ABSTRACT
Fed up with the managers disregarding their new insights, they fonned a 'Science Strategy' , frequently holding workshops and exchanging models from the individual disciplines (i.e. biology, ecology and hydrology). These meetings of scientists were highly important, because this was the first time ever that scientific consensus was reached about the main 'stressors' of the Everglades 1 2. This was remarkable because, until then, there had been discord about the most basic issues, like the question whether the Everglades was getting wetter or drier. Central to the report 1 3 of the Science Strategy Group was: 'let' s not worry about the things we do not know. Let' s organize the knowledge we have in such a way that it is more effective.' 1 4 The group translated scientific insights into managerial tools: what can a manager do about these 'stressors' in the system? With these tools the Strategy Group infonned the managers of the responsible agencies: 'Look, here are the key stressors. On all these stressors there is scientific consensus' 1 5
Significantly, 'multi-modelling' was made possible for the first time. Models of biologists, hydrologists and ecologists were integrated. For the first time, questions could be answered like: What does a certain water level mean for endangered animal species A?
