1 1 Division of Administrative Hearings 2 Department of Administration, State of Florida 3 SUGAR CANE GROWERS COOPERATIVE) OF FLORIDA; ROTH FARMS, INC.; ) 4 and WEDGEWORTH FARMS, INC., ) Petitioners, ) 5 V ) DOAH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT) Case 92-3038 6 DISTRICT, an agency of the ) State of Florida, et al., ) 7 _____________Respondents._____) ) VOLUME I 8 FLORIDA SUGAR CANE LEAGUE, ) INC.; UNITED STATES SUGAR ) 9 CORPORATION; and NEW HOPE ) SOUTH, INC., ) 10 Petitioners, ) V ) DOAH 11 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT) Case 92-3039 DISTRICT, an agency of the ) 12 State of Florida, et al., ) _____________Respondents._____) 13 ) FLORIDA FRUIT AND VEGETABLE ) 14 ASSOCIATION; LEWIS POPE FARMS;) W.E. SCHLECHTER & SONS, INC., ) 15 and HUNDLEY FARMS, INC., ) Petitioners, ) 16 V ) DOAH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT) Case 92-3040 17 DISTRICT, an agency of the ) State of Florida, et al., ) 18 _____________Respondents._____) 19 Deposition of Kenneth Rutchey 20 Taken before Robin L. Merker, Court 21 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State of Florida at large, pursuant to notice of taking 22 deposition filed by the Petitioners in the above cause. 23 - - - Monday, February 7, 1992 24 319 Clematis Street West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 25 9:10 - 12:15 p.m. 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 On behalf of the Petitioners Florida Sugar Cane League, Inc., United States Sugar Corp, 3 and New Hope, Inc.: 4 Earl, Blank, Kavanaugh & Stotts One Biscayne Tower 5 Suite 3636 Two South Biscayne Boulevard 6 Miami, Florida 33131 By: MARK KOBELINSKI, ESQUIRE 7 On behalf of the Petitioners Sugar Cane Growers 8 Cooperative, Roth Farms, Inc., and WEDGEWORTH Farms, Inc.: 9 Hopping, Boyd, Green & Sams 10 123 South Calhoun Street Tallahassee, Florida 32314 11 BY: WILLIAM H. GREEN, ESQUIRE and CAROLYN S. RAEPPLE 12 On behalf of the Respondent SFWMD: 13 Popham, Haik, Schnobrich & Kaufman, Ltd. 14 100 Southeast 2nd Street Miami, Florida 33131 15 BY: GREGORY M. CESARANO, ESQUIRE 16 On behalf of the Intervenor, United States of America: 17 THOMAS A.W. FITZGERALD, ESQUIRE 18 Assistant United States Attorney 155 South Miami Avenue 19 Suite 600 Miami, Florida 33130-1693 20 ALSO PRESENT: 21 JOE B. BIRCH, Ph.D. 22 EDWARD DOWNING MICHAEL SOUKUP 23 MICHAEL STORY 24 25 3 1 - - - 2 I N D E X 3 - - - 4 WITNESS: DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 5 Kenneth Rutchey 6 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 5 BY MS. RAEPPLE: 226 7 - - - 8 E X H I B I T S 9 - - - 10 Rutchey Exb. No. 1 8 Development of an Everglades Vegetation Map 11 Using a SPOT Image and the Global Positioning System 12 Rutchey Exb. No. 2 33 WCA-2A Field Data Collection Sites for 30 13 classes 10-2-91 to 1-13-92 14 Rutchey Exb. No. 3 56 WCA-2A Tree Islands 15 Rutchey Exb. No. 4 67 16 WCA-2A Accuracy Assessment 3-23 to 4-24-92. 17 Rutchey Exb. No. 5 80 Laboratory Notebook 18 Rutchey Exb. No. 6 105 19 WCA 3S for SPOT 5-11-92 20 Rutchey Exb. No. 7 105 WCA 3N for SPOT 5-11-92 21 Rutchey Exb. No. 8 108 22 Inland Wetland Change Detection in the Everglades Water Conservation Area 2A Using a Time 23 Series of Normalized Remotely Sensed Data 24 Rutchey Exb. No. 9 196 Holeyland file, Bates Nos. 1220441 through 25 1220572 4 1 Rutchey Exb. No. 10 228 2 Color Map of WCA-2A, using SPOT image 4-4-87 3 Rutchey Exb. No. 11 273 Satellite imagery as of 1-25-93 4 Rutchey Exb. No. 12 278 5 Resume of Ken Rutchey 6 Rutchey Exb. No. 13 298 Memorandum dated 11-5-92 from Ken Rutchey 7 Rutchey Exb. No. 14 316 8 Memorandum dated 3-30-1990 from Michael Maceina 9 Rutchey Exb. No. 15 354 Latitudes and longitudes, coordinates 10 Rutchey Exb. No. 16 355 11 Review of Remote Sensing activities by John Jensen. 12 Rutchey Exb. No. 17 357 13 Phosphorus data 14 Rutchey Exb. No. 18 364 Memorandum from Ken Rutchey and Les Vilchek 15 dated 10-22-92 16 Rutchey Exb. No. 19 370 Memorandum from Ken Rutchey dated 7-29-91 17 Rutchey Exb. No. 20 370 18 Memorandum from Ken Rutchey dated 6-18-90 19 Rutchey Exb. No. 21 373 Memorandum from Ken Rutchey dated 10-30-89. 20 Rutchey Exb. No. 22 382 21 WCA-2A fire records 22 Rutchey Exb. No. 23 384 Draft page of Everglades SWIM Plan with 23 handwritten note on back. 24 25 5 1 P R O C E E D I N G S 2 3 - - - 4 Thereupon, 5 Kenneth Rutchey 6 being by the undersigned Notary Public first duly 7 sworn, was examined and testified as follows: 8 THE WITNESS: I do. 9 DIRECT (Kenneth Rutchey) 10 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 11 Q. Good morning, Mr. Rutchey. My name is 12 Mark Kobelinski. Have you been deposed before? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. You have, all right. Good. I think I 15 knew that. 16 And I think you're aware that a deposition 17 is a means by which people involved in litigation can 18 ask questions of individuals who may or may not have 19 facts dealing with the issues in the case under oath. 20 I'll be asking you a number of questions. I believe 21 one or another of the attorneys here will be asking you 22 some questions. I'd like you to answer to the best of 23 your ability as truthfully as possible. If you don't 24 understand a question, please let me know and I'll 25 attempt to rephrase it in a manner in which you can 6 1 understand. If you don't know the answer to a question 2 or don't remember, I don't know or I don't remember are 3 the best responses you can give. 4 If you do assume something, please let us 5 know. Otherwise we're going to go on our own 6 assumption that you are not assuming. If you feel 7 compelled to assume, please tell us. 8 Under those ground rules, you were served, 9 sir, I believe with a subpoena duces tecum? 10 A. Right. 11 Q. All right. 12 You were given a notice and, as I 13 understand it, you've gathered documents in response to 14 that? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. You produced those all to us? 17 A. No. 18 Q. All right. 19 A. This morning I brought in, after reading 20 it further, a report. You might have this, you might 21 not. I don't think that was -- the C-51 study, you 22 said all publications that I've been involved in. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. And this is another one that was by Dewey 25 Worth in the early '80's, work that he did in 7 1 documenting the vegetation, and I have basically all 2 the data for that report since Dewey has now left the 3 District. 4 Q. Great, all right. 5 Well, we'll get some copies of that later. 6 A. And the other item I was asked to provide 7 was the digital data also. 8 Q. Um-hum. 9 A. The techs and I haven't put that all 10 together yet. 11 Q. All right. 12 A. I'm working on that. 13 Q. Now I note that you have a document there 14 in front of you, titled Development of an Everglades 15 Vegetation Map Using a SPOT Image and the Global 16 Positioning System. Is that the final or most recent 17 copy of that particular paper? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. All right. 20 And I know you did produce that; is that 21 correct? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. All right. 24 Well, why don't you give me few moments to 25 go through it. We weren't quite sure which was the 8 1 final version. 2 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 3 record.) 4 MR. KOBELINSKI: All right. We all set? 5 Why don't you mark that as 1? 6 (Thereupon, the document was marked 7 Rutchey Exb. No. 1 for Identification.) 8 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 9 Q. Mr. Rutchey, I've handed you what we've 10 marked as Petitioner's Exhibit 1 to your deposition, 11 which is a document entitled Development of an 12 Everglades Vegetation Map Using a SPOT Image and the 13 Global Positioning System, dated September of 1992, 14 Bates No. 1220147 through 1220440. Would you look 15 through that and identify that for me, please, if you 16 can? 17 A. This is the work that Les Vilchek and I 18 did, looking at vegetation in the Everglades and using 19 multispectral satellite data to delineate the 20 vegetation. 21 Q. Okay. 22 And what portion of Everglades was that? 23 A. Water Conservation Area 2A. 24 Q. Okay. 25 When was this work done? When did you 9 1 start on this project? 2 A. I'd say initially right after the data was 3 acquired on 8-10-91. 4 Q. Okay. 5 And when did you finish this project? 6 A. I'd say approximately eight months after 7 the actual -- all the data was collected and then maybe 8 another four months the final report was done. 9 Q. So that was just about September '92 is 10 when you finished up with this? 11 A. Yeah, I'd say that was the last, you know, 12 the revised. You know, you get comments back and... 13 Q. What we've marked Exhibit 1 is the final 14 product from that study, or are there any additional or 15 subsequent drafts? 16 A. There was drafts prior to this, yes. 17 Q. Were there any drafts subsequent to, after 18 this? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Okay. 21 Who is Les Vilchek? 22 A. He's a co-worker, same level as I am, 23 working for South Florida Water Management. 24 Q. What does he do? 25 A. He's -- he does pretty much what I do. He 10 1 has a strong background in aerial photography 2 delineation, dealing with aerial photography. He 3 worked with the National Wetland Inventory before he 4 came to the District and basically learned the image 5 processing from me, the digital image processing and we 6 used his background in aerial interpretation pretty 7 extensively in this project. 8 Q. Thank you. 9 Prior to August of '91, did you have any 10 experience in using satellite imagery, showing 11 vegetation through satellite imagery? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Could you just briefly take me through 14 when you first started doing that actually through 15 today, what your experience has been? 16 A. Okay. 17 I'd say I started, I would say it was in 18 '87 when I first became interested in this method. I 19 basically had done a lot of research in the Everglades 20 prior to that using standard ground reconnaissance, you 21 know, going out in the field as a biologist and looking 22 at vegetation, put a transect out. Basically that's -- 23 the results of that are in contained in this report 24 that Dewey Worth did. But we saw there was so much 25 more out there that we weren't covering, so we wanted 11 1 to move on to maybe looking at the area in its 2 entirety. And then initially we started just taking 3 photographs from helicopters, putting poles out in the 4 fields so we can basically tell distances, so that when 5 we delineate the vegetation we can come up with an 6 acreage of what things were that we were delineating 7 were or so -- were on the ground. 