Abstract
This study is a rhetorical analysis of communication design in the Amalga Barrens wetlands controversy during the 1990s. The Bridgerland Audubon Society (Bridgerland) in Cache Valley, Utah, was able to influence a change in public policy that removed the unique wetlands from consideration as a possible reservoir site for water taken from the Bear River. The group tried two times to influence public policy. The first effort failed because the group relied too much on lobbying. The second effort succeeded when the group developed a grassroots communication design. Bridgerland led a successful grassroots effort by (1) educating the public, (2) establishing credibility, (3) proposing an alternative solution, (4) making decisions based on data, (5) recognizing common ground, (6) getting the media involved, (7) building on what has been done before, and (8) practicing civility. Bridgerland's experience may be helpful to other environmental groups that are trying to lead efforts in their own communities. Although the communication design presented cannot be generalized to fit all groups and situations, it may serve as a starting point.