Quo Vadis Lakes Azuei and Enriquillo: A Future Outlook for Two of the Caribbean Basin’s Largest Lakes
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The topic proposed is a very common issue in water resources management of many lakes. Generally, the problem is low level (for example Aral Lake, Trasimeno Lake, Urmia Lake) in this case the main problem is the flood level.
These are my observations:
- in the introduction you can expand your considerations also to bibliography of other lakes case study;
- equation (4) is not clear, “:” ???, “b” ??? You must explain it here.
- Row 155 “Data from Figs 2 and 3 were converted to yearly averages time series as shown in Fig. 4”, These figures has different time series, this affirmation is not correct.
- References number [76] and [77] are not correct (row 175)
- Table 1 is for Enriquillo Model or Azuei?
- Section 2 is very confused and so very difficult to read (two model description and two calibration, validation and …….. must be very clear!)
- Rows 741-749 are a sort of summary, they are not useful in discussion, can be deleted.
Some others minor remark:
- Row 10: DR must be changed in Dominican Republic, I suppose.
- Row 14: “+” !?
- Rows 19-20: you say “3 different scenarios”, then you use only a) and b). I think that you can delete a) and b), and explain better this part.
- Rows 98: you repeat two times “finally”
- Rows 104-109: This part has different font!
- Rows 154-155: Lines not well formatted.
- Row 216: equation number is (5)
- Row 461, 496 and 574: reference is wrong.
- Row 629: the range of references in very large [48,68], it is not very significance.
- Rows 673-724: there are a lot of mistakes in write Km2 and Km3
Author Response
please see attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
The article presents the original data of the study of the development of the studied lakes, depending on the possible climatic scenarios. The result, at first glance, is discouraging. Since according to the author's calculations, while maintaining the current climatic parameters, a sharp increase in the volume and level of lakes is predicted. At the same time, under other scenarios of warming and increasing/decreasing the number of cyclones, a sharp decrease in the volume and water level of the studied lakes is predicted. It is not entirely clear why the volume and level of the lakes increased so dramatically between 2003 and 2016, because during these years there was also warming?
Author Response
please see attached file
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Dear authors, you have done a great job in developing a model and numerical calculation of the hydrological regime of lakes under various scenarios of climate change. Interestingly, the reaction of the lakes is exactly the opposite - from an increase in level and an increase in volume while maintaining the current climatic conditions to a decrease in level and volume in all other scenarios of climate change. At first glance, this result is discouraging. However, I think that the main result is not that the uncertainty of the hydrological regime of the lakes is obvious, but that a model has been developed that makes it possible to calculate different scenarios for the development of events.
In the discussion, you pointed out all the possible options for further improving your calculations.
I wish you success in your future work with the model.
I can recommend the manuscript for publication in its current form.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please attached rebuttal.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Dear Authors,
I appreciate your work in the paper revision. Now the methodology and results are clear and better described. Check the work carefully for some possible typos (for example there are two figure 1 and row 388 is not Figure 1).
Best wishes for your future studies.