8 And so we then basically moved to 9 satellite data and Dewey, you have to give Dewey the 10 credit. He's the one that really headed us in that 11 direction. I just sort of, I guess, tagged along. But 12 it piqued my interest and I became very interested in 13 it. In fact, it became my niche at the District. And 14 at that time we had the I2S system, which is an image 15 processing system and I learned it and I did some 16 initial work. And basically at this point I was 17 getting a real education at the District learning the 18 software and different techniques and... 19 Q. Put an approximate period of time around 20 this. 21 A. I'd say '87 to '89. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. I did a preliminary map of Water 24 Conservation Area 2A using a 1987 SPOT scene. And then 25 I started working on this -- this project, completed 12 1 this work. At this point I'm moving more now towards 2 using satellite imagery and aerial photography. I 3 consider all remotely sensed data or image processing 4 of data. That's it pretty well. 5 Q. Okay. 6 A. Sums it up. 7 Q. You say a 1987 SPOT vegetative map, was 8 that -- what area was that? 9 A. Water Conservation Area 2A. 10 Q. With regard to the photo surveys using 11 helicopters for use in vegetative mapping, what period 12 of time was that? 13 A. (No response.) 14 Q. I believe you said you used, did some 15 photo surveys using helicopters where you put posts in 16 or poles in to mark -- 17 A. That was before any actual digital image 18 processing. That was real early like, I'd say, in the 19 '81 through '85. 20 Q. Okay. 21 Do you recall what areas you did using 22 that method? 23 A. Basically it was sawgrass areas, tree 24 islands and slough areas. 25 Q. Okay. 13 1 Was that in any of the Conservation Areas? 2 A. Water Conservation Area 2A. 3 Q. Did you cover the entire Conservation 4 Area? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Do you still have the results of those 7 surveillances or not? 8 A. Some of it. 9 Q. Did you publish a report or put out any 10 type of report based on that? 11 A. Basically all that work is probably in 12 here. 13 Q. Okay. 14 A. We collected a lot of data and we put this 15 report together. We didn't use all the data. We used, 16 you know, we collected a lot of data, so it was... 17 Q. Okay. 18 Going then towards this report which we 19 marked as Exhibit 1, if you could walk me through the 20 process. 21 And I believe, just for the record, the 22 copy that has been marked as Exhibit 1, I do not 23 believe has color photos on the back of it. I know 24 that you have another copy of that here -- is that a 25 fact, Mr. Rutchey -- 14 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. -- of this report which does have color 3 photos? 4 A. (Shakes head up and down.) 5 Q. Feel free if, during the deposition you 6 need to refer to color photos as opposed to those black 7 and white photocopies to do so. We will then attach a 8 corrected one with the color photos to the deposition 9 itself. 10 If you could literally, from the point 11 where you became involved, walk me through the steps it 12 took to get to this final report, and if I need a 13 little more detail I'll ask you. Otherwise -- 14 A. Okay. 15 Q. When did you -- I assume the first part of 16 that was selecting a -- well, you tell me. Step Number 17 1, when did you get the assignment? 18 A. Well, we got the imagery that was 19 collected on August 10, 1991 from SPOT data 20 multispectral imagery. 21 Initially the first thing we do is went 22 out and got ground truth information to rectify the 23 imagery. 24 Q. Before you get to that point, how was the 25 August SPOT imagery selected? 15 1 A. Basically the overriding consideration was 2 availability. In the Everglades we don't have a lot of 3 clear days where we have a satellite where it's totally 4 cloud free. 5 Q. Um-hum. 6 A. So that was why that one was selected. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Who actually made the selection of the 9 August 10, '91 SPOT imagery? 10 A. I did. 11 Q. Okay. 12 And was this -- was SPOT imagery the only 13 satellite imagery that you considered at this point? 14 A. No, no. We looked at LandSat too. Again 15 the overriding consideration though was a scene that 16 was totally cloud free for that area. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. And there was some other work done using 19 LandSat in the Everglades, and they compared it to 20 SPOT, and they showed that SPOT was the better way of 21 looking at the vegetation and delineating. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Who had done this LandSat work and 24 compared it to SPOT? 25 A. Terry Gilbert of Game and Fish. 16 1 Q. Did you consult with Gilbert with regard 2 to selecting the SPOT imagery? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Had you worked with the LandSat before? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And did you concur with Mr. Gilbert's 7 opinion that SPOT would be a better imagery to use as 8 opposed to LandSat? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 What was the specific purpose or goal at 12 this point in time of the assignment? What were you 13 attempting to do? 14 A. Use satellite imagery to delineate the 15 vegetation in Water Conservation Area 2A. 16 Q. Any particular vegetation types or 17 literally all the vegetation you could? 18 A. All the vegetation we possibly could. 19 There was no emphasis on any specific species. 20 Q. Okay. 21 And did you select 2A as the area of study 22 or was that just, again, part of the assignment? 23 A. Selected it. Because that's where I had 24 worked since my beginning of employment with South 25 Florida Water Management District, and that area also 17 1 has had the most work done in it in previous. 2 Q. Okay. 3 Was the assignment literally just to map 4 any area within the Water Conservation Areas, open area 5 selection? How was the assignment developed? 6 A. Basically just we mapped Water 7 Conservation Area 2A. 8 Q. I'm just curious whether or not the 9 assignment was we need to start doing a vegetative 10 mapping, and you said fine, I'd like to do 2A because 11 that's what I'm most familiar with. How was that 12 assignment developed? 13 A. I would say that the direction at that 14 point came from Dewey Worth to start off doing Water 15 Conservation Area 2A. 16 Q. Okay. All right. 17 Did you review various SPOT imagery for 2A 18 and then select August 10 from a number of options or 19 was August 10 essentially the one that was proposed to 20 you? 21 A. Again, there wasn't a whole lot available 22 due to cloud cover. And it's -- I didn't want to go 23 back to a scene that was collected earlier because then 24 it makes it hard to ground truth. So I had to wait for 25 a scene to become available and then start working on 18 1 it. 2 Q. Okay. All right. 3 In what format did you receive the August 4 10 SPOT imagery data? 5 A. In digital format. 6 Q. Did you still have those digital files? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Unaltered, unmodified? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 Once you received the digital files for 12 the '80 -- excuse me -- 8-10-91 SPOT imagery, what did 13 you do next? 14 A. I went out, collected ground truth data 15 for rectification of the imagery. We collected 20 16 ground control points. That was the first thing we 17 did. Then we cut the actual area out that we were 18 interested in, which was Water Conservation Area 2A, 19 out of the imagery. 20 Q. Okay. 21 So let me -- first, after getting the 22 data, I assume you load it on to a computer, then went 23 up to selected 20 sites to ground truth -- 24 A. To ground truth for rectification 25 purposes. 19 1 Q. And what does ground truthing for 2 rectification purposes mean? 3 A. When you get the data it's not to any real 4 world map projection. So we wanted to get it into a 5 real world map projection using real world ground truth 6 information. 7 Q. Now in other words, when you get it, it 8 doesn't have the boundary of 2A drawn on it; is that 9 right? Is that -- 10 A. No. The way you get a boundary is to cut 11 the imagery from the satellite, original satellite 12 data. This rectification is so that when you look at 13 an area and -- you know where the location is at. 14 Q. Okay. 15 A. You don't know that when you first get it. 16 You have to establish ground controls and rectify it. 17 Q. So what are the types of sites you use for 18 that purpose? 19 A. Some of the fish camps within the area and 20 then points all the way around the outside perimeter. 21 Q. That including the structures? 22 A. I believe so. 23 Q. And did you do the 20 sites, inspection of 24 the 20 sites for ground truthing? 25 A. Les Vilchek and myself. 20 1 Q. Approximately how long did that take? 2 A. I would say a day to two days to collect 3 the information. 4 Q. Okay. 5 What's the next step? 6 A. Okay. 7 Initially we took the raw data and did an 8 unsupervised classification and we chose 30 clusters. 9 We did the unsupervised classification within the 30 10 clusters. We tried to find areas that we can visit in 11 the field. And this was all based on the accuracy of 12 the GPS. So basically the imagery was initially 13 rectified to .4 RMS, root means square, it means that 14 pixel within it is accurate to approximately eight 15 meters. 16 Q. With regard to this process, how many 17 classes did you -- did the computer or did you collect? 18 A. 30 clusters. 19 Q. 30 clusters, all right. 20 Let me ask you this, perhaps as we go 21 through, for the sake of -- we received a fair number 22 of documents, a lot of which are, as you know, lists of 23 data. With regard to Step 1, which was selecting the 24 August 10, 91 imagery, did you produce any documents 25 specifically related to that fact? 21 1 I'm just trying to organize the documents 2 that you produced. 