192 1 DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS DEPARTMENT OF ADMINISTRATION, STATE OF FLORIDA 2 SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE ) 3 OF FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; and ) WEDGWORTH FARMS, INC., ) 4 ) Petitioners, ) 5 vs. )DOAH Case No. 92-3038 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) 6 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) of Florida; et al., ) 7 Respondents. ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 8 FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC., ) UNITED STATES SUGAR CORPORATION; ) 9 and NEW HOPE SOUTH, INC., ) Petitioners, ) 10 vs. )DOAH Case No. 92-3039 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) 11 DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) of Florida; et al., ) 12 Respondents. ) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 13 FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE ) ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS; ) 14 W.E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., ) and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., ) 15 Petitioners, ) vs. )DOAH Case No. 92-3040 16 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT ) DISTRICT, an agency of the State ) 17 of Florida; et al., ) Respondents. ) 18 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x 100 Southeast 2nd Street 19 Miami, Florida November 23, 1992 20 9:10 a.m. - 5:30 p.m. 21 CONTINUED DEPOSITION OF RICHARD GETTINGS RING 22 Taken before RICHARD BURSKY, Registered 23 Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for 24 the State of Florida at Large, pursuant to Notice of 25 Taking Deposition filed in the above cause. 193 1 APPEARANCES 2 ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, INC., UNITED STATES SUGAR CORP., and 3 NEW SOUTH HOPE, INC. 4 PEEPLES, EARL & BLANK, P.A. One Biscayne Tower - Suite 3636 5 Two South Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 6 BY: JONATHAN L. GAINES, ESQ. 7 ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-INTERVENOR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 8 SUZAN HILL PONZOLI, ESQ. 9 THOMAS A.W. FITZGERALD, ESQ. Assistant United States Attorneys 10 155 North Miami Avenue Suite 600 11 Miami, Florida 33130 12 INDEX 13 Witness Direct RICHARD GETTINGS RING 14 By Mr. Gaines: 194 15 EXHIBIT PAGE DESCRIPTION 16 2 217 A document entitled Master Plan, May 17 1979, Everglades National Park, Florida 3 217 A document entitled Management 18 Policies, US Department of the Interior, National Park Service,1988 19 4 219 A document entitled Resource Management Plan, Everglades National 20 Park, dated September 1991 5 224 A document entitled South Florida 21 Research Center, allocation of $1.1M base increase for FY 93 22 6 285 A three-page document dated November 16, 1992 to Dr. Qualls 23 7 356 A two-page document, the first page handwritten, the second page 24 addressed to Mr. Tidwell 8 360 A multi-page document, the top 25 page containing the date June 29, 1992 194 1 RICHARD GETTINGS RING, resumed. 2 THE COURT REPORTER: Superintendent Ring, 3 I remind you you are still under oath. Do you 4 understand that? 5 THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. 6 MS. PONZOLI: Just a housekeeping matter, 7 Mr. Gaines. 8 Superintendent Ring has requested that we 9 have a copy of his whole statement. You had said 10 yesterday you had no problem with showing him that. 11 So on one of the breaks if we can have a copy of that 12 made. 13 MR. GAINES: You are talking about the 14 statement to the Water Management District? 15 MS. PONZOLI: Right, just his portion 16 before the Water Management Board. 17 MR. GAINES: All right. 18 MS. PONZOLI: Thank you. 19 MR. GAINES: It is about two pages long. 20 DIRECT EXAMINATION (Continued) 21 BY MR. GAINES: 22 Q. Good morning, Mr. Superintendent. 23 A. Good morning. 24 Q. Yesterday we were talking about problems 25 in Everglades National Park and you mentioned that 195 1 you had observed some vegetative changes south of the 2 Water Management control structures at the northern 3 border of the Park during a helicopter flight. Is 4 that basically correct? 5 A. I mentioned that I had seen vegetative 6 changes associated with the water delivery structures 7 at the north end of the Park. 8 Q. And I believe you were of the opinion or 9 are of the opinion that these are associated with 10 increased nutrients in the water from the EAA runoff. 11 Is that also correct? 12 A. I believe my testimony yesterday was to 13 that effect. 14 Q. Are you aware of any other areas of the 15 Park besides what we just were discussing that have 16 been impacted by what you believe to be increased 17 nutrients from EAA activities? 18 MS. PONZOLI: I am going to object to the 19 form. Are you referring to nutrient additions to the 20 water alone, Mr. Gaines, or just any activity in the 21 EAA? 22 MR. GAINES: I am not referring to timing, 23 distribution of water delivery but to nutrient 24 loading. 25 MS. PONZOLI: Okay. 196 1 A. I am still being briefed on the nature and 2 extent of the data and concerns that my research 3 staff has with regards to those issues. 4 BY MR. GAINES: 5 Q. Is it true then that as of this stage in 6 your briefing you haven't been made aware of any 7 other specific areas of the Park that are impacted by 8 nutrients from the EAA? 9 A. I have generally been made aware that 10 there are a number of impacts associated with higher 11 levels of nutrients coming from the EAA on the 12 Everglades system. 13 Q. Focusing just on the Park itself, I want 14 to determine what your current level of awareness or 15 knowledge is of any impacts inside the Park that have 16 been observed up until now which are purported to be 17 related to nutrients from the EAA. 18 A. My general understanding is that impact 19 due to elevated levels of nutrients creates a 20 progression of impact in the biotic communities and 21 that visible changes in plant communities such as the 22 presence of cattails is a relatively advanced stage 23 on that chain of changes. 24 I would assume from that and imply from 25 that that there are changes driven by the presence of 197 1 nutrients that are more extensive in scope than just 2 the cattail communities south of some of the Water 3 Management structures. 4 Q. If I understand what your answer just was, 5 you are saying that cattails have been observed and 6 as you understand it this signifies an advanced stage 7 of biotic change and therefore you assume that there 8 are other changes that have also occurred because you 9 can see the cattails. Is that a fair statement of 10 what you just said? 11 A. I rely on the statement I just made. 12 Q. Have any changes or impacts from nutrients 13 other than cattails south of the S-12 structures been 14 observed or documented in the park to your knowledge 15 as a result of nutrients from the EAA? 16 A. It is my understanding that they have. 17 Q. Can you tell me what those are? 18 A. Not specifically. 19 Q. Can you give me a general idea? 20 A. I believe I already have. 21 Q. And that would be changes in lower trophic 22 levels of the biotic community, lower than cattails, 23 not as readily observable from a helicopter, is that 24 what you are saying? 25 A. Certainly those. 198 1 Q. Would the changes you are talking about be 2 confined to the areas you are talking about where the 3 cattails were observed? 4 A. I don't specifically know. 5 Q. Who on your staff would be the person with 6 the most expertise or knowledge of this area? 7 A. I would rely on Dr. Soukup for information 8 relating to the specific nature and extent of our 9 data and research. 10 Q. So the only specific impact that you can 11 testify to here today is the cattail growth south of 12 the S-12 structures? 13 MS. PONZOLI: I object to the form of the 14 question. I think you are recharacterizing his 15 answer, I guess I would say that his answer stands 16 for itself. 17 I think he has given other specific 18 impacts. So I guess I object to the way you formed 19 your question. 20 MR. GAINES: I think I missed that then. 21 BY MR. GAINES: 22 Q. Tell me one other specific impact that you 23 are aware of beside the cattail growth that you 24 observed? And when I say something specifically that 25 you are aware of, not something you have to imply or 199 1 infer from the fact that cattails are present but 2 something that you are aware of that has been 3 observed or documented. 4 MS. PONZOLI: I am going to object to the 5 form of the question. 6 A. I've stated the specific changes that I 7 personally observed. 8 Q. The cattails themselves that you observed 9 or that have been observed south of the S-12, are you 10 aware of how large an area of cattail growth we are 11 talking about? 12 A. In the areas that I have observed? 13 Q. Yes. 14 A. From the air I could not be precise. I 15 would say possibly as much as several hundred acres 16 at a given structure. 17 Q. When you say at a given structure, the 18 S-12 structures which I believe what we are talking 19 about which are on the northern border of the Park 20 there, there are four of those. Did you observe 21 cattail growth associated with each of the four 22 structures or one area of cattails associated 23 generally with the structures or what was it? 24 A. I saw obvious cattail communities from the 25 air at several locations. I could not tell you which 200 1 structures they were. 2 Q. Were you able to observe whether the 3 locations had some relation orientation to the 4 structures? 5 A. They were immediately downstream of the 6 structures. 7 Q. How far from the inflow point of the 8 structures did the cattail growth begin? 9 A. Within feet. 10 Q. Did they extend out in a fan-shaped 11 pattern or some other -- 12 A. In a fan-shaped pattern. 13 Q. Can you give me your best estimate of how 14 far from the structures until the cattails stopped, 15 where growth was no longer observed? 16 MS. PONZOLI: It has been asked and 17 answered. I object to form. 18 MR. GAINES: He said several hundred acres 19 but I don't know what the configuration is. 20 A. Well, I believe I have just addressed the 21 configuration as to the size I would: I would rely 22 on the approximate acreage figure that I gave you 23 earlier. 24 BY MR. GAINES: 25 Q. I think you stated you saw several areas 201 1 of cattail growth. Just to clear it up, those were 2 several hundred acres each? 3 A. I said I would say they may be as much as 4 several hundred acres. 5 Q. But you are talking about each one 6 separately may be as much as that? 7 A. Correct. I certainly could not tell 8 precisely from the air. 9 Q. Are you aware as to whether that has been 10 quantified by research that the staff or outside 11 contractors have done? 12 A. I do not know. 13 Q. Dr. Soukup would probably know the answer 14 to that? 15 A. You could ask him. 16 Q. If you wanted to know the answer to that, 17 is he the one you would ask? 18 A. If I wanted to know the answer to that I 19 would ask him to find out. 20 Q. Other than the S-12 cattail growth, are 21 you aware of any other cattail areas in the park? 22 A. I am aware that cattails can generally 23 occur at any location where there are elevated levels 24 of nutrients. 25 Q. Given that, are you aware of any other 202 1 cattail growth in the Park? 2 A. I have seen other areas where there were 3 cattails present. 4 Q. Can you tell me where that was? 5 A. In the vicinity of rookeries. 6 Q. Rookeries? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Where in the park exactly? 9 A. In a variety of locations. 10 Q. Do you attribute those cattails to the EAA 11 runoff? 12 A. No. 13 Q. What do you attribute those to? 14 A. Elevated level of nutrients. 15 Q. The source of those nutrients would be 16 what? 17 A. The birds nesting at the rookeries. 18 Q. What is the mechanism by which birds 19 nesting elevate nutrient levels? 20 A. Fecal material. 21 Q. Other than EAA or increased nutrient 22 levels in bird nesting activities, are there any 23 other causes that you are aware of that cause cattail 24 growth? 25 A. My understanding is that cattail growth 203 1 can occur in aquatic conditions at any location where 2 elevated levels of proper nutrients occur. 3 Q. So it is only elevated nutrients that 4 trigger cattail growth as opposed to other potential 5 causes, disturbance of the soil and that type of 6 thing? 7 A. Disturbance of soils can cause elevated 8 levels of nutrients to be released into the aquatic 9 system. 10 Q. Are there other causes of elevated 11 nutrient that you are aware of besides agricultural 12 activity, bird nesting activity, disturbance of 13 soils, any other causes? 