Response to commentary on “Effect of brush control on evapotranspiration in the North Concho River watershed using the eddy covariance technique” by Wilcox et al. (2010)

Excerpt

Notwithstanding the differing professional opinion of our colleagues, the authors of this article stand by our concluding statement that brush control offers great potential for increasing water yield in the Concho River Watershed. The commenting authors are not disputing our basic finding that decreases in tree cover and density decrease evapotranspiration; rather, they dispute our statement that these seemingly modest differences will translate to meaningful changes in water supply in this watershed. Hence, we find ourselves defending not the methods and findings of our research, but rather our assertion regarding the implications of our findings.

Beginning with the support for our position, it is for the most part still amply presented in the brush control planning, assessment, and feasibility study (UCRA 1999). Therein is provided the historical grassland vegetative setting of the watershed prior to the 1880s, the infestation by evasive shrubs and brush largely culminating by the late 1950s, and ample anecdotal evidence from numerous “old time” residents of perennial streamflow and permanent spring conditions ceasing in the North Concho River and its tributaries during the 1950s. Despite no notable pumping of the groundwater resources, evidence from water well measurements in the watershed is also provided of generally declining…