Dear authors,
the comments made by the two referees have been very positive and highlight both the quality and the relevance of your study – as an example of a good match between research and applied interests expressed by stakeholders (in this case the effect of a restoration project in the Rohrschollen area, geared towards the reactivation of alluvial processes, such as surface-subsurface water exchanges). Some issues will need to be addressed though before final publication of your manuscript. Please consider in the introduction to include a brief discussion of the current state of knowledge on hyporheic processes / mechanistics in the Rohrschollen area (e.g. based on prior work) and how the presented study is geared to improve this understanding. Another important aspect relates to the definition of either testable hypotheses or a justification of a more exploratory driven approach for your work. Also, you may need to discuss the role of ET in the presented modelling work (especially why it can a priori be considered marginal). A final important point relates to hydraulic conductivity and how it is reproduced/approached in your modelling exercise (and how sensitive model outputs may be to this parameter).
Based on your responses prepared to the referees’ comments, I am confident that you will be able to address them in due time and submit a revised version of your manuscript. Please make sure to also consider minor points that may have been identified by the referees.
I look forward to receiving the revised version of your manuscript.
Best regards,
Laurent Pfister

Dear authors,

thank you for submitting the revised version of your manuscript. Considering the changes and responses to the referee's comments that you have provided, I have the pleasure to inform you that our contribution can now be further processed towards publication in HESS. Prior to that, I would ask you to carry out a few technical corrections. Please consider the points here below (by simple comparison to the text in your revised manuscript):

465 The lack of data suggests that perfect accuracy cannot be expected, …

466 … between the size of measurement supports and model resolution is the main reason for
What does ‘measurement supports’ exactly mean here ?

468 …, we suggest that the quality of model results does not relate to the fact that the model accurately represents data over a single scenario, but rather to the fact that it roughly represents data over multiple different scenarios (events). Unfortunately, we only had one single set of TIR imagery at our river reach.

563 As already mentioned, the short-term behavior of the hydrosystem in response to flood events

566 The exploration of injection scenarios …

568 … simulations, could for example inform on the number and intensity of flood events needed to …

I am looking forward to see your manuscript published in HESS. Thank you for considering our journal for publishing your research results.

Best regards,

Laurent Pfister