3 A. Could you repeat that question? 4 Q. You've produced to us about a foot and a 5 half of documents in the last few days. 6 A. Okay. 7 Q. We're trying to order them to understand 8 exactly what they are and identify them. Perhaps it 9 might be easiest to see which of those documents fit in 10 a particular project you were doing and in what steps. 11 I'm asking you, did you produce any documents with 12 regard to your selection of the August 10, 91 SPOT 13 imagery? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. 16 What documents would have you produced in 17 regard to that? 18 A. If I remember, all -- I think you have all 19 the GPS location points that were used in the 20 rectification process, in the ground truthing and in 21 the your analysis of the mapping project. 22 Q. Okay. 23 I understand we probably have all the 24 documents. Our problem is trying to figure out which 25 documents are for what task. Are there specific 22 1 documents with relation to your selection of the August 2 10, '91 SPOT imagery? 3 A. I don't think so. 4 Q. With regard to your selecting 20 sites for 5 ground truthing and for rectification purposes, were 6 there any documents specifically related to that task 7 that you've produced to us? 8 A. I believe so. 9 Q. What would those look like? 10 A. Well, I identify them based on the folder 11 that I have them in. 12 Q. Well, we received those things clipped or 13 rubber banded together. There's the first batch, 14 perhaps if you went through that and can identify the 15 20 sites or the documents related to the 20 sites for 16 ground truthing. 17 While you're doing that, let me ask a 18 quick question. Are you aware that we received your 19 documents in two batches? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Okay. 22 So that wouldn't help, telling you I 23 received it in Batch 1 or Batch 2. 24 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 25 record.) 23 1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 2 Q. It's not there. Okay. This is another 3 set of documents we received. 4 A. I don't see them. 5 Q. Okay. At the break we can take a closer 6 look at that. 7 Moving on to the next step that you 8 described to me as taking the raw data and looking at 9 the computer, doing an unsupervised classification, 10 would there be any specific documents generated from 11 that? Would the computer generate a particular file 12 or -- 13 A. I believe all it's all digital. I don't 14 think there's any hard copy of that. 15 Q. Okay. 16 Now, do I understand correctly that the 17 computer collected more than 30 classifications, but 18 ultimately narrowed it down to 30? 19 A. No. 20 Q. How does that work? 21 A. I chose 30. 22 Q. Oh, you essentially told the computer I 23 want 30 classifications, go through and find them? 24 A. I want 30 clusters to be my final number 25 of classes. 24 1 Q. Okay. Well, you have to excuse me, I'm -- 2 the difficulty is you have someone who is not expert in 3 your field deposing an expert in your field. 4 When it's an unsupervised classification 5 by the computer, does that mean the computer just goes 6 through and selects what it considers to be vegetation 7 of the same class or cluster? 8 A. Basically it looks at the band information 9 of the satellite data and clusters it out based on 10 means, basically it's a standard deviation, into 30 11 separate clusters. 12 Q. But you're the one that first plugs in to 13 the computer and tells it I want 30 to start with? 14 A. Right. 15 Q. So you could have done 40 and it would 16 have given you 40? 17 A. That's correct. 18 Q. Or you could have given it one and it 19 could have -- would have given you the entire map I 20 guess; is that essentially correct? 21 A. Yes, I think that's probably what would 22 happen. 23 Q. Did you write any memos or anything 24 related to that particular document? 25 A. Not to my knowledge. 25 1 Q. Okay. 2 After you received then the computer 3 classification of 30 clusters -- would that be the 4 appropriate term? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Okay. 30 clusters. 7 -- what was the next step you did? 8 A. Okay. 9 Basically, we tried to go out in the field 10 and identify what those clusters were. 11 Q. Okay. 12 How did you go about doing that? 13 A. We used GPS, Global Positioning System, 14 and tried to pick a minimum of five points in each one 15 of these clusters, geographically locate it throughout 16 the area. And that's what we used for trying to 17 determine those 30 clusters. 18 Q. Okay. 19 Just so I understand how you went about 20 determining the 30 clusters, did you print out a map? 21 Was there a map printed out of it showing the 30 22 clusters, where they were? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. All right. 25 Do you still have a copy of that map? 26 1 A. It's digital. 2 Q. All right. 3 Did you allow the computer to select the 4 sites where you would go out and ground truth or 5 determine what clusters represented or did you do it 6 yourself? 7 A. Did it myself. 8 Q. Okay. 9 Do you have any type of map or -- showing 10 where those sites were that you visited for the 11 determination of classes? 12 A. Yes. I -- there might be a hard copy, I 13 can't remember. But there's definitely a digital copy. 14 Q. Okay. 15 And in the digital copy, would it have the 16 coordinates of where you were going? 17 A. That's correct. 18 Q. Okay. 19 How did you go about selecting sites you'd 20 visit? 21 A. It was based on whether we were able to 22 accurately navigate to them use GPS technology. There 23 was some inaccuracy in the actual GPS and some 24 inaccuracy in the rectification process of the 25 satellite imagery. So basically we determined that we 27 1 had to have a minimum of 3 by 3 pixel cluster in order 2 to accurately navigate to. In most cases we prefer to 3 have bigger than that. 4 Q. Now with a 3 by 3, you're talking about, 5 what is that, 60 meters squared? 6 A. 60 meters on side. 60 by 60 by 60 by 60. 7 Q. All right. 8 And how many sites did you go to identify 9 the clusters? 10 A. 129. 11 Q. All right. 12 And that was yourself who picked the 129 13 sites? 14 A. I would say I picked them along with Les 15 Vilchek. 16 Q. Okay. All right. 17 What was the next step then, visiting the 18 sites? 19 A. We visited the sites and we wrote down 20 what we saw there and came back and wanted to see if 21 the cluster was accurate and it -- it had broken it out 22 into 30 clusters, whether they were all unique. And at 23 this point we determined they weren't unique, that 24 there was real heterogeneity with a number of clusters. 25 Q. Now prior to the visitation to the site, 28 1 how did you get to the site? 2 A. Either by air boat or helicopter. 3 Q. Okay. 4 And you did that using GPS, I believe you 5 mentioned? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Once you got to the site, I believe you 9 stated you identified the vegetation? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. What would you do, check a site in the 12 center of the pixel, in the center of the 9 square or 9 13 pixels? 14 A. Approximately. 15 Q. Then how would you go about identifying 16 what was there? 17 Who would do that? Let's start with that. 18 A. We stuck with one person so that we 19 wouldn't -- it's just better if you do it with one 20 person than have a number of people working on that 21 aspect of it, because he stays consistent throughout 22 the process. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. And Les Vilchek was that person. 25 Q. Okay. All right. 29 1 Once you arrived at a site, where would he 2 look to make the identification? 3 A. If we were in a helicopter he would look 4 down at the site, because you want to try to determine 5 what the satellite was seeing. If you were on an air 6 boat, we have cages on the air boat, we got on top of 7 the cage and looked basically down so we can see was it 8 sparse or moderate or dense or what the prevailing 9 vegetation signature was for that area. 10 Q. Okay. 11 With regard to the helicopter, were you 12 hovering, trying to hover at any particular level or... 13 A. Yeah, I'd say it was approximately 50 14 feet. 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. 25 feet. 17 Q. All right. 18 You now -- as I understand it, you are in 19 the approximate, what you've identified as being in the 20 approximate center of a 9 pixel square, each pixel 21 being 20 meters by 20 meters. Was Les attempting to 22 identify the community in all 9 pixels or was he trying 23 to look at what he considered to be the boundary of 24 that center pixel? 25 A. I would say he was looking at a 20 meter 30 1 by 20 meter area. 2 Q. Was that something you discussed with him 3 so you know that or is that just your -- 4 A. No, we discussed that. 5 Q. Okay. 6 Now at -- during this trip would you also 7 observe and take any notes if, for instance, if there's 8 a change in the type of vegetation surrounding -- from 9 what you've identified as the center pixel? 10 A. I believe he did that, yes. 11 Q. Now were there written documents? Were 12 there written observations from this trip? 13 A. I believe there is, yeah. I think he -- 14 they might be included here somewhere. 15 Q. But he made field notes of every, all 129 16 visits? 17 A. I believe so, yeah. 18 Q. Okay. 19 Was he keeping the field notes or were 20 you? 21 A. He kept them pretty much. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Did you make any separate observations or 24 field notes of any sort? 25 A. No. I was basically the GPS man. I 31 1 also -- I put it in in navigating to points and making 2 sure we got to the right place. 3 Q. Okay. 4 Now, is it your belief that the field 5 notes from these site visits were included in the 6 documents that were produced to us? 7 A. I think so, but I'm not positive. 8 Q. Okay. 9 Can we go through and again identify those 10 so we can start segmenting out what these documents 11 are? If it's easier, as I said, take all the rubber 12 bands off. 13 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 14 record.) 