Rehabilitation and Continuing Management of an Urban Lake Shoreline in Southeastern Minnesota, USA

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The work of Mundahl and Howard regarding lake Winona restoration and ecological status is of interest and brings valuable data to the current level of knowledge of the area.

Bellow are my suggestions for the authors:

The abstract should be shorten and made more concise in order to better reflect the aim of the paper and the results obtained. In its current state, the abstract is to "heavy" to read and does not reflect clearly the manuscript.

Introduction is good but lacks the end purpose of the manuscript. Please state in a last two sentences what is the aim of the presented paper.

Figure 1 is comprised out of two images, please mark them separately (be that A and B, or any other way).

The same for figure 3.

Although not a must, the common structure of an original article should be kept, therefore replace "6. Lessons Learned and Synthesis" with Conclusions, or be that Discussion and Conclusions.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Comments

Reviewer: Comment to Manuscript ID: land-3318680

Specific comments and questions:

1- The main topic of this article is urban lake shoreline restoration. Keywords should also be used—restoration of lake shorelines as keywords.

2- The authors mention in lines 45-46 that despite the success of many lakeshore restoration projects, many projects have yielded little results due to the failure of revegetation [15]; there is just one piece of literature related to the failed projects, citing one piece of literature, could you cite a few more, ending the reasons for the failures in detail, in highlighting the innovations that indicate the present study.

3- The authors mention that we are embarking on managing non-native and invasive species and re-establishing native vegetation along these shorelines; how does this differ from what has been done before, and what is the effect of this measure?

4- In the second part of the article, the author describes in detail how the study area was before and how it is now; could a few more pictures be added to Figure 1 to include the previous, relevant pictures about the lake? This would allow the reader to further understand the lake's previous and current condition through pictures.

5- The paper implemented many measures to restore and protect the lake shoreline's ecological environment through ecological restoration and control, enhancing its environmental function and landscape value, etc. Please add a conclusion section to summarize the conclusions reached in this study briefly.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx