A synthesis of stream restoration projects within the US estimated that, on average, at least $1 billion was spent annually between 1990 and 2004 on stream restoration (Bernhardt et al., 2005). However, in comparison to upland best management practices, there is relatively little research on the effectiveness of stream restoration to improve the physical, chemical, and/or biological integrity of stream systems. There are many reasons for this lack of science-based research: multiple interdependent variables control stream functions, biological processes cannot be scaled for laboratory studies, and the response time of stream systems is typically much longer than human planning or funding horizons (Shields et al., 2003). All of these factors combined make scientifically defensible stream restoration research difficult and costly. As a result, the practice of stream restoration has far outpaced the science. My research group is currently investigating the conditions under which stream restoration projects "fail" with the long term goal of improving the overall application, design, and review of stream restoration projects.