November 13, 2024 Planning Board Special Meeting Transcript - WEHI

105 1 move on please. 2 Q I can press a little bit more. How far back 3 does this actually -- if you don’t know the foreground 4 width, how can you say how far back we’re looking in 5 the background? 6 A I did not give you an exact answer, I said, as I 7 stated, I can see a great distance. What that distance 8 is, I did not measure, but, it is comparable to this 9 other forest and then I tried to show -- I don’t know 10 why there’s two of -- 11 Q Well, stick with my question, please, I’m 12 just trying to get the dimensions -- 13 A Well, I’m trying to answer your question. The 14 difference is that in a healthier forest, this is not 15 this forest, there are four photographs here, try to 16 get the way you would do it. 17 Q This is the slides that says what a healthy 18 forest looks like. 19 A Correct. And these four photographs which were 20 taken by me, of another forest in New Jersey and to be 21 specific in Somerset County, New Jersey, a healthier 22 forest as you can see, looking through the aspect 23 ratio, is the same camera, so the aspect ratio is the 24 same, and you can see, I can’t see very well through 25 this forest. The less you can see, the more 106 1 undergrowth. The more undergrowth the healthier the 2 forest. 3 Q Mr. DeFeo, with respect, I’m not asking about 4 another forest, so if we can go back to the last slide. 5 Now, that slide, we’re looking at that slide on the 6 screen some distance, but, when we look at the printed 7 report, and you can look close up at the photograph, 8 there’s actually quite a large diversity of trees in 9 the background of the slide, aren’t there? 10 A Yes. Nothing in my report is commenting on the 11 diversity of speciation in that forest. 12 Q Right. No, no, I don’t mean speciation 13 necessarily, I’m sure there is a diversity of species 14 there. I’m referring to the width of the trees. If 15 you look in the background on the photograph as opposed 16 to foreground, there are hundreds of trees represented 17 of many different diameters according to the photo, 18 isn’t that true? 19 A Yes. 20 Q But, didn’t you choose a photograph 21 intentionally showing an empty foreground just to 22 illustrate the thesis of a dying forest? 23 A There was no presumptive element in trying to make 24 a point other than to show you if I took pictures 25 throughout this forest they would all have a similar 107 1 type of depth and

ing forest? 23 A There was no presumptive element in trying to make 24 a point other than to show you if I took pictures 25 throughout this forest they would all have a similar 107 1 type of depth and perception. 2 Q Well, I’m looking at this very picture in the 3 printed out version of your report and after the, you 4 know, first inch and a half is run, you can look at the 5 back of it and you can see a vast number of trees and 6 many of them actually are many different dimensions. 7 So, isn’t it fair to say that the foreground does not 8 represent accurately even this part of the forest? 9 A No, you’re conclusion is incorrect. 10 Q Okay. 11 A It’s factually incorrect. 12 Q You would agree that a large forest is 13 variable and has many different elements to it, doesn’t 14 it? 15 A All forests are valuable and have many different 16 elements, yes, I would agree. 17 Q So, why on earth did you give us one single 18 photograph of one small area of this forest to 19 demonstrate to a thesis that it’s a forest that will 20 not regenerate? 21 A It is simply meant to demonstrate it by a single 22 image to show and compare to others what you would see 23 in an unhealthy forest. 24 Q But, we have no way of knowing, do we, that 25 the rest of the forest looks like the foreground here 108 1 because you’ve offered no other photographs, isn’t that 2 true? 3 A I’ve offered my testimony to support that. 4 Q So, we have your testimony supported by no 5 notes or records and no photographs, is that fair to 6 say? 7 A You have my testimony supported by my reports 8 which I think are now three or four and my testimony on 9 three, at least three separate occasions. 10 Q And we have no documentary evidence other 11 than that photograph and the histogram, isn’t that 12 correct? 13 A The documentary evidence is my report and the 14 photographs contained and the tree study. 15 Q If this condition of the foreground is so 16 widespread, why haven’t you showed us photographs of 17 different parts of the forest? Wouldn’t that address 18 the issue without leading to speculation and doubt? 19 Wouldn’t a scientist do that and document properly 20 their thesis? 21 A There’s no need to show you multiple photographs 22 to take up multiple space in a report of this nature 23 because in my professional opinion and in my 24 professional observations which I’ve testified to and 25 stated in my

ou multiple photographs 22 to take up multiple space in a report of this nature 23 because in my professional opinion and in my 24 professional observations which I’ve testified to and 25 stated in my report, this is essentially what the