this memorandum, as I say, 21 was to establish a task group for hydroperiod. 22 Q. And was such a group established? 23 A. I don't believe so. 24 Q. Why was that? 25 A. I don't remember. 454 1 Q. Who would know? Anybody? 2 A. Jocelyn may remember. During this period 3 we attempted a number of different ways to try and do 4 effective planning at the organization. We tried 5 various internal task groups, we tried participative 6 exercises with outside parties, and there were a 7 variety of mechanisms that were attempted to 8 accomplish the planning objectives that we had. This 9 was one of them. 10 Q. Who wound up responsible for the 11 hydroperiod components of the SWIM plan? 12 A. I am trying to recollect who, during this 13 period, had the specific responsibility on the 14 technical side of it. I believe Tony Federico did. 15 I believe at that point in time this was the Water 16 Quality Division, and within the Water Quality 17 Division, that is where that function was housed. 18 But I am trying to pin down the chronology of when 19 Tony and his shop were moved down to the Planning 20 Department out of the old Resource Planning 21 Department. Well, regardless of what that was, it 22 would have been in Tony Federico's shop and a SWIM 23 plan group when the preparation of the plan was being 24 carried out. 25 Q. Well, who would be responsible for the 455 1 hydroperiod component of the plan as adopted by the 2 board? 3 A. That would have been the staff identified 4 in the front of the SWIM plan. If I remember 5 correctly, the basic chain of command for preparation 6 of the SWIM plan at the time of adoption in March 7 '92, Paul Whalen was the Everglades SWIM Plan 8 manager. 9 Q. My question was more directed to the 10 hydroperiod components. Who was the staff member 11 substantively responsible for the conclusions and 12 analysis regarding hydroperiod? 13 A. I did not have responsibility at this point 14 in time, in March of 1992, for the Everglades SWIM 15 plan, so I don't know specifically who had that 16 responsibility. 17 Q. Did you have that responsibility in 18 September of 1990? 19 A. Do you have a copy of my resume'? Thank 20 you. 21 In September of 1990 the SWIM plan function 22 was housed in the Planning Department under Jim 23 Harvey and Tony Federico. 24 Q. Okay. My question goes to the hydroperiod. 25 A. To the hydroperiod components. I do not 456 1 know who had the specific responsibility for the 2 hydroperiod components at that point in time. 3 Q. When you were working on it in '89, who was 4 the most knowledgeable regarding the hydroperiod 5 conclusions of this analysis? 6 A. If it was prior to the point where Walt 7 Dineen passed away, it would have been Walt. And I 8 cannot right offhand remember the date of his 9 passing. Subsequent to that point in time, it would 10 have been Dewey Worth and Steve Davis. 11 Q. And that would be true as to the currency 12 plan of the document? 13 A. I believe so. Dewey Worth is no longer 14 with the agency. Steve Davis would be. 15 Q. What happened to Mr. Worth? Where did he 16 go? 17 A. He joined -- went out west. I believe with 18 a governmental agency. I don't remember which one. 19 Out in Idaho, I believe. 20 MR. EARL: Would you mark this, please, as 21 Number 5. 22 (The document was marked 23 Rhoads Depo Exb. No. 5.) 24 BY MR. EARL: 25 Q. Have you ever seen this before, sir? 457 1 A. Yes. I have a vague recollection of this. 2 Yes, I believe I have. 3 Q. It purports to be a memorandum dated July 4 3, 1989 to Mr. Garner from Mr. Federico; correct? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. Okay. What is this? What is the substance 7 of this memorandum? 8 A. I'll need a moment or two to review the 9 memorandum, please. 10 Q. Sure. Sure. 11 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the 12 question. 13 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 14 was read by the reporter.) 15 THE WITNESS: It appears to be a memo from 16 Tony to Woody, John Wodraska, dealing with the 17 issue of stormwater treatment efficiency for 18 total phosphorus. It appears to be a summary or 19 compilation of information, both nationally and 20 from studies here at the Water Management 21 District, on inflow concentrations of total 22 phosphorus and concentrations coming after a wet 23 detention system. 24 First column, stormwater inflow; second 25 column is the post-treatment outflow; and the 458 1 third column is the percent removal. 