14 A. I am sure there are. 15 Q. Are you aware of any of them? 16 A. Within the park? 17 Q. Yes, let's start with that. 18 A. I am aware that the primary occurrences of 19 elevated level of nutrients leading to the growth of 20 cattail communities are associated with either 21 quality of water being delivered to the park or 22 concentrations of animal communities. 23 Q. Such as the bird nesting? 24 A. Such as the bird nesting. 25 Q. When you talk about the quality of water 204 1 being delivered to the park, it indicates that 2 something has occurred to elevate the nutrients in 3 that water? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. Other than agricultural activities, 6 disturbance of soils and the bird nesting, are you 7 aware of any other factors that can lead to such an 8 increase of nutrients in the water? 9 A. I am aware that in the case of Everglades 10 National Park those are the primary factors. 11 Q. Outside the context of the park itself, 12 are you aware of any other factors that can cause an 13 elevation in the nutrient level? 14 A. I would assume that there are a variety of 15 ways elevated levels of nutrients can be released 16 into the biotic system. That can either occur by the 17 release of nutrients that are already present but not 18 available for use by the plant communities or they 19 can be artificially introduced, and with regards to 20 artificial introduction, there are probably as many 21 ways as you and I have in our imagination. 22 Q. Can fire cause an elevation in the 23 nutrient level in water? 24 A. Fire can and often serves to break down 25 organic material into components that are available 205 1 for reuse in the biological system. 2 Q. So is that a yes, it can cause or lead to 3 an elevation in the nutrient level? 4 MS. PONZOLI: I will object to the form of 5 the question. 6 A. I will stand on my answer. 7 Q. When you say that fire can break down 8 organic material into components available for use in 9 the biological system, would those components include 10 nutrients? 11 A. They would include whatever compounds are 12 available in the material being burned. 13 Q. Do you have any awareness of or knowledge 14 as to whether or not fire can serve to elevate the 15 nutrient level of water? 16 MS. PONZOLI: I object to form. 17 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the 18 question? 19 (The question referred to was 20 thereupon read by the reporter 21 as above recorded) 22 Q. Just to clarify it, I mean in a system 23 like the Everglades. 24 A. I understand that fire can release 25 elevated levels of organic and other compounds into 206 1 the air which can affect the quality of rainfall, for 2 instance, as in the instance of burning of sugar 3 cane. 4 Q. Given your general knowledge about the 5 ability of fire to break down organic material into 6 component parts, have you ever observed or been 7 exposed to the concept of fire serving to elevate the 8 phosphorus level of water? 9 MS. PONZOLI: I object to form. I think 10 it has been asked and answered several times here. 11 MR. GAINES: I can't seem to get beyond 12 some generic reference to organic material. I am 13 just trying to finish up the thought. 14 MS. PONZOLI: I understand, Mr. Gaines. 15 But I think we have offered Superintendent Ring in 16 some pretty confined areas and you are going far 17 afield from those. I have been letting him answer 18 but you want a certain answer and he answers your 19 question and answers your question the best way he 20 can. 21 And if it isn't the answer you want you 22 continue asking the same question. I think that is 23 improper. 24 MR. GAINES: The only answers I want are 25 complete and honest ones and that's my only goal 207 1 here. 2 As I understand it, Superintendent Ring is 3 offered to identify external threats to the park. 4 One of the main ones he has identified is 5 nutrient-rich water entering the park. And I am just 6 trying to explore the way that the water can become 7 nutrient enriched and I don't think that is far 8 afield at all. 9 MS. PONZOLI: I do think you won't 10 question but that he is giving you complete and 11 honest answers. 12 MR. GAINES: I certainly don't intend to 13 do that and I think the record will speak for itself 14 on that. 15 MR. GAINES: Could you read back the last 16 question. 17 (The question referred to was 18 thereupon read by the reporter 19 as above recorded) 20 A. I believe I indicated that I understood 21 that elevated levels of a variety of compounds 22 including nutrients could affect rainfall. 23 Q. Have you ever considered with your staff 24 the issue of the funneling effect that the S-12 25 structures create for the water flowing into the 208 1 park, the fact that it flows through four discrete 2 structures and the concentrating effect that has on 3 whatever nutrients there are in the water? 4 A. I know we have long had concerns with 5 regards to the concentration of delivery points of 6 water. Sheet flow was the naturally occurring 7 process of distribution. 8 Q. Have you ever discussed this issue 9 specifically with regard to the S-12 structures? 10 A. I've discussed it specifically with 11 regards to all of the delivery structures on the 12 upstream end of the park. 13 Q. Have you discussed the fact that if a more 14 natural sheet flow was established in the area of the 15 S-12 structures so that the water entered the park 16 over a broader range rather than through four 17 concentrated points, that that would address to a 18 large extent any elevated nutrients contained in the 19 water by disbursing it out over a wide area? 20 A. I am aware that such a distribution of 21 water with elevated levels of nutrients would create 22 a much more widespread effect. 23 Q. So if I understand what you are saying, 24 that would make the problem worse and not better, is 25 that correct? 209 1 A. If the quality of water being delivered 2 had levels of nutrients significantly higher than 3 what naturally occurred, it would make the problem 4 much more widespread. 5 Q. So assuming for a minute that the quality 6 of the water doesn't change from what it is right 7 now, if we were able to implement a regime whereby 8 the water entered the park on the northern end there 9 over that entire expanse of the park through sheet 10 flow rather than through the discrete structures 11 there, it is your opinion that that would worsen the 12 problem rather than improve the situation? 13 MS. PONZOLI: I object to form. It is the 14 same question you asked before. He answered it. 15 Q. Let me just -- 16 A. It is my opinion that it would distribute 17 the effect. 18 Q. Would the effect that is distributed be 19 diluted as well or would it be the same effect that 20 is observed but just over the entire area? 21 A. It would be the same net effect on the 22 park, and as a result equally as problematic. 23 Q. When you say the same net effect, you mean 24 the same volume of nutrients would be entering the 25 park, just in different areas? 210 1 A. Under the scenario you described -- 2 Q. Under my scenario, yes. 3 A. -- you described that -- you described as 4 I understand it, that is correct. 5 Q. Is it a goal or desire of the park or of 6 you as the superintendent, to try to address the 7 sheet flow issue in the area of the S-12s? 8 A. It is our desire to reestablish sheet flow 9 distribution of water wherever we can in a manner 10 that approximates the naturally occurring system. 11 Q. Are you aware of any specific goal or plan 12 with regard to the area we have been talking about? 13 A. I believe we are working with the Corps of 14 Engineers and the South Florida Water Management 15 District on modified water deliveries plan for the -- 16 for Shark Slough. 17 Q. That is the general design memorandum for 18 modified water deliveries? 19 A. That is correct. 20 Q. Do you know what the current status is of 21 that? 22 A. My understanding is that the general 23 design memorandum has been approved and that work is 24 now proceeding on what they call the detailed design 25 memorandum. I may be off on the exact title. The 211 1 acronym I believe is DDM. 2 Q. Do you have any idea when that is supposed 3 to be ready, completed? 4 A. I don't know the particular schedule. I 5 do know that it is proceeding over the next year to 6 two years. 7 Q. What is the current regime for water 8 deliveries to the park? Is there a document that 9 contains that? 10 A. I am not sure I understand what you mean 11 by regime. 12 Q. The current plan, the current practice for 13 how water is delivered to the park, quantity, timing, 14 distribution. 15 A. If you are referring to an operating plan, 16 I believe there are operating plans and schedules 17 developed and in place between the South Florida 18 Water Management District and the Corps of Engineers. 19 Q. Have you had occasion to review the 20 current operating plan in detail? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Have you generally reviewed it? 23 A. I generally understand that there is a 24 minimum water delivery schedule on the books and that 25 there are experimental water deliveries occurring 212 1 which supersede minimum water delivery schedule on an 2 iterative basis. 3 Q. And the minimum water delivery schedule, I 4 take it, is just what it sounds like, it determines 5 the minimum amount of water that can be -- that must 6 be delivered to the park at certain times? 7 A. I only referred to the title of the 8 document, not to its effectiveness. 9 Q. Is that what the intent of the document is 10 to your understanding? 11 A. I wasn't here when it was put together. I 12 understand that was developed in the early 1970s. 13 Q. As far as the experimental water delivery 14 model, is that what is referred to as the rainfall 15 model, rainfall driven model? 16 A. We are talking -- you have now 17 transitioned into reference to a model which is an 18 entirely different concept and an item than an 19 operating schedule or agreement. 20 Q. Is the current experimental water delivery 21 schedule based upon a rainfall model? 22 A. My understanding that information 23 developed utilizing such a model has been used in 24 establishing experimental deliveries. 25 Q. Who on your staff has the most contact 213 1 with this issue and the most expertise? 2 A. On -- 3 Q. Water deliveries to the park and also 4 coordinating with the District and the Corps on that 5 issue? 6 A. Again, I would refer to my research 7 director and his staff. 8 Q. Yesterday at the deposition there were 9 several documents that were produced that we didn't 10 see previously. One of them is a master plan dated 11 May 1979, Everglades National Park. 12 Can you tell me generally what is the 13 purpose of the master plan? 14 A. First I would explain that the term master 15 plan is a term that was typically used for broad 16 management planning for national park system units 17 prior to the late 1970s. Since that time with 18 Congressional guidance those documents are now 19 referred to as general management plans. And they 20 are intended to be -- to outline a broad management 21 framework responsive to Congressional mandates, 22 resource and visitor conditions and external 23 influences. They establish a strategy for management 24 of the unit intended to cover roughly a ten-year 25 period of time. 214 1 Q. You gave me several documents yesterday 2 but one is the master plan dated May 1979, and 3 another is called resource management plan, 4 Everglades National Park, a draft of that, with a 5 date of September 1991. 6 Is the resource management plan a current 7 version of what was called the master plan in 1979? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Two different kinds of documents? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Sticking with this master plan for a 12 minute, who would these master plans or general 13 management plans be prepared by, the park staff? 14 A. Typically a team made up of professional 15 planners and appropriately knowledgeable employees 16 capable of addressing the issues and needs of a given 17 area would be pulled together as a team. 18 Typically the superintendent would be the 19 primary management official working with that team, 20 providing it its guidance and support. And there may 21 be members of park staff, regional office, 22 professional service center or national office 23 assigned as members of the team. 24 Q. Is there a subsequent master plan or 25 general management plan in effect or that has been 215 1 drafted for Everglades National Park? 2 A. No. 3 Q. So is the 1979 version still in effect? 4 A. It is the most recent official document on 5 the books. 6 Q. Does a master plan that is 13 years old 7 still provide you with meaningful guidance in 8 managing the park? 9 A. It can. 10 Q. Do you make use of this master plan in 11 your management of the park? 12 A. I would refer to it routinely along with 13 other documents in understanding and addressing 14 management problems. 