Continually improving management by learning from the outcomes of operational programs designed to experimentally compare selected policies or practices, by evaluating alternative hypotheses about the system being managed.
Click on the image to the left to see a larger version
  
       
    AM Cycle 1:
Baseline gravel rehabilitation performed 1990-1998 by EBMUD. 		 
       
  AM Cycle 2:
1999 & 2000 sites used “complex structure” design approach. 1999 site design compared against 4 alternatives using physical habitat and sediment erosion criteria implemented in a 2D model.
Click on the image to the left to see a larger version

Conclusions
1. An off-the-shelf 2D modeling package can effectively compare alternative scenarios and distinguish design features that enhance physical habitat from those that are counterproductive.

2. Ad hoc gravel replenishment yields highly patchy habitat conditions that are less gravel-efficient and more likely to erode than alternatives designed with the aid of the 2D model 		 
       
  AM Cycle 3:
2001 site designed using an interdisciplinary rehabilitation design framework drawing from geomorphology, aquatic biology, civil engineering, and physics.
Click on the image the left to see a larger version		  
       
  AM Cycle 4:
2002 site designed with improved SHIRA framework.
Click on the image to the left to see the AM Cycle 4 flowchart		  
       
  AM Cycle 5:
2003-2004 site designed with up-to-date SHIRA framework.
Click on the image to the left to see the AM Cycle 5 flowchart