Dear Authors,

After consideration of the reviewers' reports on your manuscript, the paper may be acceptable for publication in HESS after major revisions with further review by the editor and referees. This decision reflects the relevance of the climate impact assessment topic, balanced against the limitation of the submitted paper. I therefore invite you to submit a revised paper that addresses all of the reviewer comments.

In particular, I urge you to respond in depth to Reviewer 1's concern that "the authors don’t make it clear how the field is moved forward even if all three goals are achieved." and "As is, the study is appropriate for a climate impacts assessment journal, but the findings are insufficiently new to warrant publication in HESS." The reviewers currently rated the scientific significance as fair/poor which must be improved before publication is considered. The revised paper must make it clear how the paper contributes to the field with either new methodology, or with conclusions that are relevant/useful beyond a single study watershed.

Best wishes,
Hilary McMillan,
Editor

Dear authors,
Your manuscript has been re-assessed by a reviewer, and found suitable for publication after minor revisions. Please respond to the reviewer comment attached. We also received a late review of your manuscript (pdf attached). Please respond briefly to these comments and make any changes to improve your manuscript - however we do not require you to make further major revisions at this stage.
Thanks
Hilary