15 Q. As I understand the purpose of this, it 16 gives you a broad direction or guidepost for 17 management activities in connection with your 18 Congressional mandate and the resource needs and the 19 public needs and that sort of thing? 20 A. It is a general strategy to guide the 21 management of the unit intended to cover 22 approximately a decade. 23 Q. I guess that brings up the question, is 24 there another one in the works? 25 A. Not at the moment. 216 1 Q. Do you intend or is it intended that a new 2 master plan or general management plan will be 3 drafted up for Everglades National Park? 4 A. It is the practice of the service to 5 periodically review and undertake new general 6 management planning process for all units of the 7 national Park system. 8 Q. So you would expect at some point there 9 will be a new plan? 10 A. Absolutely. 11 Q. Have you had any indication as to when 12 that might be? 13 A. It would largely be my responsibility to 14 trigger it. 15 Q. Do you have any current intention to 16 trigger that process? 17 A. It is typical practice, and certainly my 18 intention, to review the status of plans for the park 19 along with all other aspects of the management 20 program and to set in motion appropriate efforts to 21 follow through on critical commitments and to 22 precipitate reviews and revisions of specific 23 programs and strategies and plans where I feel it is 24 necessary. 25 Q. As we sit here today do you have any 217 1 specific time frame in mind as to when you might or 2 when you will trigger this process of coming up with 3 a new general management plan? 4 A. No. 5 MR. GAINES: Why don't we go ahead and 6 mark this as an exhibit. Make it No. 2. 7 (A document entitled Master Plan, May 8 1979, Everglades National Park, Florida, was marked 9 Ring Deposition Exhibit 2 for identification) 10 MR. GAINES: Another document we received 11 yesterday is entitled Management Policies, US 12 Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 13 1988 which we will mark as Exhibit 3. 14 (A document entitled Management Policies, 15 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 16 1988 was marked Ring Deposition Exhibit 3 for 17 identification) 18 BY MR. GAINES: 19 Q. Superintendent Ring, how is this 20 management policies document used by you, if at all, 21 in managing the park? 22 A. It is one of a variety of documents I 23 refer to for guidance in reaching decisions related 24 to the management of the area. 25 Q. Is this a standard management policies 218 1 manual for Park superintendents, national Park 2 superintendents? 3 A. It is the management policies manual for 4 the National Park Service. 5 Q. I notice this one is dated 1988. Is that 6 the most current manual that there is? 7 A. To the best of my knowledge, that's the 8 most current comprehensive edition. 9 Q. Have there been any changes to this since 10 1988 that you are aware of? 11 A. There has not been any updated version of 12 it published. 13 Q. Is this a document that you use on a 14 regular basis? 15 A. It is one of several documents that 16 provide me with guidance on any and all decisions 17 that I make. 18 Q. I am just trying to get a feel. Is this 19 something you would look at every day of the week or 20 once a month or how integral to your function is the 21 management policies document? 22 A. The policies established in the document 23 are policies that routinely guide my actions. 24 Q. Are these policies that -- I am sorry? 25 A. I worked with some version of this for 20 219 1 years so I don't sleep with it under my pillow. 2 Q. In other words, some of the policies you 3 are so familiar with at this point through repeated 4 exposure to them and through your experience that you 5 don't have to look it up every time you make a move? 6 A. Correct. 7 MR. GAINES: The third document or another 8 document we got yesterday is what is called Resource 9 Management Plan, Everglades National Park, and on the 10 interior page it states, Draft, Resource Management 11 Plan for Everglades National Park, September 1991. 12 Mark this please as Exhibit 4. 13 (A document entitled Resource Management 14 Plan, Everglades National Park, dated September 1991 15 was marked Ring Deposition Exhibit 4 for 16 identification) 17 MS. PONZOLI: Off the record. 18 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken, 19 after which the following proceedings 20 were had) 21 MR. GAINES: Back on the record 22 BY MR. GAINES: 23 Q. What has been marked as Exhibit 4, the 24 resource management plan, what is this document? 25 A. It is a draft of a programatic document 220 1 which provides a more detailed approach to the 2 management of natural and cultural resources within 3 the park. 4 Q. More detailed than the master plan that we 5 were talking about? 6 A. Yes. It is considered in our planning 7 process a subsidiary or implementing type of a plan 8 for the general management strategy that would be 9 outlined in a master plan or a general management 10 plan. 11 Q. How often is a resource management plan 12 done? 13 A. It is done initially and then routinely 14 reviewed every two to three years, and where 15 necessary, updated. 16 Q. I notice on the inside page here there is 17 a signature, recommended by, looks like Mr. Chandler 18 signed it as the superintendent on October 2, 1991. 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. There is also a signature line for the 21 regional director which is blank. Do you know if 22 this was passed on to the regional director for 23 approval? 24 A. Yes, it was. 25 Q. Has it been approved? 221 1 A. My understanding is that there was staff 2 review within our regional office and comments and 3 suggestions communicated back to the park regarding 4 the draft, and that a final document has not yet been 5 transmitted, a revised final document. 6 Q. Is that in the process of being prepared 7 now? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Who is in charge of that effort? 10 A. I am. 11 Q. Who are the primary staff people that you 12 are utilizing to do that work? 13 A. I have resource management staff within 14 the South Florida Research Center that would be the 15 coordinators, but would draw on comment and input 16 from several divisions and a variety of staff 17 members. 18 Q. Are there any particular individuals that 19 are the most heavily involved with this? 20 A. Certainly the research director. 21 Q. Dr. Soukup? 22 A. Dr. Soukup. 23 Q. If the regional director had just gone 24 ahead and signed it and approved it would there just 25 have been a final plan and not a draft, is that what 222 1 is necessary for it to become a final plan? 2 A. Yes. But it was transmitted as a draft 3 for review with an expectation of comments and 4 revisions prior to finalization. 5 Q. So there was no expectation that it would 6 be sent up and approved and you would have a final 7 plan without further revisions? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Does this plan relate primarily to 10 research efforts at the park or more broad issues 11 than that? 12 A. Broader issues than that. 13 Q. Let me ask you to turn to a section -- I 14 don't have the dividers -- it is kind of in the 15 middle here -- it has a series of what are called 16 project statement sheets. 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. I believe the name of the section is -- 19 A. Project statements. 20 Q. There are a handful, about 20 or 30 of 21 these project statement sheets. What are the 22 purposes of these documents? 23 A. They are a -- they represent a compilation 24 of resource management projects that the park has 25 identified as being appropriate to undertake in order 223 1 to accomplish the programatic objectives of the plan. 2 Q. It appears that there are various studies 3 or research projects or other activities described in 4 the project statement sheets in the form of a 5 statement of a problem, a description of recommended 6 action and a brief budget, some budget information. 7 Are these sheets essentially an 8 application to somebody for authorization or funding 9 to do these projects? 10 A. No. 11 Q. For example, the first one, project No. 12 001 here entitled the East Everglades Exotic 13 Vegetation Control, it says, Funding Status, 14 unfunded. 15 Is that still the status of that, if you 16 know? 17 A. I'm not sure I can give you the specifics 18 with regards to what activities under this project 19 were funded in fiscal year 1992 and fund allocation 20 for projects for fiscal year 1993 have not yet been 21 made. 22 Q. If these sheets are not a mechanism by 23 which funding or approval is requested for these 24 projects, what is that mechanism? 25 A. There are routine budget submittals. 224 1 Q. Who are they submitted to? 2 A. Any that I submit are submitted to the 3 regional director in Atlanta. 4 Q. Would those budget submittals have a 5 breakdown of the various projects such as we see on 6 the project statement sheet, describing what they 7 are, how much should be budgeted for them and why 8 they are necessary, that kind of thing? 9 A. In any funding request I would identify 10 those priority projects or needs and provide 11 justification for the funds requested. 12 MR. GAINES: While we are talking about 13 this let's make this No. 5. 14 (A document entitled South Florida 15 Research Center, allocation of $1.1M base increase 16 for FY 93 was marked Ring Deposition Exhibit 5 for 17 identification) 18 BY MR. GAINES: 19 Q. What has been marked as Exhibit No. 5 is 20 two pages relating to, as I see it, funding for the 21 South Florida Research Center. The first page 22 references allocation of $1.1 million base increase 23 for fiscal year '93. 24 Was there a $1.1 million base increase in 25 the funding for the Research Center for fiscal year 225 1 '93? 2 A. No. 3 Q. What does this refer to? Was this a 4 proposed increase? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Has that been approved? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Has it been declined or is it still 9 pending? 10 A. A base increase as described was proposed 11 as part of the President's budget proposal to 12 Congress in January of 1992 for fiscal year 1993. It 13 included a $1.1 million increase for research at 14 Everglades National Park. It was part of a targeted 15 parks program proposal for the National Park Service. 16 It was not funded in the -- as proposed in 17 the final appropriations bill. 18 Q. Was there any increase funded in the final 19 appropriations bill? 20 A. Specific to Everglades National Park? 21 Q. Yes. 22 A. No. 23 Q. When you have your budget funded each 24 year, each fiscal year, is there a specific amount 25 that is allocated to the Research Center, South 226 1 Florida Research Center? 2 A. I have allocated an operating budget 3 within which I fund all aspects of continuing Park 4 operations, including the Research Center. 5 Q. So you are provided with essentially a 6 lump sum by Congress and as superintendent you have 7 the authority and discretion to determine how to best 8 allocate those funds in carrying out your function? 9 A. Within those base funding levels I have 10 discretion to set fund allocations for the various 11 aspects of park operation. 12 Q. So the funding for the Research Center, 13 whether it was increased or decreased, it was up to 14 you within your base fund allocation, is that 15 correct? 16 A. To a degree. 17 Q. How were you treated for fiscal year '93 18 by Congress? Did you receive any increased funds 19 from the prior year? 20 A. For operations? 21 Q. Operations as opposed to what? 22 A. As opposed to any other sources of funding 23 that Congress might appropriate for activities not 24 contained within normal Park operations. 25 Q. Can you give me an example of something 227 1 that would be not within normal Park operations that 2 Congress would appropriate funds for? 3 A. Land acquisition. 4 Q. Anything else? 5 A. A variety. 6 Q. From your answer, for fiscal year '93 did 7 Congress appropriate certain funds for operations, 8 certain funds for land acquisition and certain funds 9 for other items relating to the park? 10 A. They appropriated funds in a variety of 11 categories for the National Park Service. 12 Q. In each of those categories or for the 13 National Park Service as a whole? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Would Congress deal specifically with what 16 piece of that pie goes to Everglades National Park or 17 is that someone within the Park Service? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Both? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. In terms of operations, did you receive an 22 increase for '93? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Did you receive a decrease? 25 A. Yes. 228 1 Q. How much were you decreased? 