A Study on Identifying Priority Management Areas and Implementing Best Management Practice for Effective Management of Nonpoint Source Pollution in a Rural Watershed, Korea

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The abstract section repeats a whole paragraph (the first one, between lines 37 to 45) in the introduction section.  I recommend to summarize this paragraph in the abstract section.  The abstract should show the important findings in the research presented on this paper.

At the end of line 74, there are some numbers showing the surface area of the watershed. However, the decimal point is not showed correctly (it is written "10.7.06").  It is not clear what is the surface area in square kilometers (10.706, 107.06 or else).  This number must be corrected.

At the end of line 94, the authors mention the use of ArcView.  Did ArcView or ArcGis software use in the research? Or were original shapefiles created using specific software?  ArcView is an old version of the ESRI GIS software.  Therefore, it should be clarified in the paper.

Figure 1 should show some coordinate system (and other geographic information such as datum) to help worldwide readers locating study area.  In figure 1b, it is not clear what black straight lines mean in the figure context.

In line 153, it is written TABLE 9 in bold word with a dot a the end.  However, the following lines could not be related with that table.  The whole paragraph describes priority selection method for NPS management which is depicted in table 3 (below that paragraph).  Therefore the words TABLE 9 appears to be a mistake.

In line 224, it is written "thanan".  I think that correct form is "than an"

Table 7, 8 show a different FONT type than other tables.  This should be standardize.

In figure 7, I recommend to change the subtitles of each graphic.  As an example, subtitle 7a says "The point of the Number one".  I suggest "Validation/calibration Point Number 1 (Upstream area of the Songya Stream)" and so.

I recommend that FIGURE 9, between lines 283 and 284, should be moved to the next page, because the figure itself is in page 13 and title and subtitles are in page 14.  Therefore, it looks broken.

Figure 14 look a little fuzzy.  A best resolution figure should be included.

The widths of columns in table 11 should be better adjusted.  Some text in the columns could look better and row heights could be optimized.  The title of the table should be in the same page at the beginning of the table.  In addition, heading row could be repeated in every page where table is.

Author Response

I attached the file. 

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Authors must correct the manuscript:  

The abstract is too long. It is inappropriate to mention the same sentences in the Introduction part as well as in the Abstract (lines 9-14 and lines 37-...). The end of the sentence at the end of the abstract is not indicated.

When abbreviations are mentioned for the first time, they must be explained in full.

In Introduction part, some references are missing (for example, line 51, 60...).

Line 74- correct the area value.

Line 88 - it does not appear to be end of the sentence.

Line 119 - missing source.

Line 153 - at the beginning of the paragraph, Table 9 is mentioned???

A large number of tables and figures need to be corrected.

Technically correct table 3 and 5.

Table 4 - correct the second and third lines (it is blurry and not completed).

Figure 4 - the legend is not clearly visible.

Tables 7, 8 and 9 are very unreadable and unclear.

Figure 13 - uniform frame, edges.

Figure 14 is very blurry.

Make table 11 more clear and transparent.

Author Response

I attached the file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

-