Dear Authors,
Thank you for your responses to the two referees’ reports. Based on my own reading of the manuscript, I find this is a concise but interesting paper that fits the scope of HESS well and will be of interest to the community.
The two reviews are both quite favourable, but they also make some important points about comparing the effect of gap-filling in different types of sites (e.g. in different regions and hydrological regimes), providing contextualisation and implications of the work (its wider significance and transferability to other contexts), and comparing the models. Additionally, some of the discussion and assertions could be better supported by references, such as the statement that ‘it is well recognised that hydrological modelling is the best option’ (for gap-filling). See for instance papers describing the utility/efficacy of different gap-filling approaches (e.g. those discussed in https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.4954).
I would therefore like to invite you to upload a revised manuscript, incorporating the proposed changes and additions, and making any other modifications where you see fit.
I look forward to receiving the revised manuscript.
With best regards,
Louise Slater

Dear Authors,
Thank you for submitting your revised paper. I find the revisions have been undertaken consistently and am very happy to see this paper published.
Sincerely,
Louise Slater