2 A. I believe there was some portion of one 3 percent across the board naturally that was reduced 4 from Park operating budgets. 5 Q. And that was some portion of one percent 6 decrease of the operating funds that were allocated 7 to the National Park Service as a whole? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. What authority determines how those 10 operating funds are distributed among the various 11 national parks? 12 A. Usually the director of the National Park 13 Service consistent with whatever language is in the 14 appropriations bill. 15 Q. Are you aware whether in this instance did 16 the director have the authority to decrease some 17 parks more and increase some depending on need or was 18 it just an across the board, some fraction of one 19 percent decrease in operating budgets for all parks? 20 A. My understanding is that Congress reduced 21 all operating accounts by that percentage in order to 22 meet their target funding levels. 23 Q. And whatever happened at other parks, you 24 know your operating budget decreased by some portion 25 of one percent? 229 1 A. Correct, that's what I have been informed. 2 Q. Do you recall what the amount allocated is 3 for your operating budget for fiscal year '93? 4 A. I don't know the specific figure. 5 Q. Can you give me an order of magnitude? 6 A. Between 8 and $9 million. 7 Q. And fiscal year '93, when does that begin? 8 A. It began on the 1st of October 1991 and 9 ends on September 30, 1992. 10 Q. Do you recall how much was allocated for 11 land acquisition for fiscal year '93 roughly? 12 A. I believe 7 and a half million dollars was 13 appropriated by Congress for land acquisition at 14 Everglades National Park. 15 Q. Is that primarily targeted to the east 16 Everglades area? 17 A. Primarily. 18 Q. Other than land acquisition and 19 operations, are there any other categories of funding 20 that were allocated to the park for '93? 21 A. By Congress? 22 Q. By Congress. 23 A. Construction funds were allocated. 24 Q. How much was that? 25 A. $7 million. 230 1 Q. What is intended to be constructed with 2 those funds? 3 A. Those funds are supporting the 4 implementation by the Corps of Engineers of modified 5 water deliveries to the park. 6 Q. Are they already in the construction phase 7 on the modified water deliveries? 8 A. No. 9 Q. So what do those funds, are those for 10 further studies in that area? 11 A. The category of appropriation is line item 12 construction by title. The funds appropriated are 13 the funds specifically necessary to accomplish that 14 project identified. 15 Q. Is that to support the detailed design 16 memorandum effort that is ongoing? 17 A. Funds appropriated for that project 18 support all aspects of the project including design 19 stages. 20 Q. So just because the line item is entitled 21 construction doesn't necessarily indicate that 22 anything is going to be built with those funds, 23 right? 24 A. It implies that the project is one that 25 will be built. 231 1 Q. At some point? 2 A. At some point. 3 Q. But not necessarily fiscal year '93? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. I take it that at this point, given the 6 still ongoing design, you don't have any awareness of 7 what structures are intended to be built in 8 connection with that project, is that right? 9 A. I believe the general design memorandum 10 outlines those structures. 11 Q. Can you tell me generally what structures 12 are included in that? 13 A. I would refer you to the Corps of 14 Engineers at the Jacksonville District. 15 Q. Is there an individual at the park who is 16 primarily coordinating with them on this? 17 A. It would fall between my office and the 18 research center. 19 Q. Dr. Soukup, and in your office you are the 20 individual? 21 A. Dr. Soukup and I would direct the 22 coordination with the Corps of Engineers on the -- on 23 that project. 24 Q. Any other categories of funds allocated by 25 Congress for fiscal year '93? 232 1 A. Specifically providing funds to the 2 Everglades National Park? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. Not that I am aware of. 5 Q. Are there other funds available to the 6 park for fiscal year '93 that have not been allocated 7 by Congress? 8 A. Aside from the base funds that I referred 9 to? 10 Q. We spoke about operations, land 11 acquisition and construction funds that have been 12 appropriated by Congress. Is that the sum total of 13 the funds that you have in your checkbook for this 14 fiscal year or are there other funds available? 15 A. Those are the only funds that have been 16 allocated to the park. 17 Q. The only reason I am asking this question 18 is when I asked you if there were other funds 19 allocated you asked, by Congress, which indicated to 20 me there might be some other source of funding. Are 21 there other sources of funding that the park has? 22 A. That the park has? 23 Q. Yes. 24 A. Not at this moment. 25 Q. At some prior moment were there other 233 1 sources of funding or do you anticipate other sources 2 of funding? I am just trying to be clear. 3 A. You have asked several things. Could you 4 be specific? 5 Q. Here is the basic thrust of my question. 6 You seem to be qualifying your answer in some way 7 when I am trying to pin down what funds are 8 available. 9 When I asked what was funded you said by 10 Congress indicating there might be some other source. 11 When I said was there another source you said not at 12 this moment which indicates at some other time there 13 might be other sources. 14 What other types of sources are there 15 available to the park for funding? 16 A. At any given time a variety of other fund 17 sources can be made available. 18 Q. Can you give me an example of that variety 19 of sources? 20 A. From other programs within the National 21 Park Service operation, from other agencies of 22 government, from other governments, from other 23 academic and private institutions, from the visitor 24 who spends time in the park. That would be a sample. 25 Q. Beyond the base funds that we have 234 1 discussed, does the park have available to it 2 currently any other funds from the National Park 3 Service for other programs? 4 A. For fiscal year '93? 5 Q. Yes. 6 A. Not at this time. 7 Q. Do you have any reason to anticipate any 8 such funding? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. What is that? Why is that? 11 A. There are a variety of park programs and 12 offices that are administered regionally and 13 centrally in support of specific functional 14 objectives, and priorities are set in support of park 15 activities on an annual basis and either staff time 16 or funding can be allocated in support of specific 17 projects and objectives at different parks as a 18 result of those decisions. 19 Q. Do you currently anticipate any specific 20 funding with regard to any specific such program or 21 objective? 22 A. I believe that would be speculation. 23 Q. I don't want to rise to the level of 24 speculation. Have you been advised by anybody that 25 there is going to be such a program? Are you aware 235 1 of any such programs or objectives that are imminent? 2 A. I told you that there are a variety of 3 those, of such programs and decisions are made in 4 support of specific field projects. 5 Q. Among that variety, do you have any 6 specific awareness of any of them? 7 A. I know of most of those offices and 8 programs. 9 Q. Do you know of any one program for which 10 the park will receive funding on this basis during 11 fiscal year '93, just as an example? 12 A. I know of no allocations that have been 13 made. 14 Q. Can you tell me one program that you think 15 is the most likely to be funded and allocated to the 16 park? 17 A. With regards to budget matters, I would 18 not speculate on funding allocations until they have 19 been made. 20 Q. How did you become aware of these various 21 programs that are not yet funded or haven't yet been 22 allocated? 23 A. I started to work with them as a budget 24 and program analyst 18 years ago and have been 25 dealing with them as a park manager ever since. 236 1 Q. And in your experience are these types of 2 programs funded each fiscal year? 3 A. Some combination of them to varying 4 degrees, yes. 5 Q. Can you give me some examples of just 6 several of the types of programs you are talking 7 about so I can understand the parameters of this type 8 of program? 9 A. There is a program called lump sum 10 construction. It is intended to provide 11 project-related construction funds in small 12 quantities -- in small amounts to areas that have 13 emergency needs that cannot be met through the normal 14 budget cycle. 15 There is cyclic maintenance funding which 16 is allocated to provide larger cost for typically 17 contractually accomplished maintenance projects like 18 roof replacements and major rebuilds of facilities. 19 Q. Would you expect some funding along those 20 lines in connection with the damage from the 21 hurricane? 22 A. Funding from those sources could be used 23 in response to some of those things. 24 Q. Would funding of this type be used for 25 research projects undertaken by the Research Center? 237 1 A. Not of the programs I have described. 2 Q. Not lump sum construction or cyclic 3 maintenance but funding from the National Park 4 Service from other programs within it beside the base 5 funds that have been allocated, could that 6 potentially generate funds for the Research Center? 7 A. There are programs that could. 8 Q. Are you aware of what those are? 9 A. Certainly. 10 Q. What are they? 11 A. There is a water resources program 12 administered by the service, an inventory and 13 monitoring program administered by the service, a 14 science program administered by the region. A 15 variety. 16 Q. Are you aware as to whether or not any of 17 those types of programs for the research component 18 generated any funding to the Research Center or the 19 park in the prior fiscal year? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. What was that with regard to, if you know? 22 A. I believe there was a water resources 23 program provision of support for work in Florida Bay. 24 Q. Do you know how much that was? 25 A. No. 238 1 Q. Another source you mentioned was other 2 agencies of government. 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Have other agencies of government provided 5 any funding to the park for fiscal year '93? 6 A. Fiscal year '93? 7 Q. Or '92, if you know. 8 A. Other federal agencies, I believe, have 9 included, yes, the answer is we have received funds 10 from other federal agencies that I am aware of. 11 Q. For '93 or '92? 12 A. '92, I believe. 13 Q. What agencies were those? 14 A. Corps of Engineers, EPA. 15 Q. Any others? 16 A. There may have been. 17 Q. Is that two different agencies you just 18 mentioned? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What do they provide funding for? 21 A. I believe that the EPA provided some funds 22 for work to occur in the park associated with 23 monitoring global climate change, and I believe that 24 the Corps of Engineers provided some funds associated 25 with biological research into the effects and 239 1 implications of changes to the C-111 canal drainage 2 in preparation for a revised GDM for that basin. 3 Q. Has the Department of Justice provided any 4 funding, for example, to the Research Center for 5 research projects that might be of use in the water 6 quality litigation? 7 MS. PONZOLI: Counsel, let me think about 8 this, if you are going to into privileged areas. I 9 want to think about it. Just give me a minute. 10 (Pause) 11 MS. PONZOLI: I think you are in a very 12 difficult area, Mr. Gaines, in the relationship 13 between what basically I guess is the law firm for 14 the client and the client. 15 I don't honestly have a real good feel for 16 whether this is a privileged area or not. I feel it 17 is but I am not sure that you aren't entitled to some 18 information. 19 I would prefer, if you would hold your 20 question on this until after lunch, I would honestly 21 like to speak with someone at my office and get like 22 a second opinion before stopping you and just saying, 23 no, you can't answer this or letting you just go 24 forward, I would be more comfortable if I could have 25 that opportunity to confer with someone. 240 1 MR. GAINES: Just so I understand, is it 2 correct that you would object and instruct the 3 witness not to answer as to the substance or the 4 subject matter of any research programs that are 5 going on currently with regard to this litigation 6 that haven't yet been completed? Is that a correct 7 understanding of what your position is? 8 MS. PONZOLI: No. This is an odd way for 9 this to come up. I don't know that it has ever come 10 up this way before. And I really don't have in my 11 own mind a good feel for the parameters of what you 12 would be entitled to and what you are not. I really 13 would prefer a second opinion. 