2 BY MR. EARL: 3 Q. Okay. Could you help me with this in 4 units? This is milligrams per liter, I guess. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Nationwide typical values, residential, 7 under the pre-treatment is point 5 -- what would that 8 be in parts per billion, sir? 9 A. That would be 500 parts per billion total 10 phosphorus. 11 Q. Okay. So I gather commercial nationwide 12 would be about 200 parts per billion? 13 A. 200 parts per billion. That is correct. 14 Q. Okay. What is your understanding of what 15 Mr. Federico is representing here? This is runoff 16 from residential and commercial properties, 17 nationally? 18 A. Based upon the literature carried out by 19 staff, this represents typical values found 20 nationally for the total phosphorus concentration in 21 stormwater exiting residential or commercial 22 property. 23 Q. And then we go down to SFWMD studies. He 24 talks about residential. Again, point 14 is how many 25 parts per billion? 459 1 A. That would be 140 parts per billion. 2 Q. And what does he mean -- why are there two 3 categories, if you know, of residential there? The 4 next one is residential too, which is 310 parts per 5 billion. 6 A. There are two residential categories 7 because there were two separate studies conducted by 8 the District staff, and those three enumerated 9 studies represent the results from each of three 10 studies. 11 Q. Help me understand the staff study. 12 Typical residential runoff, and then what retention 13 system; stormwater retention system? 14 A. Yes. It's been many years since I directed 15 those studies, but the staff selected several sites 16 in reasonable proximity to West Palm Beach to 17 evaluate the effectiveness of wet treatment systems 18 that the District had permitted, so the first one -- 19 no, it's been too long. I don't remember the 20 specific studies involved. But they were individual 21 studies conducted over a period of time at individual 22 wet treatment systems that had actually been 23 constructed in the vicinity of the West Palm Beach 24 area. 25 The commercial one I do remember. That was 460 1 at the Boynton Beach Mall. One of the residential 2 sites was a development called Timber Creek, and I 3 don't remember the name of the other residential 4 site. 5 Q. Okay. And on the Boynton Beach Mall, which 6 I guess is number 3 there, commercial? 7 A. That is correct. 8 Q. The inflow was 240 parts per billion? 9 A. That is what it appears here. 10 Q. And the outflow from the stormwater 11 retention system was 40 parts per billion; is that 12 what this tells you? 13 A. Point 048 milligrams per liter total 14 phosphorus equates to 40 parts per billion, yes. 15 Q. Do these studies still, in your mind, 16 represent the typical figures from -- 17 A. To the best of my knowledge. 18 Q. -- residential and commercial runoff? 19 A. Representative studies, yes. 20 Q. Do you know who did these studies? 21 A. They had various program managers over a 22 period of time. Mike Cullum was a program manager 23 for a period of time, and he's the only program 24 manager that I remember who gathered it. There were 25 several other professionals on the District staff. 461 1 These studies were conducted over about a seven year 2 period, I believe. 3 Q. Are they tech pubs? What form do they 4 take? 5 A. At least one of them is a tech pub form, 6 perhaps two, perhaps three. I don't remember 7 specifically. 8 Q. What would you ask for? 9 A. The Timber Creek tech pub, the Boynton 10 Beach Mall tech pub. And that is the one I don't 11 know whether that actually made it into technical 12 publication form or whether it was manuscript only. 13 And as I mentioned earlier, I can't remember the name 14 of the second residential one. It was down in Boca 15 Raton. I can't remember the name of the development. 16 MR. EARL: I'm sorry. We have somebody new 17 in the room. I haven't met you. 18 MS. CLEMMONS: Ruth Clemmons from the 19 District. 20 MR. EARL: Are you District counsel? 21 MS. CLEMMONS: Yes, I am. 22 MR. EARL: Pleasure to meet you. 23 Can we mark this, please, as Number 6? 24 (The document was marked 25 Rhoads Depo Exb. No. 6.) 462 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. I hand you now what has been marked as 3 Number 6, Mr. Rhoads. Have you seen this before? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What is it, please? 