15 THE WITNESS: This is in digital form. I 16 don't see the -- 17 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 18 Q. Let's set that aside for the moment. 19 Everything that's -- everything you have that relates 20 to the -- is it just that one document you have in your 21 hand or is there anything underneath that also? 22 A. Well, this actually gives you the 23 coordinate and what we saw there. I'll keep looking 24 through. 25 Q. Well, I'd like to see if we do have field 32 1 notes. Let's -- why don't we set that aside. I'll 2 identify that for the record in a moment. But if 3 there's anything else related to that visit to the 129 4 sites in the field and the identification of 5 vegetation. 6 A. I think this pertains to that too. I 7 think these are it. We actually made sheets up, field 8 inspection sheets. I think this is it. 9 Q. All right. Let me try find these here. 10 MR. CESERANO: You want the number? 11 MR. KOBELINSKI: Yes. 12 MR. CESARANO: 1202944. 13 THE WITNESS: No, this, I think, was for 14 ground truthing. 15 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 16 Q. Why don't we put -- this is yours, and I 17 think you turned some stuff over here. I just want to 18 make sure. 19 MR. CESARANO: Pardon me, let me look at 20 this for a moment if I could. 21 MR. KOBELINSKI: All right. What does 22 that start with? 23 MR. CESARANO: 1203. 24 MR. KOBELINSKI: All right. And I think 25 we'll just mark this as a large composite 33 1 exhibit. 2 (Thereupon, the document was marked 3 Rutchey Exb. No. 2 for Identification.) 4 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 5 Q. Mr. Rutchey, did you -- were there any 6 photos taken during the three site visits, the 129 7 sites? 8 A. I think we did do it for this one, I'm not 9 sure. 10 Q. Who would have those photos? 11 A. I'd have to look in my slides for that, 12 because we have gone there on and off on different 13 things. 14 Q. Would they be in just slide form or would 15 you also have photos, do you know? 16 A. They'd be slides. 17 Q. Okay. 18 Who would have taken the -- snapped the 19 photo or slide or whatever, done the camera work? 20 A. Yeah, I -- if I recall, I don't think we 21 did it for this particular project, we didn't take 22 pictures. I'm not sure. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. I'd have to look. 25 Q. All right. 34 1 Mr. Rutchey, I'm showing you a composite 2 exhibit that we've marked as No. 2. There's actually a 3 number of different portions to it, but the first page 4 appears to be a photocopy of a possibly a file folder 5 which reads WCA-2A field data collection sites for 30 6 classes, 10-2-91 through 1-13-92. And all these 7 documents bear consecutive Bates numbers in the lower 8 right-hand corner, 1202881 all the way through 1203072. 9 Some of these are stapled together. 10 I'd ask you first of all, is this a -- one 11 entire file that you keep, this particular file? 12 A. It's not an entire file, it's a number of 13 different files. 14 Q. Perhaps -- because it was produced to us 15 in this consecutive order, I'd like you to go through 16 and perhaps see if you can identify each set, the first 17 portion of which is stapled together at 1202882. Do 18 you know what that particular document relates to? 19 A. This is the actual data that I sent to 20 John Jensen of the 30 ground truth sites and their 21 coordinate location. 22 Q. And it's actually referring to 129 sites? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Okay. 25 Now -- so this does relate to this initial 35 1 site identification of the 129 sites and the classes 2 that are listed there in this document. Where did you 3 get that information? 4 A. These are the classes that we determined 5 from looking during our aerial reconnaissance is the 6 site locations. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Just going through this top page here, 9 1202882, the first column there are a number of 10 numbers. What would that indicate? 11 A. Just basically it was a way of telling the 12 different ones apart, 1 through 129. 13 Q. So that's just essentially the numbers 14 that, for instance that first page we're on, 61, 63, 15 80, these are just the various sites; is that correct? 16 A. Um-hum. 17 Q. All right. 18 The next one is labeled class, I believe 19 you just stated that classification, you identified it 20 based upon your observations; is that correct? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. I'm still on Page 1202882. 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. The next has UTM. 25 A. That's correct. 36 1 Q. What is that UTM, coordinate? 2 A. Universal Transverse Mercator 3 Q. That's your GPS coordinates there? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. All right. 6 Next document that, at least it's stapled 7 together, bears Bates No. 2202885 through 887. And 8 could you -- do you know what this document reflects? 9 A. I'm going to tell you these don't look 10 like they're in order to me. And not to have my 11 folders here, my original stuff, I'm guessing basically 12 what I'm seeing here. 13 Q. All right. 14 Well, to the best of your ability do you 15 do you recognize what this could be? 16 A. It's basically -- it's classes grouped 17 together and their location, such as Class 1 is -- you 18 see all together and Class 2 and so on, and so on to 19 30. 20 Q. This is based upon the original 129 sites? 21 A. I believe so. 22 Q. Okay. 23 And the first column there says point old, 24 what does that mean? 25 A. I'm going to have to go back. We had two 37 1 sites, point old and -- well, not point old. And we 2 had new and old -- not new. It was basically two 3 different trips. We combined them together in the 4 final documents or data set. 5 Q. When you say two different trips, is this 6 all part of identification of the 129 sites where the 7 vegetation was? 8 A. Yes. Two different trips that basically 9 it might have been more than two trips, but at one 10 point in time we had one data set and then we had 11 another data set, then we combined them, the old data 12 set, old and new date set. 13 Q. Good classifications. All right. 14 Well, let me back up a moment. How long 15 did it take you to visit all 129 sites? 16 A. I think we did it over a period of two or 17 three months. 18 Q. Okay. 19 And what months would those be? 20 A. I think it says right here on the 21 beginning of Exhibit 2, 10-2-91 to 1 -- it look likes 22 13-92. 23 Q. Okay. 24 And did you go to all these sites? 25 A. Yes. 38 1 Q. I believe you said Les Vilchek did all the 2 identification. He also obviously went too. 3 A. Right. 4 Q. Did anybody else participate in the site 5 identification trips? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Approximately how many trips did it take? 8 A. Without having my folders, I don't recall. 9 Q. Okay. 10 And did you visit certain sites more than 11 once? 12 A. I don't think so. 13 Q. Okay. 14 I was just trying to understand why there 15 were two different data sets that you then merged. 16 A. I'm going to have to go back and look. I 17 remember that we collected one set and then we 18 collected another set, not repeating, two different 19 sets. We called one old and one new, and then we 20 combined it. That's the best of my knowledge, without 21 going back to my notes. 22 Q. All right. 23 Are those notes that you've produced to 24 us? 25 A. No, they're in -- it's basically in my -- 39 1 yeah, they're probably here. But it's all -- not like 2 in my folders. 3 Q. Okay. 4 So you had field notes then from this 5 aspect of the study? 6 A. Well, those were already part of that. 7 Q. We're coming up on those. 8 A. Right. 9 Q. Okay. 10 Let's move on to the next document which 11 is Bates No. 120288 through 120291. And this likewise 12 has point new. My question would be that in the 13 approximately fourth column there, a number of data 14 points have 5 by 5 or 5 X 5. What does that refer to? 15 A. I believe that was if it had 5 by 5 pixels 16 or more, instead of a 3 by 3 pixel. 17 Q. Okay. All right. 18 Moving on then to next stapled portion of 19 this, which bears Bates No. 1202892 through 1202898, 20 and what would this relate to? 21 A. These are all out of the software called 22 PFINDER, and it's our software that we use to 23 differentially correct our field GPS data. This is the 24 output. 25 Q. Okay. 40 1 This is output from the unit you had out 2 in the field? 3 A. I'm not sure without having my folders in 4 front of me. I mean it's either output from the unit 5 in the field or it's the output after it's been 6 differentially corrected. 7 Q. All right. Let me just explore that for a 8 moment. 9 You have a GPS unit and it takes you to a 10 spot; is that correct? 11 A. That's correct. 12 Q. All right. 13 What are you -- how do you get to a spot 14 with a GPS unit? 15 A. You can enter way points into the GPS 16 unit, basically navigation points. You can navigate to 17 the point. The military's been jamming GPS signals 18 since the Gulf incident, so about the worse accuracy is 19 about a hundred meters. But there's -- we've found 20 that you can take that data set back to your office, 21 you have a community base station set up collecting GPS 22 data out of a known location that's been surveyed to 23 less than one centimeter. You can differentially 24 correct the recovery unit data to get an accurate 25 location of where you really were. 41 1 Q. Okay. 2 The unit itself, the recovery unit as you 3 called it, records then time and place, it was -- 4 A. It records the time and the position. 5 Q. Okay. 6 Is that where you just press a button and 7 it does that for you, or how does it do it? 8 A. Pretty much press a button. 9 Q. So every time you got a spot that Les 10 would do a site identification you would press a 11 button, it would record the time and coordinates? 12 A. Right. We took a number of coordinates at 13 each place that we stopped, because that gives you 14 better accuracy the more you can average the data. And 15 basically we went to known benchmarks during our field 16 trips that we found, identified and checked the unit to 17 see how accurate we really were getting. And accuracy 18 ranged from three to seven meters. 19 Q. Okay. 20 That was during all your visits to the 129 21 sites? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Okay. 24 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 25 record.) 42 1 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 2 Q. The next document is Bates No. 1202899 3 through 1202904. 4 Can you identify what that document is? 5 A. Again, this is output from the PFINDER 6 software for GPS, PFINDER software. 7 It looks like we can take, for instance, 8 the first page, Site No. 61, these are all the points 9 that were collected at that site. And then this is 10 like until -- before we actually average it and get 11 then a final number. 12 Q. Okay. 13 Are these -- looking at 61, you have 14 approximately 10 readings there. I didn't count it, is 15 that about right? 16 A. Yeah. 17 Q. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. Yeah I think it's about 18 10. Is that all from the same holding spot or did you 19 actually move around to get those? 20 A. No, same spot. 21 Q. Okay. All right. 22 And then going to the next document 23 1202905 through 909, what would this be? 24 A. Again, this is output from the GPS PFINDER 25 software. 43 1 Q. Okay. 2 Just drawing your attention to the 3 leftmost column where it says text, and following 4 through, is that an identification of some sort? 5 A. In this case, not on that page, it 6 represents the site number. 7 Q. And the following pages? 8 A. Bug in the program. We were able to 9 overcome that bug by looking at the time in the second 10 column to determine where we were. 11 Q. All right. 12 In next document, 1202910 through 913, 13 what is that? 14 A. GPS PFINDER output. 15 Q. Okay. 16 Would that hold true likewise for the next 17 document, 1202914 through 2920? 18 A. That's correct. 19 Q. Okay. 20 And next documents 1202921 through 927? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. 23 And then drawing your attention to the 24 next four documents bearing Bates numbers 1202928 25 through 936, what are these documents? 44 1 A. PFINDER GPS data output. 2 Q. Okay. 3 And looking at 1202937 there's handwriting 4 on there, it says this starts quote the new data set 5 quote. Now does that indicate that the new data set 6 essentially starts on December 3, '91 and went only 7 after that period? Is that how you'd read this? 8 A. Yeah, I'd say that's a fair statement. 9 Q. Does this help you recall as to why there 10 were two data sets? 11 A. No. 12 Q. On this sheet, this 1202937, there's 13 handwriting on here in a couple of places, it says 14 miss. What does that refer to? 15 A. I don't recall. 16 Q. Okay. 17 Whose handwriting is that; do you 18 recognize it? 19 A. It looks like mine. 20 Q. Drawing your attention to 1202939, the 21 document goes through 940, the leftmost column in 22 handwriting, what are these, the handwriting identified 23 as 96, 104, 54 as I'm going through? 24 A. I think this means -- dealing with the 25 accuracy of GPS being a hundred meters, that when we 45 1 actually went to a site that we thought was that 2 cluster, so the unit was off a hundred meters, it threw 3 us outside the cluster when we went back and checked 4 it. So we missed a cluster. So we couldn't use the 5 ground truth statement, because we weren't at that 6 location. That's what miss means, we missed. 7 Q. Okay. All right. Fair enough. 8 Well, just look at 1202939, just so I 9 understand your first eight readings, are those all the 10 same site or are those different sites? 11 A. I would say they're different sites. 12 Q. Each of these represents a different site? 13 A. Um-hum. 14 Q. All right. 15 And then quickly finishing up the 16 following two documents, 1202941 through 943, these are 17 likewise GPS documents; is that right? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Okay. 20 What would do you when you missed a site, 21 would you go back on a different day? 22 A. We would try to attempt to go back to it. 23 Q. Did you ultimately locate all 129 sites to 24 your satisfaction? 25 A. Initially there were more sites, there 46 1 were -- we just never could get to them. They -- some 2 of the clusters broke out to just 3 by 3 pixels, and if 3 they were jamming for a hundred meters we never found 4 that site. We couldn't include it. 5 Q. Of the 129 original sites that you set out 6 to do, how many did you ultimately get to? 7 A. No, there was more than 129. Initially 8 there was 150. 9 Q. Oh, I see. 10 And do I understand correctly then that 11 you were able to get to a hundred -- get to 129 of the 12 150? 13 A. Right. 14 Q. Okay. All right. 15 Then looking at Bates Nos. 1202944 through 16 1203016, the first page of which has -- states SFWMD 17 Environmental Sciences Digital Mapping Field Inspection 18 Sheet, what are these documents, sir? 19 A. These are the ground truth data, what we 20 saw there at the site depicting the vegetation. 21 Q. Okay. 22 And who kept these, who prepared these 23 documents? 24 A. Les Vilchek. 25 Q. And he prepared these out in the field? 47 1 A. No. 2 Q. Okay. 3 How would he record what he was seeing out 4 in the field? 5 A. On a piece of notebook paper or whatever, 6 then he came back in, he transcribed them to here. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Does he still retain his field book or his 9 field notes themselves? 10 A. I'm not sure. I sort of doubt it. 11 Those things, especially in your air boat, 12 they get all smudged up and get wet, so that's why we 13 did this. 14 Q. Now under a vegetation type, for instance 15 on the first page you have 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 16 10, 11 categories, how are the 11 categories selected? 17 A. Those are some of the major things that we 18 thought were out there initially, so to make it easier 19 so we don't have write them down every time we went to 20 a site, we made a list. 21 Q. Okay. All right. 22 And I notice -- I draw your attention to 23 documents in the next rubber band set, which is 1203017 24 through 1273072. What are these documents? 25 A. The same. Ground truth information. 48 1 Q. All right. 2 And that is all -- this ground truthing 3 relates to the original visitation of the approximate 4 129 sites; is that correct? 5 A. I believe so. 6 Q. All right. 7 Are there any other documents then that 8 would relate to this portion or this task in the 9 project? 10 A. Just the digital data. 11 Q. Okay. 12 Once you received these field notes or the 13 field inspection sheets, what would do you with them? 14 A. Basically we went to each of the clusters 15 to see if they had clustered out uniquely, and we found 16 that wasn't the case, that a lot of them exhibited 17 heterogeneity within a single cluster within -- based 18 on our field reconnaissance. 19 Q. Okay. 20 Who did that work? 21 A. I did that work. 22 Q. What was the type of recovery unit you 23 used for the GPS? 24 A. A PathFinder Basic. 25 Q. All right. 49 1 You've done all the field work, you have 2 all these field notes, you come back, what's the next 3 step in the process? 4 A. Well, once we determined that everything 5 just didn't cluster out the way we had hoped, we used 6 that data set to do a supervised classification. 7 Q. All right. 8 How did you go about doing that? 9 A. It's basically the computer does -- they 10 do -- you feed it the ground truth information and run 11 a supervised classification and you look at the 12 results, see if they mean anything, see if you have 13 unique spectral signatures for the final data. And we 14 determined that, yeah, we came up with initially 19 15 unique signatures based on that kind of ground truth 16 information. And we used those, initially we saw some 17 problem areas and we attacked those and came up with 18 one additional class. 19 Q. What was the additional class? 20 A. Periphyton. 21 Q. All right. 22 Now with supervised classification, a 23 little more detail there. Did you select 19 classes 24 based upon your review of field notes and make a 25 determination there were actually 19 identifiable 50 1 classifications out there, or did the computer then 2 select 19? 3 A. No, it's based on supervised, based on 4 ground truth data. 5 Q. Okay. 6 So you took the data from your visits to 7 the 129 sites? 8 A. Um-hum. 9 Q. You yourself came up with 19 classes from 10 that? 11 A. Right. 12 Q. Okay. 13 Then you tell -- identify them to the 14 computer, the computer reruns the digital data to see 15 where it finds those classes? 16 A. Based on the spectral signature of those 17 data sites, basically the band information within those 18 areas. It's used in the supervised classification to 19 delineate based on these statistics. 20 Q. Okay. 21 Is this something you were doing or Les 22 was doing? 23 A. I was doing. 24 Q. All right. 25 Are there any documents related to that 51 1 particular activity? 2 A. Hard copy, no. Digitally, yes. 3 Q. What would have you digitally related to 4 this? 5 A. Well, we have all the seed locations for 6 the ground truth information. And basically all the 7 steps from there to the final supervised 8 classification, the output maps. 9 Q. Okay. 10 You didn't make hard copies of the maps 11 though, is that you're saying? 12 A. No. Well, I did make hard copies of -- 13 not hard copies, no, no, I didn't. Just digital. 14 Q. Okay. 15 What was the next step? 16 A. Well the two problem areas, as I said, was 17 one was sawgrass/cattail sparse class, we knew from 18 aerial photography that we had a lot of, what we were 19 seeing in the southern end was periphyton that was 20 coming up as sawgrass/cattail sparse, so we wanted to 21 see if we can break that out. So we actually took that 22 class out of the supervised classification and ran an 23 unsupervised classification on that and broke it out 24 into, I believe it was five new spectral classes. We 25 look at each individually, looked at each of those 52 1 class individually and determined that we could break 2 out the periphyton from the sawgrass/cattail sparse 3 class. And then we came up with one additional class, 4 periphyton in the southern region. 5 Q. Okay. 6 I believe you said you knew from aerial 7 photography that the sawgrass/cattail part showing up 8 in the southern end was actually periphyton. 9 A. Um-hum. 10 Q. That aerial photography you were reviewing 11 as part of this particular project? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Okay. 14 What aerial photography were you using? 