14 Normally you can go so far but not 15 further. Where that so far is, I am having real 16 difficulty. I am deciding. 17 MR. GAINES: The scope of my current 18 question is limited to whether the DOJ has provided 19 any funding to the Research Center for research to 20 the litigation, it doesn't go -- 21 MS. PONZOLI: That is the first step. 22 Before we go, first step or step and a half, on to 23 step two, I would like to sort out the scope of what 24 we feel is appropriate and then let you go as far as 25 we feel you have a right to go. 241 1 MR. GAINES: I will take that at least for 2 now as a temporary instruction to the witness not to 3 answer that question and we will determine after 4 lunch if that instruction is a permanent one or 5 retracted. 6 MS. PONZOLI: Sure, and then you will be 7 allowed to go as far as we think it is appropriate 8 and we will sort it out however we have to 9 downstream. But that is only a couple of hours and I 10 don't think we will be finished by lunchtime. Do 11 you? 12 MR. GAINES: No. 13 MS. PONZOLI: I didn't either. 14 MS. PONZOLI: Would you read back to me 15 the precise question so I will know the first step, I 16 will have it accurate. 17 (The question referred to was 18 thereupon read by the reporter 19 as above recorded) 20 MR. GAINES: And just to cure any possible 21 infirmity with that question, the phrase "might be of 22 use," I understand, is vague and potentially 23 objectionable but I think you understand what I am 24 driving at here. 25 MS. PONZOLI: I think I understand too. I 242 1 am dealing more with the substantive issue of what 2 you can get into between the client and the law firm. 3 BY MR. GAINES: 4 Q. Let me ask you, Superintendent Ring, to 5 look at the second page of Exhibit No. 5, and there 6 is a list of projects here, it has two titles, one is 7 remaining unfunded projects after $1.1 million 8 increase and it appears to be, it is table 3 from 9 some publication or document, it states, partial list 10 of underfunded projects from pre-proposal list. Do 11 you have any familiarity with this list of projects? 12 A. Some. 13 Q. Where it says remaining unfunded projects 14 after $1.1 million increase, I take it that means 15 that with the $1.1 million increase these projects 16 would still not be funded with what was the proposed 17 $1.1 million increase, is that correct? 18 A. I believe it characterizes that kind of 19 relationship with the preceding page. 20 Q. Did you have any connection with the 21 preparation of this Exhibit No. 5? 22 A. It was prepared by others on my staff. 23 Q. During your tenure, I mean, after you came 24 on board at the park? 25 A. I don't know that. 243 1 Q. Do you know whether this Exhibit No. 5 was 2 transmitted to -- 3 A. Are you referring to the entire exhibit or 4 just the one page of it? 5 Q. I was referring to both pages. And my 6 understanding was they were connected in some way but 7 maybe you can clear it up for me. 8 Do you know, what, for example, the first 9 page, what is this page? Where did it go? What was 10 its purpose? 11 A. It was prepared at my request. 12 Q. What was done with it? Was this 13 transmitted to the region or to Congress or someone 14 considering the request for additional funding? 15 A. It provided me with a summary of 16 information with regards to the implications of the 17 base increase proposal in the President's budget for 18 fiscal year '93. 19 Q. Was this transmitted to anyone outside the 20 park in connection with the request for additional 21 funding? 22 A. I used it in conjunction with a variety of 23 discussions I had concerning the proposal in the 24 President's budget. 25 Q. So this was a document that enabled you to 244 1 say, here's the extra funding we are requesting and 2 here is how we are going to use it or here is how we 3 propose to use it? 4 A. In a very summary fashion, yes. 5 Q. And was page 2 of this Exhibit 5 also used 6 in the same fashion by you? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Is there a relationship between -- 9 A. Excuse me, I have a question. You 10 referred to page 5. 11 Q. No, page 2 of Exhibit 5. That is the page 12 that states remaining unfunded projects after $1.1 13 million increase. 14 A. Sorry. Obviously the caffeine hasn't 15 connected yet. 16 Q. Would you like to take a break? 17 A. No, that is fine. Let's continue. 18 Q. There is a list of projects under category 19 B here on the first page that would be intended to 20 benefit from the increased funding for fiscal year 21 '93 and then another list of projects on the second 22 page that would still remain unfunded. 23 Can you tell me what the relationship is 24 between that list, those two lists of projects taken 25 together and the project statement sheets contained 245 1 in the resource management plan which is Exhibit 4? 2 A. No. 3 Q. No, you don't know what the relationship 4 is, if any? 5 A. I cannot describe the relationship between 6 them. 7 Q. Let me ask you this: If I was to list all 8 of the projects here from the resource management 9 plan and put it down next to these two combined lists 10 on the fiscal year '93 Exhibit 5, would projects that 11 are from the management plan that aren't contained on 12 either one of these lists, can I assume those were 13 funded or would that not be a safe assumption? 14 THE WITNESS: Could you read that back to 15 me? 16 (The question referred to was 17 thereupon read by the reporter 18 as above recorded) 19 A. It would not be a safe assumption. 20 Q. The reason I am asking is, it seems to me 21 that if you take the Exhibit 5 projects, these are 22 all projects that remain unfunded absent a $1.1 23 million increase and even with the $1.1 million 24 increase the second page is still unfunded. 25 So that brings up the question, what 246 1 happened with the projects in the resource management 2 plan? Would some of them have justed dropped out of 3 the picture altogether and been abandoned as proposed 4 projects? 5 A. I don't know. 6 Q. Who would know the answer to that? 7 A. With regard to any specific project? 8 Q. Yes. 9 A. My research staff. 10 Q. Dr. Soukup and his staff? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. With regard to the first one here on the 13 project statement sheets, the East Everglades Exotic 14 Vegetation Control. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Did you already state you don't know 17 whether that has gone forward or not? 18 A. No, I didn't state -- I don't believe I 19 stated that I did not know whether it has gone 20 forward. I believe I stated I did not know whether 21 or not any funds had been allocated for it. 22 Q. Maybe I have been making an assumption. 23 Is there a relationship between a project being 24 funded and a project actually going forward? 25 A. Is there a relationship? Of course. 247 1 Q. Do you know whether or not this project 2 has gone forward? 3 A. I believe funds have been requested to 4 accomplish aspects of this project. 5 Q. Has that request been granted? 6 A. We have not received any Park Service 7 funds this year associated with this project. 8 Q. As I understand it, the resource 9 management plan relates to fiscal year '92, is that 10 correct? 11 A. No. 12 Q. It relates to fiscal year '93? 13 A. No. 14 Q. What does it relate to, any particular 15 fiscal year? 16 A. The management of resources 17 programatically within the national park. 18 Q. When it says proposal date at the bottom 19 of this first page, '92, what does that indicate? 20 A. I would assume that it is a reference to 21 the time at which the project was first proposed. 22 Q. With regard to funding of projects to the 23 Research Center, you talked about some categories of 24 base funds that are provided to the park. Out of the 25 base funds, we had three categories, land 248 1 acquisition, operations and construction. Am I 2 correct in assuming that neither the land acquisition 3 nor the construction funds are available for the 4 Research Center to do research projects with? 5 A. It is incorrect to refer to all three 6 categories as base funds. 7 Q. The base funds are the operations? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. Am I correct in assuming that only the 10 operations funds among the funds allocated by 11 Congress are available to the Research Center and not 12 the land acquisition and construction funds? 13 A. That would not be entirely correct. 14 Q. What is incorrect about that? 15 A. Fund allocations are for support of 16 routine and recurring park operations from within the 17 operations base and can be used in any fashion to 18 support those type activities. 19 The land acquisition funds are allocated 20 specifically for the task of acquiring lands within 21 an authorized boundary of the park and can be used 22 for any activity in support of that objective. 23 And the construction funds are allocated 24 for a specific project, the accomplishment of a 25 specific project, usually construction, and can be 249 1 used to support any activity that is necessary to 2 accomplish that project. 3 Q. If I understand what you are saying, if a 4 determination is made, for example, that in 5 connection with the efforts to acquire land from the 6 East Everglades, those efforts would be supported by 7 a particular research project determining water 8 quality or the conditions of the land there or 9 elsewhere, you would have the authority to allocate 10 some of those funds from the land acquisition 11 appropriation and direct those to the Research Center 12 to do that project? 13 A. No. 14 Q. How would that work, then? 15 A. Land acquisition funds are allocated to a 16 realty office not under my direct supervision. 17 Q. The realty office is part of the Park 18 Service? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Who is in charge of that? Is this in 21 Atlanta or down here? 22 A. The realty office that accomplishes work 23 for Everglades National Park is located in Naples and 24 is under the direct supervision of the regional 25 director. 250 1 Q. The regional director from Atlanta? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Could a decision be made by the regional 4 director in the realty office to allocate some of the 5 land acquisition funds to the Research Center if it 6 is determined that research by the Research Center 7 would be supportive of the land acquisition effort? 8 A. If some activity on the part of the 9 Research Center was necessary in order to accomplish 10 specific acquisition activities, then, yes, such a 11 decision could be made. 12 Q. Are you aware of that having happened in 13 this instance with regard to the -- 14 A. No. 15 Q. What about, would the same thing apply to 16 the construction funds? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. So among those three categories, land 19 acquisition, operations and construction, potentially 20 all of those categories could be used to fund 21 research through the Research Center under certain 22 circumstances? 23 A. Yes, consistent with the legal constraints 24 on the use of those funds. 25 Q. Additionally, funds could be provided to 251 1 fund research projects by the Park Service for other 2 programs within the Park Service and also other 3 agencies of government? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. You also mentioned other governments 6 before. In what instances would other governments 7 provide funding to the park? 8 A. Just to clarify, I referred to other 9 agencies of government as I made an assumption there 10 that that referred to other federal agencies. Other 11 governments would refer to state and/or local 12 governments and their agents. 13 Q. Has the park received any funding from any 14 state agencies or specifically the Research Center to 15 support or fund research for use in the water quality 16 litigation? 17 A. I don't know. 18 Q. Who would know that, Dr. Soukup? 19 A. Yes. Excuse me, I would clarify that. 20 Dr. Soukup would know what research has 21 been funded. I assume that the US Attorney's Office 22 would know whether or not that research had any 23 association with the litigation. 24 Q. Are you involved in the litigation on an 25 ongoing basis in terms of strategy or coming up with 252 1 issues and approaches to issues? 2 MS. PONZOLI: I am going to object to the 3 form of the question, it is compound. 4 I will ask you when you are referring to 5 the water quality litigation, are you referring to 6 the SWIM challenge litigation? 7 MR. GAINES: I was actually referring to 8 both the federal litigation and the SWIM challenge 9 litigation as the overall water quality litigation. 10 MS. PONZOLI: The federal litigation is 11 presently at the appellate level, counsel. I don't 12 know what active federal litigation you are referring 13 to beyond that. 14 MR. GAINES: At any rate, he doesn't know, 15 however we define the litigation. 