Dear Authors:
Your original submission was evaluated by four experts in the sector, who provided interesting comments and suggestions for improvement, but also raised a few concerns. However, during the discussion step of the journal your preliminary reactions suggest that a suitable revision can be made.
I agree with the reviewers' comments and I would like to point out that three out of four have evaluated the scientific quality of your study and the presentation of the relevant results as fair/good or even poor. Allowing for these evaluations, I release your paper under major revisions and invite you to also specifically focus on improving the scientific and presentation quality of the revised version of your study. Please upload also a point-by-point reply to all of the reviewers' comments received so far. Be advised that another round of reviewers' evaluations might be required.

Dear Authors,
The revised version of your original submission is in a good shape now and also clarified most of the concerns raised during the previous referees' evaluations.
However, the additional round of appraisals also highlighted the need for a few further refinements as reported by the new referees' comments.
I think that the additional comments can definitely make your paper even clearer to a wider readership and therefore I suggest you should consider these comments. Should you disagree with some comments, please explain your position clearly in your rebuttal.
I look forward to receiving soon your revision together with the replies.

Dear Authors,
Allowing for your last replies to the additional referees' comments received, I think that your last version of the paper can now be accepted as it is for publication in HESS. Congratulations!
Nunzio Romano