15 A. We had an area flown approximately at the 16 same time by Southern Resource Mapping at 1:24,000 17 scale, color infrared. 18 Q. That was by who? 19 A. Southern Resource Mapping. 20 Q. Now you're talking about the area, you're 21 talking about all of WCA-2A? 22 A. That's correct. 23 Q. Do you recall approximately when they did 24 that? 25 A. I think it was -- I'd be guessing. 53 1 Q. Well -- 2 A. It was within a year of this, the actual 3 data that we acquired, this satellite imagery. 4 Q. Within a year of August 10, '91? 5 A. Right. 6 Q. Okay. 7 Now did you retain the infrared 8 photography from that? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Who is doing the vegetative identification 13 using infrared photography? 14 A. Both Les Vilchek and myself. 15 Q. Did you produce any of those infrared 16 photos? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Okay. 19 Do you still retain those? 20 A. Um-hum, yes. 21 Q. With regard to the southern area which the 22 computer was identifying as sawgrass/cattail sparse, 23 and that you had determined from aerial photography was 24 periphyton, were there any of the 129 sites located 25 within that area? 54 1 A. I don't recall. The sites were pretty 2 well distributed through out the whole area, I would 3 guess yes. 4 (Thereupon, Mr. Downing entered the room.) 5 MR. KOBELINSKI: Okay. Let's take a five 6 minute break as long as Ed just came in. 7 (Thereupon, a brief recess was taken.) 8 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 9 Q. Let's see the step No. 6 that we were 10 discussing, or at least I had written down, is 11 supervised classification, which was done after you had 12 visited 129 sites for the unsupervised. And were there 13 any documents generated for this particular step of the 14 project? 15 A. Just what's available digitally, to the 16 best of my knowledge. 17 Q. Is that -- did you have hard copies that 18 you produced to us? 19 A. I don't believe so. 20 Q. Okay. 21 So the documents that you produced to us, 22 there are none related to this step? 23 A. The supervised? 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. Just the, you know, the ground truth 55 1 information and locations and what we saw there. 2 Q. Yeah, that's fine. We've already gone 3 through that? 4 A. Right. 5 Q. Okay. I appreciate that. I'm trying to 6 make some sense of what we have so we can sort of 7 follow along with what you did out there. 8 Now, you ended up with 19 and then you 9 added a 20th class of periphyton; is that correct? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. What was the next step? 12 A. There was another problem area, tree 13 islands. 14 Q. Um-hum. 15 A. They were being classified to something 16 other than tree islands. And basically we went and 17 digitized the tree islands on the supervised 18 classification, ran another unsupervised classification 19 just on tree islands, ten spectral classes, and then 20 collapsed that down into four already existing classes, 21 and mosaicked them back into the output of the 22 supervised classification 23 Q. Now, is there any documentation related to 24 that step? 25 A. That's probably -- I did see something, 56 1 ground truthing of the tree islands, the visits that we 2 made to those, stated tree islands. 3 Q. Why don't we quickly identify that? 4 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 5 record.) 6 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 7 Q. It might be the bottom thing in that 8 entire stack. Take a look at the -- I have it as the 9 very bottom. Is that -- yeah, look at that one. I 10 don't know if that's it, but... 11 A. Yes, I believe this is it. 12 MR. KOBELINSKI: Why don't you mark that 13 as 3. 14 (Thereupon, the document was marked 15 Rutchey Exb. No. 3 for Identification.) 16 BY MR. RUTCHEY: 17 Q. All right. 18 Mr. Rutchey, drawing your attention to 19 what's been marked as Exhibit 3, and which record is a 20 document, bears Bates Nos. 1203073 through 1203105, and 21 the first page of which appears to be a cover, a file 22 cover, bearing the name WCA-2A tree islands and bears a 23 date of 2-20-92. 24 By the way, would February of 1992 be 25 about the time that you were doing this 57 1 reclassification of tree islands? 2 A. Yeah, this is the ground truthing of these 3 tree islands. 4 Q. Now, did this result in separate ground 5 truthing? In other words, did you go back out in the 6 field? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. The third time you've gone out in the 9 field if I've counted correctly? Well, the third task. 10 First one was for, you referred to it as rectification, 11 that was your first field visit; is that right? 12 A. Field visits. 13 Q. Field visits, plural. 14 The second one was visits to the 129 15 sites, and this would be third set of visits you took 16 to the field? 17 A. That's correct. 18 Q. All right. 19 And there was -- Les Vilchek did this? 20 A. Both of us. Again, I'm the GPS and he's 21 the -- 22 Q. All right. How many -- 23 A. -- vegetation. 24 Q. How many sites did you visit? 25 A. I could count them, how many sheets are 58 1 here. Probably that's how many sites. 2 Q. All right. 3 A. It looks like 31. 4 Q. Okay. 5 Let me draw your attention back to 6 something -- or before I do that, looking at what is 7 the Bates page of this document, 1203074, what would 8 this be? 9 A. That's the location of the tree islands' 10 approximately center points. 11 Q. Okay. 12 Did you follow the same GPS technique of 13 taking a number of readings and then correcting it for 14 any distortion caused by the GPS system? 15 A. No, the tree islands are all fairly large 16 that we did digitized. And once you're navigating to 17 them, to your navigation points, you can see the trees, 18 so it wasn't necessary. 19 Q. Then drawing your attention then to the 20 field inspection sheets, which commences at 123075, in 21 the upper right-hand corner it says photo number R1-1. 22 Does that indicate that those photos were taken during 23 these visits? 24 A. I would say yes. Well, that's a good 25 point. 59 1 Q. I know, that's what I just noticed myself. 2 Going back then to Exhibit 2, I believe 3 start of the field sheets, it's at 1202944 -- 4 A. Right. 5 Q. -- these likewise have photo numbers in 6 them. Does that refresh your recollection as to 7 whether or not photos were taken? 8 A. Obviously, yes, they were. 9 Q. All right. 10 Do you know whether or not those photos 11 are still retained? 12 A. I haven't looked at them if they are. I 13 haven't looked at them. I don't even recall them. But 14 if they are, I might have them. 15 Q. Okay. 16 Were they used for any purpose in 17 refreshing your recollection when making 18 identifications? 19 A. I don't think so. I think we used our 20 visual view of the area as we saw it in real time with 21 our eyes. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Did you actually help Les with these or, 24 again, was he -- these are all just his notes as to 25 what he identified at the tree islands? I'm referring 60 1 back to Composite Exhibit 3. 2 A. He took the notes, but we would sit there 3 and he would tell me what he thought he saw there. And 4 we would, you know, between the both of us, I would 5 say, we came up with it. But he was the primary 6 person. But he would say this is what I see. I would 7 say well, you know, maybe sawgrass was 60 percent, he'd 8 say 70 percent. But we were pretty close. But we 9 still kept it to one person's view. I just wanted to 10 make sure he wasn't totally out of line. It's good to 11 have a second opinion there when you -- he's doing 12 that. 13 Q. Now with regard to the tree islands, did 14 you attempt to identify one entire tree island or were 15 you likewise attempting to identify a 20 by 20 pixel or 16 area? 17 A. Basically we were looking at the entire 18 tree island. 19 Q. Okay. 20 So of the 31 sites, are these essentially 21 then 31 different tree islands? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Okay. 24 Any notation as to the approximate area 25 that was covered by the tree islands? 61 1 A. Repeat that again. 2 Q. Would you be able -- is there any notation 3 on these sheets which would tell me how large the tree 4 island was? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Okay. All right. 7 Based upon these field trips, what did you 8 then do, how did you use this information? 9 A. We used this ground truth information, as 10 I said before, we cut out the tree islands from the 11 supervised classifications, 31 of them, and did 12 unsupervised classifications on them and made ten 13 clusters. Then we determined from this ground truth 14 information what those 10 clusters represented. And 15 some of them were duplication, so we collapsed it down 16 to four, which were already four classes we had within 17 the original 19 classes of supervised classification, 18 and then collapsed it -- well, collapsed to those four, 19 and then mosaicked it back into the supervised 20 classification. 21 Q. All right. 22 Just so I understand what you were doing 23 before, let me see if I understand what you're doing 24 here. A tree island in this case could actually be 25 comprised of approximately how many in this case, a 62 1 pixel being a 20 by 20 meter square? 2 A. Hundreds, if not thousands. 3 Q. Okay. 4 When you went out there to a particular 5 tree island, were you attempting to identify all of the 6 various pixel types that were out there or were you 7 doing a general vegetation type for the entire tree 8 island? 9 A. Basically, no, we were trying to look at 10 from the point of -- I have to look here. 11 Q. You want to use your original, it has the 12 nice color photo? 13 A. Yeah. 14 Basically we were looking at tree islands 15 from the point of a sawgrass/brush mixture 1, which is 16 what we categorize it as, sawgrass/brush mixture 2, and 17 these are all delineated within a table by -- what we 18 mean by these categorizations, tree island and other 19 keys. It might have been just been sawgrass, in some 20 cases cattail. 21 Q. Okay. All right. 22 What was the next step? 23 A. Okay. 24 Well, then we started mapping our accuracy 25 assessment of the overall map product. 63 1 Q. Once you did the tree islands, did you 2 then have what you believed to be a final or a pretty 3 much a final vegetation map? 4 A. That's correct. 5 Q. Okay. 6 And is there -- is that the same one 7 that's attached to Exhibit 1? 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. Okay. 10 And that would be Bates -- would that be 11 Bates No. 1220435? 12 A. That's correct. 13 Q. Okay. All right. 14 Go ahead, what was the next step then? 15 A. Map accuracy assessment. We generated 241 16 random points from the final supervised classification. 17 We used a stratified random sampling technique based on 18 class. And the number of points selected was based on 19 the required minimum of 204 for an 85 percent map 20 accuracy with an error of plus or minus five percent. 21 And this was based on the binomial formulas. 22 Q. Now 241, would that -- were you 23 essentially trying to get X number of samples for each 24 of the particular 20 classs? 25 A. Well, the stratified random sampling by 64 1 class implies that you're going to take samples within 2 each of the classes. 3 Q. Is that -- does it by necessity result in 4 a minimum number taken within each particular class? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Okay. 7 And is there data showing approximately 8 how many were taken for each class? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 Where would that be? 12 A. You might have it in hard copy. It's 13 definitely in digital form. 14 Q. Okay. All right. 15 Once you determines these 241 points, 16 actually I believe then the computer then generates 17 these 241 points; is that correct? 18 A. That's correct. 19 Q. Is there a map showing the 241 points? 20 A. Yes, a map was generated digitally. 21 Q. You get the points out of that digital 22 map? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Did you produce that one? 25 A. It might be here, I'm not sure. 65 1 Q. Okay. 2 A. I'm not sure if it's in my files. 3 Q. All right. 4 You had 241 points. What did you do at 5 that point? 6 A. Basically you visit all these points out 7 in the field. 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. Ground truth them and see if they are what 10 you said they were in the map. 11 Q. All right. 12 Were you able to visit all 241 points? 13 A. I believe so. 14 Q. Okay. 15 A. If I remember correctly -- 16 Q. I'm sorry? 17 A. In acquiring 241 points we were again 18 constrained when the computer said this is where it 19 will be, that it had to be within a minimum of a 3 by 3 20 pixel area. I mean if it fell on one pixel and it was 21 surrounded by other things, well then, we weren't 22 obviously going to find that area, so... 23 Q. With regard to -- is that an instruction 24 that you gave the computer to pick 241 sites, was to 25 make sure it was picking a 3 by 3 or a 9 pixel area? 66 1 A. (No response.) 2 Q. Do you understand my question? 3 A. Right. I understand. 4 I'm not sure how we actually went about 5 doing that. I can't remember if there was a way we 6 could do that on the computer or whether we just picked 7 the closest point that was -- met the minimum 3 by 3 8 requirement. 9 Q. Ultimately you ended up with 241 3 by 3 10 sites? 11 A. Or larger. 12 Q. Or larger. 13 A. Right. 14 Q. You visited these? 15 A. Right. 16 Q. Okay. 17 Do you have documents related to those 18 visits? 19 A. I believe so. 20 Q. Similar to what we've already seen? 21 A. I think so. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Why don't we flip this one over so we 24 don't get confused. That's the tree island one. And 25 let's see if we can -- you can just keep them there, 67 1 that's your set. 2 A. Okay. 3 Q. That too. You don't need to go through 4 that, that's the other. It will be probably be here or 5 in here. 6 A. I believe this is it. 7 Q. All right. 8 And you're -- could you read off the Bates 9 numbers? These are consecutive. Just take, if you 10 just look at the top page there. 11 A. 1202231. 12 Q. Through? The final page -- 13 A. Yeah. 14 Q. -- of that entire. 15 A. Well, I'm make making sure all this is. 16 Q. Okay. 17 Well, I'll take you through each and every 18 one, trust me. 19 A. 1202541. 20 Q. Okay. 2541. Okay good. 21 MR. KOBELINSKI: Mark this as Composite 4. 22 (Thereupon, the document was marked 23 Rutchey Exb. No. 4 for Identification.) 24 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 25 Q. Showing you then, Mr. Rutchey what's been 68 1 marked as Composite Exhibit 4, which bears the Bates 2 number you just read off into the record, the first 3 page of which appears to be a file cover reading WCA-2A 4 Accuracy Assessment, 3-23 through 4-24-92, is that the 5 period of time that you did the site visits for the 6 accuracy assessment? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Okay. 9 Now I want to go through this, rather 10 quickly identify what we have inside here. The first 11 document in there which bears Bates No. 120232 through 12 36, is this a summary of the site visits to all 241 13 sites? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. 16 And so if I understand, isn't that, being 17 similar to a document previously identified in regard 18 to the 129 site visits, this is a summary based upon 19 the field notes and the visitations for the entire 20 field study? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Okay. 23 And what would be 1202237 through 40? 24 A. Well, the first part is the class number 25 that was assigned to each of the 20 classes. 69 1 Q. Okay. 2 Now with regard to points, would that be 3 the 240 some-odd sites? 4 A. Well, it's 210 of them. 5 Q. Okay. 6 Were there only 210 sites then that were 7 visited? 8 A. No, there was 241, but it was collected, 9 again, two different times. There was a second set 10 that was added on, 31 sites. 11 Q. Okay. 12 So those cover 210 sites. I can see that, 13 going along the columns here on this first page, 14 1202237, you have the points, you have the GPS 15 coordinates; is that correct? 16 A. (Shakes head up and down.) 17 Q. What would the, I guess it would be the 18 fourth column, which starts at the top of 10, 1, 2, 4, 19 1, 1 and et cetera? Is that class identification? 20 A. Yeah, but from looking at this I can't 21 tell whether that's what we saw in the field or what 22 was actually in the map, the final map that we 23 produced. 24 Q. Okay. 25 What is the final column when it says 70 1 negative 1 everywhere? 2 A. It looks like a bug. 3 Q. A bug, all right. 4 When you went out to the field to make 5 these classifications of 241 sites, were you aware 6 already what the computer was identifying each site as? 7 A. Les wasn't. I wasn't either, no. 8 Q. Okay. 9 The next document is 1202241 through 45. 10 It appears similar to what we just looked at, however 11 there's a fair amount of handwriting here. And drawing 12 your attention to that final, to the top of that where 13 the first page says final-map-CAT -- 14 A. Um-hum. 15 Q. -- what are the numbers in that left-hand 16 first column, first one? It looks like possibly 19.41. 17 It's difficult to read. The next one is clearer, 18 18.34, 7.76 and down the line. Do you know what those 19 are? 20 A. I'd be guessing, but I think it's 21 percentage. 22 Q. Percentage of the entire area? 23 A. Percentage of each of these classes. 24 Q. All right. I'm afraid you lost me on 25 percentage. 71 1 Are you talking about what percentage of 2 WCA-2A is made up of those classes or what 3 percentage -- why don't you answer that. 4 A. These numbers in the first column -- 5 Q. Um-hum. 6 A. -- okay, I believe they represent the 7 percentage of that class within Area 2. But again I'm 8 not sure. This is something I wrote on this paper two 9 years ago. 10 Q. All right. 11 Going along you have then the next column 12 or the, just class numbers 1, 2 through 20, and the 13 following column is a column of handwritten numbers, 14 41, 39, 9 16. Do you recall what those numbers are? 15 A. No. 16 Q. All right. Let's move along. 17 Drawing your attention then to a large 18 piece of map, which bears Bates No. 1202246, do you 19 recall what this is? 20 A. I believe this is our path that we 21 followed to look at the map accuracy assessment points. 22 Q. So this essentially has all 241 points on 23 here? 24 A. I think it's got the first 210. 25 Q. Okay. 72 1 Did you -- were 31 points added on after 2 the initial 210? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Why was that? 5 A. One of the things we wanted to know with 6 confidence is the cattail, and the stratified random 7 sampling didn't come up with enough points on that 8 cattail area. So we wanted to get more points to 9 verify whether the map was accurate in respect to 10 cattail. So we did a stratified -- another stratified 11 random sampling, checking 31 points within the cattail 12 zone. So an additional 31 sites were visited. 13 Q. All right. 14 When you say within the cattail zone, 15 which of the 20 classes were used for that stratified 16 selection? 17 A. (No response.) 18 Q. If you go back one, you can see the 20 19 classes, if that helps you. 20 A. Without actually seeing the digital data, 21 it's hard to be definite, but I would say it was 22 cattail dense, moderate, sparse cattail/brush mixture, 23 and I believe those are the only ones. 24 Q. Okay. 25 Do you recall whether sawgrass/cattail 73 1 mixture was reviewed, or part of that 31? 2 A. Oh, excuse me, yes, I would say those two. 3 I'm not sure. 4 Q. Would there be some documents in here that 5 we could look at to confirm that one way or the other? 6 A. It's all digital as far as I know. 7 Q. Okay. 8 The next set within this composite exhibit 9 1202247 through 253, what are these? What are these 10 documents? 11 A. This is ground truth data and the first 12 page is GPS output, PFINDER output. 13 Q. Okay. 14 And this is with regard to just these 15 seven sites? 16 A. That's correct. 17 Q. Okay. 18 Did you have any problems with the GPS 19 system during the inspection at 241 sites? 20 A. Other than the one I previously told you 21 about, as far as the navigation aspect. 22 Q. Okay. 23 And is there a particular name that's 24 referred to as, I think there is, where the data is 25 that it's not telling you the accurate location, what 74 1 is that? 2 A. Well, you either have raw GPS data or you 3 have differentially corrected GPS data. The raw can be 4 off by as much as a hundred meters. Differentially 5 corrected, we found we could get it down to three to 6 seven meters. 