16 MS. PONZOLI: I think for purposes of your 17 answers, you would want to clarify what you are 18 talking about, wouldn't you? I certainly do, since 19 he is answering your questions. 20 MR. GAINES: Yes, that's true. Maybe for 21 this proceeding when I say the water quality 22 litigation we will keep it focused on the SWIM 23 challenge administrative proceeding. 24 BY MR. GAINES: 25 Q. What role, sir, do you play in the SWIM 253 1 challenge administrative proceeding, as you 2 understand it? 3 A. I participate in discussions with 4 Department of the Interior, Department of Justice, US 5 Attorney's Office attorneys with regards to the role 6 of the United States as intervenors in defense of the 7 SWIM plan and with regards to the challenges that 8 have been filed against it. 9 Q. Do you participate in such discussions on 10 a regular basis? 11 A. I don't know what you mean by regular 12 basis, but I have on several occasions. 13 Q. Do you follow the progress of the 14 litigation, for example, by getting copies of 15 pleadings and reviewing them? 16 MS. PONZOLI: Counsel, I think you are 17 going beyond where you can go. 18 What he discusses with his lawyers, I 19 think you can get that he talks with us, I guess you 20 can get some level of frequency. But what he talks 21 about with us, I think you just stepped over the 22 line. 23 Q. Let me make it very clear then, I 24 understand, I don't want to get into privilege and 25 the substance of your discussions, but what I am 254 1 talking about right now are pleadings filed, motions, 2 memoranda of law, documents filed in the court file 3 of the administrative challenge which are public 4 documents and my question is do you follow the 5 progress of that litigation to the extent that you 6 review those documents. 7 MS. PONZOLI: You have the documents, 8 counselor, that he had in his possession. They were 9 provided to you as part of the document production. 10 So to the extent that those answered your 11 question, you already have the answer to your 12 question because you have those documents. 13 MR. GAINES: Number one, I feel I am 14 entitled to an answer on the record in this 15 deposition, and number two, I don't know if he has 16 ever seen or looked at those documents. And that is 17 the question. 18 MS. PONZOLI: I will let him answer this 19 question but I really believe you are pushing the 20 outer limits of what you can ask a client. But that 21 won't be the first time the League has pushed the 22 outer limit. 23 A. I follow the progress of the proceedings 24 and where and when necessary review pertinent 25 documents that have been filed with regard to it. 255 1 Q. Did you review any of the pleadings or the 2 depositions taken in this case to prepare for this 3 deposition? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Have you read any of the deposition 6 transcripts from other witnesses that have been 7 deposed in the case up to now? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Have you seen any such transcripts? 10 A. Certainly. 11 Q. When you say certainly, whose transcripts 12 have you seen? 13 A. I visited the US Attorney's Office and 14 seen piles of documents that I understand are 15 associated with these particular proceedings. 16 Q. When you say -- 17 MS. PONZOLI: Do you want to know how high 18 the piles are? 19 Q. When you say that you haven't read any, 20 and I asked you if have seen any, have you obtained 21 possession of any deposition transcripts for the 22 purpose of reviewing them? 23 A. I have not requested any. 24 Q. Have any been -- 25 A. Nor have any been furnished in response to 256 1 my desire to specifically review or request to 2 specifically review any. 3 Q. Are there members of your staff that are 4 specifically allocated to work on the litigation or 5 aspects of the litigation? 6 A. There are a number of members of my staff 7 that have some degree of involvement and 8 participation. 9 Q. Are you able to quantify for me how many 10 staff members or what percentage of your resources, 11 your human resources are allocated to efforts 12 surrounding litigation? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Has any analysis been done of the cost of 15 the litigation, in either human or dollar terms to 16 the park? 17 A. I believe that some assessments have been 18 routinely made over the effect on other priorities 19 and on individuals with regards to demands placed on 20 them in support of this litigation. 21 Q. Have you seen those assessments? Are 22 those written assessments? 23 A. They have typically been discussions on 24 the part of myself and my staff as a part of a 25 routine responsibility we have to discuss those kinds 257 1 of issues resulting from any project commitments. 2 Q. Can you give me what the substance of 3 those discussions have been? 4 MS. PONZOLI: I think you have stepped 5 over the line. I mean, if the League wants to 6 stipulate right here and now that it is going to 7 allow all of its clients to reveal their strategy in 8 the litigation to the United States, then I would 9 certainly consider letting Superintendent Ring 10 discuss the park's. I will consider. 11 But I think what you are asking for is a 12 strategy of the client in proceeding with the 13 litigation. 14 Q. Not the strategy, I don't want you to 15 reveal any work product or confidential 16 communications you have had with counsel. All I am 17 asking for is some feel for the scale of the 18 resources that you feel have been allocated to the 19 litigation effort. 20 MS. PONZOLI: I don't have a problem with 21 that question, Superintendent Ring. 22 MR. GAINES: Are you instructing him not 23 to answer? 24 MS. PONZOLI: No. I said I don't have a 25 problem with it. 258 1 MR. GAINES: I thought you said you do 2 have a problem. 3 MS. PONZOLI: No, no. 4 A. To the best of my knowledge, no 5 comprehensive assessment of the scale of resources 6 committed to this project has been done. 7 BY MR. GAINES: 8 Q. Would you characterize it as putting a 9 strain on the park's resources as you administer the 10 park on a day-to-day or week to week basis? 11 MS. PONZOLI: I will object to the form of 12 the question. You are talking about a park that has 13 just been through a natural disaster. Probably 14 getting through the gates these days is a strain. 15 MR. GAINES: I understand that. 16 A. It places significant demands on staff 17 resources as do many projects. 18 Q. Could you take a look, sir, please, at 19 project No. 003 on the project statement sheets? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Do you know the process by which these 22 project statement sheets were produced or drafted? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Do they come out of the Research Center? 25 A. I assume so. 259 1 Q. Have you reviewed these in the past prior 2 to today? 3 A. I have read through this document. 4 Q. Are you familiar with this project that is 5 described here as No. 003, titled Determine 6 Natural/Induced Long-term Veg -- vegetative -- 7 Changes? 8 A. I am familiar with the project statement. 9 Q. Do you know whether this project is an 10 ongoing research project? 11 A. I believe the project statement indicates 12 that it is an unfunded project. 13 Q. Do you know whether that is still the 14 case? 15 A. If it has not been funded in any way 16 during fiscal '92 prior to my arrival then it is 17 still the case. 18 Q. In other words, it has not been funded 19 during your tenure? 20 A. I have made no fund allocations to this 21 project. 22 Q. Does that mean that the project is not 23 being done? 24 A. This project to the best of my knowledge 25 has not been funded and commenced. 260 1 Q. Are you familiar with the concepts that 2 are discussed here in the problem statement portion 3 of this sheet, for example, where it states in the 4 first sentence, "There is very little information 5 available on the wetland successional patterns and 6 changes that have occurred in the Everglades." Is 7 that true as far as you know? 8 A. That is a relative statement. Almost 9 every project statement I have ever seen from a 10 research or resource management perspective starts 11 with, there is very little information available or 12 there is not enough information available. 13 Q. Is that put in there so there will be more 14 of an impetus to fund the project? Are you calling 15 into question the veracity of that statement? 16 A. No. 17 MS. PONZOLI: I object to the form of the 18 question. I think he is explaining -- 19 A. No. 20 MS. PONZOLI: -- the way these are 21 frequently worded. 22 A. I think that statement is one that is a 23 relative statement. 24 Q. In the second sentence it says, "Most of 25 the information available is qualitative in nature." 261 1 Do you agree with that? 2 A. I assume that's correct. I would simply 3 say that very little and most are neither absolute 4 terms. And without looking at the information 5 available I would not be able to tell to what degree 6 the terms very little or most applies. 7 Q. What about the next sentence which states 8 that "Many factors affect the vegetation communities 9 in the Everglades including natural disturbances such 10 as hurricanes and frost, and such managed or 11 man-induced perturbations such as fire, hydrology, 12 nutrients and exotic plants"? Is that accurate as 13 far as you are concerned? 14 A. I would say that is an entirely accurate 15 statement. 16 Q. When you say you have not allocated funds 17 for this, would that include any funds that came from 18 other governmental agencies outside the park Service? 19 A. No. 20 Q. So if I understand your answer, it is 21 possible that funds for this would have been 22 provided, could have been provided by other 23 governmental agencies and that was not included when 24 you stated that you didn't allocate funds? 25 A. That's correct. 262 1 Q. So without answering the question, if, for 2 example, the Department of Justice funded a project 3 such as this, funded the Research Center to do this 4 project, you would not consider yourself to have 5 allocated those funds? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. You also answered I think that as far as 8 you knew this project was not funded, had not been 9 funded or commenced. 10 If the Department of Justice had funded 11 this project to the Research Center could it have 12 been funded and commenced without your knowledge of 13 it? 14 A. I have been here a total of seven months. 15 There is quite a lot that is commenced and going on 16 in the park that I am not, still not aware of in any 17 great detail. 18 Q. So you don't have an awareness, then, I 19 take it of every single research project that has 20 been commenced? And when you say, as far as I know 21 it hasn't been commenced, that has limited meaning 22 because you can't be aware of every single project, 23 is that right? 24 MS. PONZOLI: I object to form. I think 25 it is a compound question. 263 1 He can answer it. 2 A. I am aware of those projects that have 3 commenced either as a result of my allocation of 4 funds or my approval of entering into a relationship 5 with some outside agency associated with project 6 activity. I am not necessarily aware in detail of 7 those activities that were funded or approved prior 8 to my arrival. 9 Q. Have you undertaken any kind of 10 comprehensive look at what research projects there 11 are currently ongoing at the park to determine 12 whether you approve of those projects or not? 13 A. I have not completed a comprehensive 14 review of the work in progress and proposed. 15 Q. Is that something that you intend to do? 16 A. Absolutely. 17 Q. Are you in the midst of that kind of 18 review? 19 A. I had a detailed schedule to do it in 20 early August that -- 21 Q. Andrew had different ideas? 22 A. Someone up there did. 23 Q. So if a project was initiated after you 24 came on board, either through you allocating the 25 funds or through some other governmental agency 264 1 funding it, you would be aware of such a project, you 2 would have had to approve such a project, is that 3 correct? 4 A. I would have had to approve the allocation 5 of funds, the acceptance of funds or the issuance of 6 permission for some other agency to conduct research 7 activity within the park. 8 Q. But if, for example, this particular 003 9 project, if the Department of Justice said, we think 10 this is a good project and they provided funding for 11 it on April 19, 1992, the day before you arrived, it 12 is possible that that project was funded and 13 commenced and you just aren't aware of it yet, is 14 that accurate? 15 A. It is possible that some of that may have 16 even occurred after April the 20th. My arrival at 17 the office didn't constitute the flick of a light 18 switch. 19 Q. Is there currently in place some system 20 where you would routinely be made aware of any 21 projects that were being commenced by the Research 22 Center or by outside contractors in connection with 23 the park? 24 A. There is a process where my office would 25 be informed, and in any periodic review of status or 265 1 discussion of upcoming funding allocations, those 2 projects would be identified. 3 Q. But they may not be in your personal 4 consciousness at the moment that they start? 5 A. No. I absolutely encourage my staff to 6 seek out and find funding for or cooperation from 7 outside agencies in any and all projects we have 8 identified as being necessary and appropriate to the 9 furtherance of a program at the park. 10 Q. Does the park also receive funding from 11 environmental or conservation groups? 12 A. I don't specifically know of an instance, 13 but I do know that environmentally dedicated 14 organizations do provide everything from voluntary 15 assistance to occasional funding to National Park 16 Service projects in park units. 17 Q. On this vegetative changes project here, 18 do you know what specific vegetative changes that was 19 intended to examine? 20 A. I think the project was characterized as 21 dealing with a wide variety of communities, 22 vegetation communities and locations and effects. 23 Q. Did this deal with, for example, cattails 24 versus sawgrass? 25 A. I assume it would. 266 1 Q. Cattails, do you consider that a native or 2 an exotic species? 3 A. Cattails are a biological community that 4 do naturally occur within the Everglades at locations 5 where there are elevated concentrations of nutrients 6 and where other appropriate conditions exist. 7 Q. Does that mean they are a native species? 8 A. My understanding is that they are. 9 Q. Do cattails themselves do harm to the system? 10 A. They are an indication of conditions, of 11 specific conditions in the chemical and biological 12 environment. 13 Q. That being elevated nutrients? 14 A. That's one aspect of it, yes. 15 Q. Other aspects? 16 A. They require, like any other vegetative 17 species, they require certain kinds of water 18 conditions and soil conditions. 19 Q. On the second page of this, can you just 20 explain to me what the setup is here on the budget? 21 What does FTE stand for? 22 A. Full-time equivalency. 23 Q. Under year one, source, it says PNR 1. 24 What does that mean? 25 A. I don't know off the top of my head. 267 1 Q. What about act type RES? 2 A. I don't know specifically. 3 Q. Then it has the amount of money in 4 thousands of dollars and then FTE is what, full 5 full-time equivalency? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. What does that refer to? 8 A. It is the government's more recent 9 characterization of what used to be called work years 10 or man years of staff time. 1.0 for instance on that 11 page represents the equivalency of one employee 12 working full-time for one year. 13 Q. So then down at the bottom, year four, 1.5 14 would indicate -- 15 A. A combination of. 16 Q. One and a half man years? 17 A. Right, combination of employees that over 18 a course of a year would be equivalent to one and a 19 half persons working full-time for a year. 20 MR. GAINES: Do you want to break here? 21 MS. PONZOLI: Yes, I think it would be a 22 good idea. 23 MR. GAINES: One hour? 24 MS. PONZOLI: Yes. 25 (Luncheon recess) 268 1 AFTERNOON SESSION 2 12:50 p.m. 3 MR. GAINES: We are back on the record 4 now. 5 BY MR. GAINES: 6 Q. Let's go back to the issue we brought up 7 prior to lunch where there was at that time a 8 temporary instruction not to answer pending further 9 consideration. That question involved whether or not 10 the DOJ, Department of Justice, to your knowledge, 11 had provided any funding to the Research Center or 12 outside contractors for research related to the 13 issues in this litigation. 14 MS. PONZOLI: Counselor, I must tell you, 15 I don't remember that portion of the question 16 including outside contractors. Clearly the 17 Department of Justice has hired expert witnesses and 18 provided funds for them for the water quality 19 litigation. So as to that aspect of it, I don't even 20 think that is your intent, to -- 21 MR. GAINES: I was trying to ask the same 22 question. The outside contractors reference in my 23 question referred to outside contractors coordinated 24 through the Research Center. But let's leave that 25 out for purposes of this question initially. 269 1 MS. PONZOLI: Let me just tell counsel, I 2 appreciate his giving me the opportunity to consult 3 with the second opinion as to the privilege that is 4 inherent in this question or any line of questions 5 that would follow from it. 6 I will allow Superintendent Ring to answer 7 the question but knowing what his answer will be, I 8 don't think the issue is resolved between us. I 9 think Dr. Soukup's deposition will have to flesh out 10 where the privilege line will exist and I think we 11 will devote some research to that issue. 12 So with that, I don't intend my allowing 13 him to answer this question to function as a waiver 14 of any further questions. It is a very limited 15 exception and we are going to research where the 16 privilege line will exist. 17 MR. GAINES: Okay. 18 BY MR. GAINES: 19 Q. Given all of that, do you understand what 20 the question is that is pending? 21 A. Why don't we read it back. 22 Q. Let's read it back and I would rather have 23 it read back than reask it, but when you hear it read 24 back, let's eliminate the reference to outside 25 contractors. 270 1 MR. GAINES: Off the record. 2 (Discussion off the record) 3 MS. PONZOLI: The question I have is: has 4 the Department of Justice provided funding, for 5 example, to the Research Center for research projects 6 that might be of use in the water quality litigation. 7 I wrote it down verbatim from the court reporter 8 because there was some importance to having it 9 accurate. 10 MR. GAINES: Let's use that as the 11 question. 12 MS. PONZOLI: And with my provisions 13 before I will allow him to answer that. 14 A. I know of no funds provided to the park 15 for the purposes of conducting -- provided to the 16 park by the Justice Department for the purposes of 17 conducting research during my tenure as 18 superintendent. 19 BY MR. GAINES: 20 Q. Do you know of any research projects that 21 are ongoing or have been undertaken as a result of 22 requests from the US Attorney's Office or the 23 Department of Justice? 24 MS. PONZOLI: I think all of my -- 25 A. Do you mean projects that we have 271 1 undertaken with our own funds as a result of a direct 2 request from the Department of Justice? 3 Q. I am not really including the source of 4 the funds as an element in this question, but it 5 would include what you just described, yes. 6 MS. PONZOLI: Then I think I am confused. 7 Are you talking about any work that is being done in 8 the water quality litigation? That goes back to of 9 course the Department of Justice has hired outside 10 experts. 11 MR. GAINES: No, my question, I think I 12 specified that the park, Research Center of the park 13 is conducting. 14 MS. PONZOLI: Oh, okay. 15 A. Again, with regards to my personal 16 involvement, most of the research projects funded for 17 fiscal year 1992 were triggered prior to my arrival 18 and the projects for fiscal '93 are yet to be 19 finalized in terms of the National Park Service 20 funded projects. 21 I am aware of a number of other agency 22 projects or other agency funded projects that have 23 been agreed to since my arrival and I believe I 24 mentioned them previously in reference to the EPA 25 global climate change work and the Corps of Engineers 272 1 sponsored research into issues having a bearing on 2 the C-111 Taylor Slough Canal. There have been 3 several like that. 4 Q. My question is more focused on projects 5 being done to support the United States' position in 6 this litigation at the behest of the Justice 7 Department or the US Attorney's Office, whether you 8 are aware of any such projects? 9 A. I am aware that there is a significant 10 amount of staff time and effort going into the 11 support of the government's position in this 12 litigation. 13 Q. Does that include research staff? 14 A. I would say that's primarily staff on 15 the -- it would be primarily staff from the South 16 Florida Research Center. 17 I would simply like to note that the South 18 Florida Research Center has organizationally broad 19 responsibilities for inventory monitoring, actual 20 research and analysis and resource management and 21 management application. So that there is a wide 22 range of professional and technical staff within that 23 part of the organization. 24 How any of that work is characterized, I 25 would defer, and what spec work has gone on, I defer 273 1 to my research director. 2 Q. Do you know, for example, what was the 3 term, FTEs, full-time equivalencies, how many FTEs 4 have been expended by the research staff in let's say 5 the last calendar year in support of the government's 6 position in this litigation? 7 A. No, I do not. We typically do not account 8 for the usage of FTE on the basis of anything other 9 than broad category -- than the organizational 10 structure. 11 Q. I take it you are not able to quantify for 12 me the expenditure of research staff time and 13 lawsuit-related activity, is that correct? 14 A. No, that's correct. 15 Q. Is this something that Dr. Soukup, you 16 would expect him to be able to quantify or have that 17 information available to him? 18 A. I think he would be able to address some 19 specific aspects of it that he was involved in 20 directing and supporting. 21 Q. Other than what he observed with his own 22 eyes and was involved in, is there any kind of effort 23 made to keep track of that type of a statistic, how 24 much staff time is allocated to various functions and 25 projects? 274 1 A. We have a normal system of accounting for 2 funding and staff time assigned, but in broad 3 programatic categories, I am not aware of any 4 comprehensive audit that we have conducted with 5 regards to how many total dollars or days have been 6 dedicated over a given period of time to any given 7 aspect of the water quality issues. 8 Q. Does the research staff keep time sheets 9 on a daily basis reflecting what projects they are 10 working on and for how long? 11 A. The time records for the agency are 12 administrative records relating to whether an 13 employee was at work and what time he arrived and 14 left. 15 Q. But it wouldn't reflect what he was 16 working on? 17 A. No, we do not have an accounting system in 18 our agency that is similar to the one you describe. 19 I guess the legal profession has that. 20 Q. We are familiar with that concept, yes. 21 A. I had always assumed that was for billing 22 purposes. 23 Q. I guess that is one of the purposes. 24 Other than being able to testify that a 25 significant but unspecified amount of research staff 275 1 time is expended in support of the government's 2 position in this litigation, you are unable to, if I 3 understand your testimony, to tell me any specific 4 research projects or efforts that the staff is 5 undertaking in support of the government's position, 6 is that correct? 7 A. We have not developed an analysis of the 8 staff time or funding dedicated specifically to the 9 support of this particular case. And whether or not 10 there are projects that may or may not support 11 aspects of this case, when we pursue an issue we 12 typically assess whether any of the data available in 13 our records or any of the data coming from research 14 projects, regardless of how they were initiated, may 15 have a bearing on the case and make them available in 16 support of our analysis and arguments. 17 Q. Who is the individual, if there is one, 18 responsible for ensuring that the research efforts 19 undertaken by the research center adhere to the 20 scientific method? 21 A. Everyone from the professional scientist 22 conducting the research to that individual's 23 supervisor, to the research director, to myself, to 24 my boss, the regional director. 25 We have different aspects of 276 1 responsibility relating to assuring that that occurs. 2 Q. We will leave this area but just so I 3 understand what you are saying, there is no single 4 research project that is occurring or has occurred 5 that you are aware of that was instituted at the 6 request of the Justice Department or the US attorneys 7 for purposes of use in the litigation? 