The authors have adequately addressed the reviewer's comments and the paper should be recommended for publication pending some minor revisions, outlined below.

Firstly and most importantly, because this special issue encompasses a readership from many domains, I think it would be useful for the authors to include one or two more figures which illustrate the concepts and procedures in this contribution. For example, for one of their study areas they could include a map-view illustration of the delineation of basins, hillslope patches, channel networks, hilltop points and their associated flowpaths, etc. Another example could be a map-view of the hillslopes/basins included/excluded in by the filtering in 6.2.2. These are suggestions and I leave the authors to choose the most appropriate figure(s) to illustrate their methodology.

In implementing reviewer #2 change to "data are", the authors have neglected to adopt the plural in their other uses of the word "data", e.g. "the data plots", rather than "the data plot", I have tried to outline this in the commented-up PDF, but encourage the authors to double-check for consistency themselves.

I have spotted that in two of the figures, the plots appear in an order which is different to that outlined in the caption and the text (Figs.8 & 9), as this issue was outlined also by reviewer2 for another figure, I encourage the authors to make sure this ordering-issue is fixed in the final version.

Other minor suggestions are given in the commented PDF.

Thank you for contributing to the ESurf special issue on Frontiers in Geomorphometry and for dealing efficiently with referee comments and AE feedback. I look forward to seeing your work published as is.
Niels Hovius