THIS is a plaace where u can experimnt and make mistakes

Questions for inquiry:
Two questions should be asked at the very beginning of the discussion:

What does it mean to say that Rosgen's approach "works" or "doesn't work"? How is "success" or "workability" assessed?

What does "restoration" mean"? What is it that is to be "restored"? How is the condition to be "restored" defined? And who is entitled to define it?


Discussion within CAGS, including consultation and dialogue with experts holding diverse or conflicting positions, covering as far as possible the range of positions found among experts. These should include both academic experts and consultants and practitioners in the extra-academic field of stream restoration and STS experts as well. STS expert could act as facilitator as well. A consequence of this action will be the need to establish parity of participation and of legitimacy of knowledge claims for all participants (including experts and CAGS members).

Question for inquiry:

If Rosgen's approach is used as part of a strategy of "adaptive environmental management", does it, and to what extent, create "path dependency" within the process, that is, do steps taken at a given moment foreclose some choices and allow others, and generate irreversibilities? Would, for instance, "upstream" intervention to limit or eliminate sources of pollution, as suggested by a CAGS member, be posiible or compatible with that approach?

blah de blah

Why experiment with the sandbox? Or should the question be, "Why not experiment with the sandbox?"