8 A. I am aware of no request in my tenure as 9 superintendent of the park. 10 Q. Just so we don't limit it, if you are 11 aware of any projects that occurred or commenced 12 prior to your tenure which you have been since 13 advised fit into that category, I would also like you 14 to tell me that. 15 A. I believe I can only speak to those issues 16 which I have direct and responsible knowledge of. If 17 you need to understand what may or may not have been 18 requested and approved prior to that, I think you 19 need to talk to the individuals who acted in my 20 position prior to my arrival and who preceded me. 21 Q. I can understand that you don't want to 22 make a statement based on something that is not your 23 personal knowledge. So my question is only limited 24 to your personal knowledge. And the personal 25 knowledge I am asking about it is, do you have 277 1 personal knowledge of having been advised or told by 2 anyone or seen some document indicating that any 3 research project has been requested or is ongoing at 4 the request of the US Attorneys or the Department of 5 Justice in connection with this litigation. 6 A. I am routinely told about a variety of 7 matters that occurred before my time and they are 8 often characterized as having been motivated by a 9 particular issue or request. And that may or may not 10 be the case, based on the individual's perceptions 11 and perspective that is talking to me about it. 12 I have seen no formal request, nor reply 13 on the part of the national park related to any such 14 activities, and I am not aware of any that have 15 personally crossed through my office since I have 16 been here. 17 Q. Accepting for a minute the inherent lack 18 of certainty in relying upon something someone else 19 has told you that you can't verify firsthand, this is 20 a discovery deposition and I am just trying to find 21 who I would need to follow this up with, so given 22 whatever qualifications you want to make about it may 23 or may not be true, my question is has anyone told 24 you that this has occurred with regard to projects 25 requested by the US Attorneys or the Department of 278 1 Justice regarding this litigation. I understand you 2 testified you haven't seen a formal request, that it 3 hasn't happened while you are there. Now the 4 question is just limited to have you been advised in 5 some fashion that this occurred prior to your 6 arriving. 7 A. I have been advised that such things have 8 occurred in the context of being advised about an 9 incredible of variety of things associated with 10 the -- with preceding events related to the water 11 quality issues here. 12 Q. Have you been advised that any particular 13 research projects were requested by the government in 14 connection with the litigation? 15 MS. PONZOLI: Sir, I am going to have a 16 continuing objection to any conversations that took 17 place between attorney and client. And that is where 18 this is a very difficult line of questioning. 19 Because when you ask, did the Department of Justice 20 ask its client to do X, you are talking about an 21 attorney-client communication. So it is very 22 problematic and I think you know that. 23 MR. GAINES: Without -- 24 MS. PONZOLI: I have let you go a long, 25 long, long way and you know it and I know it. And I 279 1 think to continue going, it is almost as though you 2 are inviting me to reach the point where I am forced 3 to cause him not to answer. And I think that is 4 wrong. I just think that is fundamentally wrong 5 because I have given you enormously way. 6 MR. GAINES: I appreciate that. I don't 7 know if I agree with that. 8 MS. PONZOLI: I am sure we would never 9 agree on that point. I am sure you could go through 10 my whole office and not think I have been generous 11 but we have to agree to disagree on certain things. 12 BY MR. GAINES: 13 Q. I am not trying to get from you advice or 14 confidential communications you have had with your 15 attorney. 16 A. Okay. 17 Q. So leaving that out of it, has anyone 18 advised you that there were any research projects 19 requested by the US Attorneys, the Department of 20 Justice, in connection with this litigation? 21 A. Of course. 22 Q. Who is that? 23 A. I don't recall specifically. 24 Q. You say of course like it is evident. It 25 is not evident to me. 280 1 A. I tried to explain to you that I have 2 heard an enormous amount from an enormous number of 3 individuals who have characterized what has gone on 4 prior to my arrival at the park with regards to the 5 water quality issues and the various aspects of 6 litigation associated with it. 7 And I have heard literally everything that 8 can be heard associated with who did what and why. 9 Unless I have direct knowledge of it, or I 10 see documents that substantiate exactly what's gone 11 on, I tend to hear that and not discount it so much 12 as, I don't try and retain it as a part of a factual 13 body of information that I've got to deal with. 14 Q. Understanding that, this is what we call a 15 discovery deposition. 16 A. Right. 17 Q. And you can get into areas or levels of 18 testimony for purposes of discovery that may not be 19 admissible in a court of law when we get to the final 20 trial. 21 A. Okay. 22 Q. For example, a statement like, somebody, I 23 can't recall who, told me that the so-and-so project 24 was requested by the US Attorneys in connection with 25 the litigation, that wouldn't prove very much in a 281 1 court of law at a final hearing but for purpose of a 2 discovery deposition, it is meaningful information 3 that we are entitled to obtain. And that is the kind 4 of information I am trying to elicit from you right 5 now. 6 So given the fact that it may not be in 7 your mind valid or something that you can firsthand 8 swear is true, my question is what have you been 9 advised if anything concerning research requests by 10 the US Attorneys or the Department of Justice in 11 connection with this litigation. 12 A. I am trying to be precise and accurate in 13 my responses to your questions and not speculate or 14 ramble about things that I am not certain of. 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. And I feel that's how I need to respond to 17 you. 18 Q. I don't want to you speculate on what you 19 were told or try to remember something that you can't 20 remember. But if you remember being told by somebody 21 that a particular research project was initiated by 22 the US government, even if you can't verify that 23 fact, that is what I am asking you. Can you remember 24 somebody telling you -- 25 A. And as I indicated to you before, I have 282 1 been told a wide variety of things associated with 2 this case and in my response where I said, of course, 3 I am telling you that I assume, have a general sense 4 that I have been told that certain actions on our 5 part up to and including research may have been 6 motivated by the Justice Department or the US 7 Attorney's Office's request. 8 Q. This doesn't apply I assume to every 9 single research project that you are aware of, that 10 the Research Center has undertaken at any time, does 11 it? 12 A. I am a little unclear, when you say this, 13 what do you mean? 14 Q. This statement that you are making that at 15 one point or another you were told that a lot of 16 things had to do with the lawsuit, no one told you 17 every single thing the Research Center ever did in 18 its existence is related to the litigation that we 19 are sitting here today on, have they? 20 A. I think there have been a couple of 21 conversations where that has been the message. 22 Q. Can you specify even one research project 23 that would fit into this category of someone who has 24 told you that it was related to the lawsuit? 25 A. I in a general sense, I would say that 283 1 anything having to do with water or the effects of 2 water has been at one time or another characterized 3 by me as being associated with the litigation. 4 Q. You said characterized by me, do you mean 5 to -- 6 A. Characterized to me by others, and a whole 7 lot of other things as well. 8 Q. Do these others include Dr. Soukup? 9 MS. PONZOLI: Excuse me, I don't 10 understand the question. 11 MR. GAINES: He said it was characterized 12 to him by others as having to do with the litigation 13 and I asked if the others include Dr. Soukup. 14 MS. PONZOLI: Okay. 15 A. I talk routinely and regularly with Dr. 16 Soukup and discuss the implications of research being 17 conducted in relation to management issues that the 18 park is dealing with. So I've had discussions with 19 Dr. Soukup concerning the potential implications of 20 various research projects to issues, some related to 21 the issues engaged here in the litigation. 22 But in terms of being motivated, research 23 being motivated by that litigation, I don't recall, I 24 don't recall anything specific in that regard. 25 Q. With Dr. Soukup? 284 1 A. With Dr. Soukup. 2 Q. Can you recall any specific conversations 3 in that regard with any individual? 4 A. As I said, unless it reaches a certain 5 level of substantiation with me, I tend to let it go 6 very quickly. So I don't even try and retain any 7 specific memory of those conversations. 8 And I want to make sure you understand 9 that I typically hear these kinds of things 10 associated with any large or controversial aspect of 11 park operations or management. 12 Q. When you say you typically hear these type 13 of things, you mean that certain factors are 14 motivating operations and management, is that what 15 you mean? 16 A. No. Any issue that is a controversial one 17 publicly as a matter of public policy or resource 18 concern, and oftentimes any matter that is a matter 19 of widespread concern and/or controversy related to 20 personnel, employee concerns, oftentimes or usually 21 generates quite a bit of discussion and quite a bit 22 of speculation about what is occurring and what 23 motivated those occurrences. 24 What I am telling you is that I hear that 25 level of conversation about a wide variety of issues 285 1 including water quality litigation. And it includes 2 everything from very plausible suggestions and 3 statements to very ill-informed ones. 4 As I said, I tend to pay attention to and 5 try and remember those that have some sort of 6 confirmed factual basis behind them as in documents, 7 supported by documents or specifics from an 8 individual who is stating what they did or didn't do. 9 Q. And I take it that none of the 10 conversations of this type that you have had has 11 reached the level of enough sureness that it has 12 remained in your memory as a particular conversation 13 you can recount for us now? 14 A. Not in specific terms, that's right. 15 MR. GAINES: Exhibit No. 6, please. 16 (A three-page document dated November 16, 17 1992 addressed to Dr. Robert G. Qualls from Richard 18 G. Ring was marked Ring Deposition Exhibit 6 for 19 identification) 20 BY MR. GAINES: 21 Q. Superintendent Ring, I have handed you 22 what has been marked as Exhibit No. 6, it is a letter 23 dated November 16, 1992 to a Dr. Robert Qualls from 24 yourself. 25 Do you recognize this letter? 286 1 A. I recognize the issue and the individual 2 referred to. I would like it to be noted that the 3 letter is signed -- it has my signature block on it 4 but it is signed by Ken Morgan, my chief ranger, who 5 was acting for me during a time of my absence. 6 Q. This was November 16, 1992. 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. Where were you at that time, when you say 9 during a time of your absence? 10 A. Let me think here. 11 MS. PONZOLI: You certainly get these 12 fast, don't you, Mr. Gaines. Faxed right from the 13 Duke's School of the Environment. Is Dr. Qualls 14 listed as one of your experts? 15 MR. GAINES: No, he isn't. 16 A. I believe I was aware -- I know I was away 17 from the office that day. I may have been in West 18 Palm Beach for the day. 19 Q. You were out of the office somewhere on 20 November 16 so you didn't personally sign this 21 letter? 22 A. That is correct. 23 Q. And Ken Morgan is the chief ranger, you 24 stated? 25 A. Yes. 287 1 Q. What are the duties of a chief ranger? 2 A. He's in charge of what we refer to as our 3 ranger division which is responsible for both 4 resource and visitor protection. That includes all 5 aspects of law enforcement and he also has under his 6 responsibility the fire management function. 7 Q. Would he generally deal with issues such 8 as are contained in this letter? 9 A. All of my division chiefs on a rotating 10 basis may find themselves in a situation where they 11 are acting in the absence of either myself or my 12 assistant. 13 Q. The second and third page of this exhibit 14 is an application for permission to collect specimens 15 of rocks, plants, minerals, et cetera that Dr. Qualls 16 submitted dated November 1, 1992. 17 Did you review this application at any 18 time? 19 A. When it came in it went to my Research 20 Center staff. 21 Q. Did you see it? 22 A. I was aware of it when it came in. 23 Q. Do you know how the decision was made to 24 deny Dr. Qualls' request to conduct his research in 25 the park? 288 1 A. I don't u