Dear Dr. Hackl,

as you have seen we have received the comments of both of the referees and you provided a very comprehensive answer during the public discussion phase.
Going through your answers to the referee comments it becomes quite clear how you plan to revise your nice piece of work. Therefore I encourage you to proceed (uploading of your revised work, including track-change and step-by-step answer to the referees comments, as it is already available in your supplementary files), the revised version will undergo another round of review as usual, whenever possible, to the original referees.
I wish you good success with your work, and thank you for your patience during the open review process,

kind regards,

Sven Fuchs (Editor NHESS)

Dear Dr. Hackl,

thanks for the efforts in revising your manuscript, which gained in clarity and conciseness.
As you can see we received another review of your current version, which also recommends publication in NHESS. The reviewer suggested some minor improvements which are related to previous works undertaken in the region of Chur and which may be helpful to support your arguments with respect to the economic prosperity of the region, and at the same time stresses the importance of your work. Furthermore, the aspect of climate change you raised can be further underpinned by respective works, as indicated.
Of course, these aspects can from my side only be seen as suggestions, above all because I was (co-)author of three of these works. You may wish to go through these publications and have a quick look if they are helpful for the envisaged readers of your work (and if you believe these can be included at the indicated locations). Another example is the work recently published by Unterrader et al. in the Journal “New Zealand Geographer”. Therefore I decided for “technical corrections” so that the manuscript can go to immediate production once you uploaded your final version.
I wish you good success with your further works!
Kind regards,

Sven Fuchs