Two Reviewers have provided critical but constructive comments to the paper, which should be carefully addressed. The revised paper will undergo another round of external review.

Dear Authors,
The paper has received a number of additional comments from Referee #3, which I think will contribute to further improve the quality of your manuscript. I agree with the proposal of leaving out of this paper the parts about "adaptive water resource management framework", which are unclear. After reviewing the paper, I will perform an "Editor review".
Best wishes,
Giuliano Di Baldassarre

The paper was further improved, but there are still three points that should be addressed:
1) The adaptive water resource framework was only partly left out (fig. 7). It is still in the title and often repeated in the text, even in the title. I agree with Rev#3, if the approach is not sufficiently treated, any reference to it should be removed.
2) The paper show how human activities have altered the hydrological regimen and the magnitude of flood events. This paper focuses on how reduced flood pulses have an impact on the wetlands ecology. Yet, it could be worth mentioning whether such an impact has led to a reduction of flood losses for people and local economies. Much research has been done recently (e.g. socio-hydrology) in this trade off between the ecological benefits of hydrological variability and rotationally negative impacts of hydrological extremes.
3) Fig. 1 and 2 should be consistent. If there are technical issues, authors might even consider to remove one (or both) of them.

All comments were properly addressed. The paper can now be published. Congratulations!