7 Q. And did you have that type problem when 8 you were doing the site visitation at the 241 sites? 9 A. As far as the inaccuracy? 10 Q. Right. 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Okay. 13 Now then, going on to the next document 14 which appears as Bates No. 1202254 through 2275, what 15 are these documents? 16 A. Again, it's GPS PFINDER output data along 17 with ground truth. 18 Q. Are these grouped into any particular 19 manner? For instance, are these grouped into classes? 20 A. It's probably grouped based on that day's 21 work that we went out, went out in the field. 22 Q. Oh, all right. Okay. 23 And if you would just then go through the 24 remainder of this exhibit and confirm that what we have 25 here then are similar GPS data sheets along with field 75 1 inspection reports, and that would be up through Bates 2 No. 1202500. 3 A. (Indicating.) 4 Q. Would -- through that Page 500, is that 5 the initial 210 sites? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Okay. 8 And drawing your attention to Bates No. 9 1202501 through 541, what would these be? 10 A. This has the additional -- let me see. It 11 looks like 32 sites. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. That we visited. 14 Q. All right. 15 Now, looking at these documents here in 16 regard to the additional sites for the cattail accuracy 17 assessment -- 18 A. Um-hum. 19 Q. -- does this help you determine what 20 classes were used or included in this? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Nothing in here would identify that? 24 A. You're asking -- well, could you repeat 25 the question? 76 1 Q. My question is, going back to -- on the 2 additional 31 or 32 sites for cattail accuracy, I'm 3 trying to see which of the 20 classifications were used 4 for that -- 5 A. All right. 6 Q. -- random selection of 31 or 32 sites. 7 A. Again, I think it's -- without looking at 8 the digital data, I believe it was cattail dense, not 9 moderate, sparse and cattail brush mixture. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. And you added sawgrass/cattail mix, so I'm 12 not sure about that. 13 Q. I didn't mean to add it. I was just 14 asking whether or not it was part of it. To the best 15 of your recollection it was Classes 10, 11, 12 and 13? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. What about 15, which is brush/cattail 18 mixture? 19 A. I don't think so so. It started with 10. 20 Q. And would your digital file show which 21 classes were identified or used? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Was that 31 or 32 additional sites that 24 were added on? 25 A. It looks like 32. 77 1 Q. Would it make a total of -- the total 2 would be 242 points then? 3 A. No, it's 241. If we went back and 4 counted, I think it was a total of 241 altogether. 5 Q. All right. All right. 6 What was the next step then? 7 A. Okay. 8 So we did the map accuracy assessment. 9 Q. Um-hum. 10 A. And we came up with the results from that. 11 And we -- at that point we wanted to see if we can 12 better those results by collapsing the -- within 13 species density characteristics that we were trying to 14 break out using the 20 class map. For instance 15 sawgrass, we had a dense, moderate to sparse. Well, 16 maybe the satellite imagery was having a hard time 17 breaking out with a species with that fine line between 18 graduations of density. So we combined all the 19 sawgrass and all the cattail into one class and came up 20 with a 12 class map. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. Final map. 23 Q. Would there be a particular document 24 related to that step? 25 A. Yes. It's part of this paper. It's all 78 1 explained. 2 Q. Other than -- well, I understand the 3 explanation of the paper. Are any specific documents 4 going through that work step that you've produced? 5 A. Not to my knowledge. Digitally there is. 6 Q. All right. 7 And any additional steps after that? 8 A. We then did a map accuracy assessment on 9 that final 12 class map using the same data set that we 10 used on the 20 class map and came up with the overall 11 map accuracy. 12 Q. Okay. 13 Now as I understand it, you had -- then 14 you had the computer rerun the map using 12 15 classifications; is that correct? 16 A. We collapsed the 20 class map to a 12 17 class map, yeah. 18 Q. The computer would generate a new figure 19 showing just the 12 classes? 20 A. That's correct. 21 Q. Now, again, if I understand your testimony 22 that you did not make any additional field visits, then 23 you just took the data that was from the 241 sites 24 visited and used that for accuracy of the final map 25 with the 12 classifications? 79 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. All right. 3 Any additional steps? 4 A. That about sums it up. 5 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 6 record.) 7 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 8 Q. Mr. Rutchey, I'm going to hand you a 9 number of documents, see if you could identify what the 10 documents relate to. 11 MR. FITZGERALD: Give him a hint, these 12 are his documents? 13 MR. KOBELINSKI: We'll use that 14 definition. 15 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 16 Q. Yeah, these are all from documents that 17 you've been looking at today in response to a duces 18 tecum that you've produced to us today in response to 19 the duces tecum; first of which is a laboratory 20 notebook, 1202643 through 688. 21 Do you know what that lab book relates to? 22 A. Yeah. This is the actual at the site that 23 we visited, it has in the left-hand margin the site 24 visited and what actually the pixels that were within 25 the imagery, 3 by 3 matrix of every one of them. 80 1 Q. This relates then to the paper we were 2 just discussing? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Okay. 5 MR. KOBELINSKI: Why don't you go ahead 6 and mark that. 7 (Thereupon, the document was marked 8 Rutchey Exb. No. 5 for Identification.) 9 MR. KOBELINSKI: I will identify this 10 better for the record. What we've marked as 11 Exhibit 5 -- is that correct? -- is a 12 laboratory notebook. It bears Bates Nos. 13 1202643 through 688. 14 BY MR. KOBELINSKI 15 Q. Is that your notebook, sir? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. All right. 18 Why don't we use just the first -- second 19 page of it which is 1202644 and it says Class 1. What 20 exactly does this reflect? 21 A. It almost jiggles my memory about old and 22 new, but I'll try to guess. 23 Um, basically this is the -- what was, 24 let's say, Site No. 4, for the ground truthing, what 25 the pixel data was, such as was it all -- in this case 81 1 it looks like on No. 4 that it was all one, which would 2 have been, it looks like sawgrass dense. So we had a 3 whole 3 by 3 dense homogeneous patch of dense sawgrass. 4 Q. Well, let me break this apart a bit, if I 5 can. On Page 1202644 in the left-hand margin outside 6 the grid there are two numbers written there, 4 and 5. 7 Do you see that? 8 A. Yeah. 9 Q. Is that site Site No. 4, is that what that 10 reflects? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. All right. 13 Now, following across this grid of 14 approximately 30 or 40 squares across, this is a grid? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And within that, just following the row 17 next to 4, interspersed in there are, in six places, 18 are the number 1 space, space, 1, space, space, 1, et 19 cetera. What exactly does that mean? Is there a 20 reason you have 6 columns there? How would I -- how do 21 you interpret this? 22 A. Okay. 23 I separated them out. If you look -- I'm 24 going further on so you can understand better. 25 Q. Okay. 82 1 A. If that's -- 2 Q. Okay. 3 Just give a Bates page and I'll turn 4 there. 5 A. 1202679. 6 Q. Done. 7 A. Okay. 8 Let's go -- let's go like 131 there in 9 upper right-hand site. Hold on one moment. 10 (Thereupon, a discussion was held off the 11 record.) 12 BY MR. KOBELINSKI: 13 Q. Okay. 14 131 appears to be on the upper right-hand 15 corner. 16 A. Okay. 17 That Site 131, the computer is telling us 18 within that location of Site 131, of the accuracy of 19 the site location, that every pixel showed to be 20, 20 which this case was periphyton. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. If you look at the column over there we 23 say yes, it's 20, what we determined it to be. We went 24 out in the field and they came up to be 6, so this one 25 was wrong. 83 1 Q. Okay. 2 So this actually classification No. 6? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. This is out in the field, okay. So 5 reading next to 131 I have a box with nine 20's in it. 6 A. Right. 7 Q. On those 9 pixels in the computer I would 8 find them all as Class No. 20 -- 9 A. Right. 10 Q. -- and that's why you have 20 written down 11 then in the third column. Over where 6 is is what 12 actually the field notes show? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. All right. 15 Now, just out curiosity, would that mean 16 to you that, according to your field observations, all 17 nine of those were Category 6 or is that the 18 predominant category within the nine? 19 A. What it means to me is that our computer 20 said that that 9 by 9 matrix was periphyton and our 21 field reconnaissance showed otherwise, in that it was 22 counted as wrong. 23 Q. Okay. 24 How would you go about determining whether 25 your field observations showed all 9 pixels to be 84 1 Category 6? 2 A. You go out in the field and you ground 3 truth it and you write, like on field sheets, the 4 notes. And if it's not periphyton it's something other 5 then. 6 Q. Perhaps I'm not explaining myself. 7 Is that final column, where you have 8 written 6, does that indicate that that -- that all 9 nine pixels would be Category 6, or would 6 be 10 predominant of these nine, for instance, five out of 11 the nine were 6, would 6 be written there or would 6 12 and 4 or whatever classification? 13 A. I believe it represents predominant 14 vegetation that was at that site. 15 Q. Okay. All right. 16 This is from the whole 141 site field