Dear authors,
your paper has been revised by two reviewers. One reviewer suggested minor changes (however indicating some useful points for the improvement); the second reviewer raised major issues with some constructive indications to improve the work.
I also read your paper and the public responses; I'm satisfied with your replies and the work indeed is interesting; I think you should have a chance to propose a revised version of the work. Therefore I decided to reconsider this paper after major revisions.
In submitting your revised version, please provide a detailed list of the changes made to the text and a detailed list of your responses to the reviewers’ comments.
Please note that this editorial decision does not guarantee that your paper will be accepted for final publication in NHESS. A decision will be made when the revised version will be available and evaluated.
Best regards
Paolo Tarolli

Dear authors,
your paper has been further revised by two reviewers, who revised the article at the first stage of review. One reviewer suggested technical changes; the second reviewer appreciated your changes, but she/he raised again major issues with some constructive indications to improve the work.
I think you should improve the article following the suggestions by reviewer #2. Therefore I decided to reconsider this paper after major revisions.
In submitting your revised version, please provide a detailed list of the changes made to the text and a detailed list of your responses to the reviewers’ comments.
Please note that this editorial decision does not guarantee that your paper will be accepted for final publication in NHESS. A decision will be made when the revised version will be available and evaluated.
Best regards
Paolo Tarolli

Dear authors,
your article is now ready for publication.
Best regards
Paolo Tarolli