6 A. It is a memorandum from me through John 7 Wodraska to Doran Jason, Vice Chairman of the 8 Governing Board, dated July 17, 1989. It deals with 9 the subject of amount of phosphorus loading to the 10 EAA derived from Lake Okeechobee releases. 11 Q. And you state in the memorandum that's 35 12 tons a year; is that correct? 13 A. Yes, that is what the memorandum states; on 14 an average annual basis. 15 Q. Is that still your belief? 16 A. I think the data prepared in support of the 17 Lake Okeechobee rule, the technical supporting 18 document for the rule, has more updated analysis to 19 deal with this particular subject. Routings were 20 run, and in the back of the technical support 21 document there is a table that includes this, among 22 other data, and I would be more confident in that 23 more recent data than I would be in this memorandum. 24 Q. Is it the same range, same order of 25 magnitude? 463 1 A. Same order of magnitude, I suspect, yes. 2 Q. When you are talking about on an average 3 annual basis approximately 35 tons a year phosphorus 4 is released from Lake Okeechobee for water supply 5 purposes, both agricultural and urban and lake stage 6 regulatory control, that is released through what 7 structures? 8 A. I suspect -- I did not run the analysis 9 supporting this memorandum, my staff did. 10 Q. I understand. 11 A. I suspect that this includes releases made 12 through the gravity control structures adjacent to 13 pump stations S-2 and S-3. 14 Q. What they used to call the hurricane gates? 15 A. The hurricane gates and hurricane gate 5 16 along the West Palm Beach Canal. Those three major 17 outflow points from Lake Okeechobee. 18 Q. Okay, sir. Oh, it is 35 tons. You include 19 water supply both for agricultural and urban use and 20 lake stage regulatory control. How is that treated 21 in the SWIM plan in terms of are the farmers required 22 to remove that? 23 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. 24 MS. BIRCH: Could you read the question 25 back? 464 1 MR. EARL: Let me rephrase it. 2 BY MR. EARL: 3 Q. Is the 35 tons you refer to in your memo 4 treated in the Everglades SWIM Plan? Are the farmers 5 required to remove that? 6 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form of the 7 question. 8 MR. EARL: Tonnage. 9 MS. BIRCH: It seems to me like you're 10 asking two things, Mr. Earl. 11 MS. PONZOLI: Same objection. 12 MR. EARL: Okay. 13 THE WITNESS: As I understand the question, 14 the Everglades SWIM Plan does not deal with the 15 allocation of responsibility for removing 16 phosphorus. In other words, it does not say 17 this entity or this entity needs to do 18 something. As I recollect it, it deals with the 19 issue of here is what needs to be done. 20 BY MR. EARL: 21 Q. Is this within the -- is the 35 tons 22 included within the 200 -- I believe you said 23 yesterday it is probably 205 tons a year from which a 24 load reduction has to be made. 25 A. The total tonnage -- let's assume that 465 1 figure is about 200 tons which releases from Lake 2 Okeechobee. The tonnage associated with that is 3 included within that 200 ton figure, yes. 4 Q. And is the 25 percent BMP figure, reduction 5 figure, you told me about earlier, is that also based 6 on the 205 tons? 7 A. I would have to go back and check the rule 8 on that. I remember that being a discussion during 9 the public workshops on adoption of the EAA rule, and 10 I don't specifically remember how we handled that in 11 the rule. 12 Q. Well, from the SWIM plan, would the SWIM 13 plan help you at all? That is what we are here today 14 on. I believe you have a copy there. 15 MS. BIRCH: This is just a copy of a 16 planning document. 17 BY MR. EARL: 18 Q. I have the other two also, if you would 19 like them. 20 A. I wouldn't know where to look in there for 21 this. The only place I know to look, if I had to 22 come up with that piece of information, would be the 23 EAA rule. 24 Q. Does the SWIM plan require the farmers to 25 undertake a 25 percent reduction through BMPs? 466 1 A. Yes, it does. 2 Q. And I'm asking you what your understanding 3 is of whether that includes the 35 tons you have 4 referenced in Exhibit 6. 5 A. Number one, Counselor, I mentioned the 35 6 tons is not, in my opinion, the most appropriate 7 figure to be using. 