The global spread of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems has prompted population control efforts to mitigate negative impacts on native species and ecosystem functions. Removal programs that optimally allocate removal effort across space and time offer promise for improving invader suppression or eradication, especially given the limited resources available to these programs. However, science-based guidance to inform such programs remains limited. This study leverages two intensive fish removal programs for nonnative green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) in intermittent streams of the Bill Williams River basin in Arizona, USA, to explore alternative management strategies involving variable allocation of removal effort in time and space and compare static versus dynamic decision rules. We used Bayesian hierarchical modeling to estimate demographic parameters using existing removal data, with evidence that both removal programs led to at least a 0.39 probability of eradication. Simulated alternative management strategies revealed that population suppression, but not eradication, could be achieved with reduced effort, and that dynamic management practices that respond to species abundance in real time can improve the efficiency of removal efforts. High removal frequency and program duration, including continued monitoring after zero fish were captured, contributed to successful population control. With management efforts struggling to keep pace with the rising spread and impacts of invasive species, this research demonstrates the utility of quantitative removal models to help improve invasive removal programs and robustly evaluate the success of population suppression and eradication.