Managing conflicts in the River of Grass

Chances are, you would not pack up and move to a new home without first researching the neighborhood, reviewing your finances, and maybe investigating schools nearby. Similarly, you would not buy the first car you find on a magazine cover without first reviewing the technical specifications, exploring your options, and perhaps taking a test drive. Even when making simple purchases online, you probably shop around, check out customer reviews, and scan seller feedback ratings.

Rarely do we act on impulse alone when faced with decisions. Rather, we typically start with a vision of what we want before gathering the necessary information, weighing our options, prioritizing our values, and evaluating possible tradeoffs. In making choices that range from lighthearted to life-changing, we use this commonsense strategy every day of our lives.

Environmental decision-making is no different. For decades, natural resource managers faced with complicated problems have made decisions by breaking them into smaller components that are easier to approach. And like our day-to day decisions, the process is ideally guided by a shared vision of the future. However, it can become complicated when multiple, seemingly disparate views on what the future should hold emerge. As Lewis Carroll once wrote, “If you don’t know where you are going, any road will get you there.”

Divining a vision of the future for the Florida Everglades and making supporting decisions is a complex undertaking. But unlike Alice thrust through the looking glass, we have tools and techniques to help us make sense of it all. The application of tools to help decision-making can move us closer to the successful restoration of this imperiled landscape.