33
disjointed. Part of this effort involves computer models that attempt to approximate
conditions in the Everglades by which so-called adaptive management decisions are
based (Gunderson and Light 2006; LeSchiava et al. 2013; Sklar et al. 2001). The
problem here is that ecological processes and natural environments are generally
poorly understood for pre-settlement conditions (see for example Finkl and
Restrepo-Coupe 2007, for a description of potential natural environments based on
soils). There are many examples of the unreliability of computer models (e.g.,
Pilkey and Pilkey-Jarvis 2007) and their application in the Everglades project may
do little to provide guidance for management decisions that are useful to solving
problems that plague the well being of the environment.
The other aspect of restoration efforts, with or without computer models and
numerical simulations, is that without a clear vision of what is being attempted the
project goals become a process rather than a destination. The process, from the
viewpoint of big government, is to feed money into the machine that is largely composed of government agencies, universities, and consultancies. The institutionalization of the projects thus becomes the new vision, to feed public and private research
groups that in turn help keep the economic wheels turning. Even though these are
the facts of life when dealing with large projects administered by a centralized or
totalitarian federal government (e.g., national agencies such as NOAA, EPA, NPS,
COE), the public is offered glowing reports of success to justify the expenditure of
large sums of money from the public purse. Yet, researchers struggle to show the
viability and success of their efforts by referring to indicator species that have
increased in numbers. The idea here is to represent the situation as successful
because certain fauna seem to be making a comeback from near extinction or a
severely degraded condition. Use of indicators (Doren et al. 2009a, b; Frederick
et al. 2008; Gaiser 2009; Mazzotti et al. 2008; Trexler and Goss 2008) to make arm
waving proclamations as to the success of the whole restoration effort are perhaps
overzealous, to say the least. Other methods are also used to assess restoration progress, as reported by Rutchey et al. (2008) in the case of vegetation mapping and by
Gwin et al. (1999) via wetland regulation through hydrogeomorphic classification.
As far as the process is concerned, the input of large sums of money to support
numerous institutions, the purpose becomes one of maintaining the status quo at any
cost. Government agencies and institutions become used to the inflow of cash for
research, administration, and oversight, and as such they never quite come to conclusions or definitive results. They instead always suggest or indicate that just a little
more research is required to get to the answer; that is, a solution of the problem. A
good analogy perhaps might be the industry that has been built up around cancer
research. It has long been rumored that solutions or cures for certain cancers have
been found but are buried or not made generally available to the public because a
cure curbs the industry (e.g., Trull 1993), which will do everything in its power to
continue to exist. Another analogy might be the status of political systems and terms
of individual politicians, both of which do whatever is necessary to ensure the survival and continuance of the status quo. That is to say, the end results justify the
means. All of this, whether agreeable to most or not, is part and parcel of the
socioeconomic- political system that exists today.
1 The Florida Everglades: An Overview of Alteration and Restoration
disjointed. Part of this effort involves computer models that attempt to approximate
conditions in the Everglades by which so-called adaptive management decisions are
based (Gunderson and Light 2006; LeSchiava et al. 2013; Sklar et al. 2001). The
problem here is that ecological processes and natural environments are generally
poorly understood for pre-settlement conditions (see for example Finkl and
Restrepo-Coupe 2007, for a description of potential natural environments based on
soils). There are many examples of the unreliability of computer models (e.g.,
Pilkey and Pilkey-Jarvis 2007) and their application in the Everglades project may
do little to provide guidance for management decisions that are useful to solving
problems that plague the well being of the environment.
The other aspect of restoration efforts, with or without computer models and
numerical simulations, is that without a clear vision of what is being attempted the
project goals become a process rather than a destination. The process, from the
viewpoint of big government, is to feed money into the machine that is largely composed of government agencies, universities, and consultancies. The institutionalization of the projects thus becomes the new vision, to feed public and private research
groups that in turn help keep the economic wheels turning. Even though these are
the facts of life when dealing with large projects administered by a centralized or
totalitarian federal government (e.g., national agencies such as NOAA, EPA, NPS,
COE), the public is offered glowing reports of success to justify the expenditure of
large sums of money from the public purse. Yet, researchers struggle to show the
viability and success of their efforts by referring to indicator species that have
increased in numbers. The idea here is to represent the situation as successful
because certain fauna seem to be making a comeback from near extinction or a
severely degraded condition. Use of indicators (Doren et al. 2009a, b; Frederick
et al. 2008; Gaiser 2009; Mazzotti et al. 2008; Trexler and Goss 2008) to make arm
waving proclamations as to the success of the whole restoration effort are perhaps
overzealous, to say the least. Other methods are also used to assess restoration progress, as reported by Rutchey et al. (2008) in the case of vegetation mapping and by
Gwin et al. (1999) via wetland regulation through hydrogeomorphic classification.
As far as the process is concerned, the input of large sums of money to support
numerous institutions, the purpose becomes one of maintaining the status quo at any
cost. Government agencies and institutions become used to the inflow of cash for
research, administration, and oversight, and as such they never quite come to conclusions or definitive results. They instead always suggest or indicate that just a little
more research is required to get to the answer; that is, a solution of the problem. A
good analogy perhaps might be the industry that has been built up around cancer
research. It has long been rumored that solutions or cures for certain cancers have
been found but are buried or not made generally available to the public because a
cure curbs the industry (e.g., Trull 1993), which will do everything in its power to
continue to exist. Another analogy might be the status of political systems and terms
of individual politicians, both of which do whatever is necessary to ensure the survival and continuance of the status quo. That is to say, the end results justify the
means. All of this, whether agreeable to most or not, is part and parcel of the
socioeconomic- political system that exists today.
1 The Florida Everglades: An Overview of Alteration and Restoration