Next Article in Journal
Spatiotemporal Evolution of Evapotranspiration in China after 1998
Previous Article in Journal
Enhancing Water Literacy through an Innovative Television Series Focused on Wai Maoli: Hawai’i Fresh Water Initiative
Article
Peer-Review Record

Identification of Potential Sites for a Multi-Purpose Dam Using a Dam Suitability Stream Model

Water 2020, 12(11), 3249; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113249
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Water 2020, 12(11), 3249; https://doi.org/10.3390/w12113249
Received: 3 October 2020 / Revised: 13 November 2020 / Accepted: 18 November 2020 / Published: 19 November 2020

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Please see attached file.

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

A word file is attached that contains response to your all questions and suggestions. Thank you 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Dear Editor, 

Thank you for the opportunity to revise this paper! I recommend the following major revisions:

1. Please simplify the Fig.2 because it is very hard to follow each step of the worflow. Please add only the essential steps.
2. On which basis did you classified your slope and elevation layer in 5 classes? The same question for distance to streams.
3. Please add the information regarding the aerial images which were used for land cover classification! Also, why didn't use a more advanced classification technique than Maximum Likelihood?
4. Please discuss the issue of different resolution of your classified rasters! I ask you this because you used also the lithology which has not the same scale as the other layers!
5. Did you generated the contours at 5 m from SRTM DEM? If yes, why did you do this?
6. Please separate the Results from Discussions!
7. Please discuss the elements of novelty and also discuss the main drawbacks of your research!
8. Please provide some reasons for which your study deserves to be published in Water!

Author Response

A word file is attached that contains response to your all questions and suggestions. Thank you

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Revisions are OK

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for considering my comments! 

Back to TopTop