8 Q. I understand that. Let's assume whatever 9 that corrected figure is. 10 A. Whatever that is, I do not remember whether 11 the 25 percent was based on the 200 ton figure 12 subtracting that 35 ton figure or the more 13 appropriate one or whether it was based on the total. 14 I don't remember how we handled that. 15 Q. Well, how, in your judgment, should it be 16 handled? 17 MS. PONZOLI: Object to form. Relevancy, 18 materiality. 19 MS. BIRCH: Calls for a conclusion. I join 20 Ms. Ponzoli's objections. 21 THE WITNESS: The 25 percent reduction 22 should apply most appropriately, I would think, 23 to the runoff coming from the Everglades 24 Agricultural lands within the tributary 25 watershed. 467 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. That would not then, in your judgment, 3 include the waters released for lake stage regulatory 4 control? 5 A. No. 6 Q. And again, sir, in your judgment, that 7 would not include waters released for urban water 8 supply purposes? 9 A. That is correct. 10 Q. Would it, in your judgment, include waters 11 released for agricultural water use in the EAA? 12 A. I don't believe that waters released for 13 agricultural water use are germane to the issue 14 involved. 15 Q. Why is that? 16 A. Because what is at issue is the runoff 17 coming off of the lands within the tributary 18 watershed and the water flowing through the tributary 19 watershed. That is what constitutes -- the sum of 20 those two parts constitute what comes out at the 21 major pump stations on the south side. From my view 22 of the world, my prospective on this, what comes into 23 the farms from the water supply viewpoint is not 24 germane to either of those two figures. 25 Q. So long as it is consumed; the water use is 468 1 utilized on the land and doesn't come out again? 2 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form. You 3 changed his answer. 4 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 5 BY MR. EARL: 6 Q. You're saying the water supply taken out of 7 the canals, released from the lake here, taken out of 8 the canals, applied to the farms, shouldn't apply; 9 okay? Did you just say that? 10 A. Yes, that is what I said. That is not a 11 factor, in my mind. 12 Q. Okay. Now, if a particular molecule of 13 water is not consumed -- i.e., not otherwise 14 utilized -- and goes out the pump, in your judgment, 15 that would then be included in the 25 percent 16 reduction? 17 A. Yes. If it comes off the property, if it 18 is discharged from the property, then, in my concept 19 of the hydrology, that would be runoff. Constitute 20 runoff. 21 Q. Now, you have heard, have you not, Mr. Paul 22 Parks at SAGE committee meetings talking about he 23 wants mitigation for the lake water the farmers use? 24 A. I have heard a discussion on that general 25 topic, yes. 469 1 Q. On more than one occasion, I suspect. 2 A. On several occasions. 3 Q. What is your understanding of what 4 Mr. Parks is proposing? 5 MS. BIRCH: That is calling for speculation 6 on behalf of Mr. Rhoads, and I'm not sure what 7 the relevancy of what Mr. Parks thinks about 8 mitigation has to do with the SWIM plan. 9 If you know, Mr. Rhoads, you can answer. 10 THE WITNESS: My understanding of the 11 general concern is that it is ecologically 12 undesirable to reduce the magnitude of the 13 discharges going south. In other words, there 14 is a broad consensus, in my understanding, that 15 the Everglades needs all the water it receives 16 now, if not more, and the concept that Dr. Parks 17 has talked about is that if the amount of water 18 going south through the major pump stations is 19 reduced through best management practices or 20 other activities, that that amount of water 21 should be mitigated, or should be made up from 22 other sources, in order to sustain the 23 downstream discharges. That's my understanding 24 of that issue. 470 1 BY MR. EARL: 2 Q. Mr. Rhoads, it is correct, isn't it, that 3 hydrologically speaking, the EAA is a contributor of 4 water to the system? 5 MS. PONZOLI: Object to the form. 6 MS. BIRCH: Object to the form. 7 MS. PONZOLI: I don't think you clarified 8 what contributor means. 9 MS. BIRCH: Again, Mr. Rhoads is not a 10 hydrologist. 11 MR. EARL: I am just asking him his 12 understanding of things he has briefed the board 13 on or otherwise represented. 14 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question 15 for me, please. 16 (Thereupon, a portion of the record 17 was read by the repor