Dear Authors,
as you have read and understood (in view of your responses to the comments received), the judgments of the two Referees seem somewhat split. However, I believe that addressing the issues raised by Reviewer #1 may, in many cases, also help to make the aims and the message of your study clearer to Revewer #2, who has raised issues on the usefulness of your study, which seem to me mostly originated by misunderstanding its scope, rather than by a complete disagreement (in fact, her recommendation is major revisions).
Hence, I invite you to submit a revised version of your manuscript, trying to address as much as possible the comments received by both the Referees.
I look forward to receiving the revised manuscript.
Best regards
Roberto Greco

Dear Authors,
the answers that you give to the issues raised by the Referee, and the relevant changes to the manuscript, indicate that you did your best to address the remaining issues raised. Hence, his/her judgement about this revised version is needed before I can make a decision abut the possible publication.
Best regards
Roberto Grreco

Dear authors,
I am pleased to inform you that the revised manuscript is accepted for publication.
Thank you for submitting your work to HESS.
Best regards,
Roberto Greco