Dear authors,

thank you for the revised manuscript. All queries have been addressed and the manuscript is ready for publication. I am impressed by the high quality of writing; reading the paper I have not found a single language problem or typo. However, I do have a small suggestion you may want to consider: the paragraph at the end of page 14, starting on line 293, may be better placed in the discussion, as it goes beyond the mere presentation of results and contains elements of interpretation. Please consider moving it into a suitable location in the discussion. The point is minor and the organisation works even if you decide not to follow this suggestion.

I have decided on technical corrections. Once you upload the revised version, the manuscript will go straight to production, without another editorial screening.

Thanks and best wishes, Jens Turowski

Dear authors,

I am happy to confirm acceptance of your paper for publication in esurf (and I apologize for the delay in getting this decision to you). The two reviewers and the Associate Editor (AE) all viewed your submission positively, and it appears that you have diligently and thoughtfully taken on board the suggestions of the reviewers — as well as providing a manuscript in overall very good shape, as the AE notes. I expect your paper will make an important contribution to understanding of channel morphology and of the role for large wood in geomorphic systems.

I have noted a few minor suggestions below. You might consider making these adjustments before uploading the final version of your manuscript, or during proof correction. I also encourage you to think carefully about the AE's suggestion of moving the text starting at line 293, though I leave that decision to you.

Thank you for choosing esurf for your work, and I hope you consider publishing in this venue again in the future!

Josh


Line 38: It seems a little unusual at this point in the Introduction to bring the text to focus on "streams included in this study" rather than remaining general, so you might consider keeping a more general perspective (e.g., "In many settings, including those considered in this study, ..."

Lines 115: standard deviations in what? I assume this is discharge, but might help to specify "standard deviations in discharge smaller than their mean"

Methods section in general: you jump between present and past tense; it would be better to keep this consistent

Line 122: do you mean "including AT the GPS points in Table 1"?

Table 1:
-- "GPS" might be better stated as "lat/long", also should note that the is in degrees
-- the for baneful discharge heading, the m3/s should have superscript 3
-- units for area are presumably km2, not km3

Line 134: criterion, not criteria

Line 154-155: I was curious how long these stream segments typically were?

Line 170: c is not a parameter in the equation w=aQ^b, so probably better to leave this out here and specify at line 176 instead?

Line 176: if you say here at c and b are constants, shouldn't you include a, too?

Figure 1 caption
-- "are have" isn't correct (presumably you mean just "have"?)
-- it might help readers to specify which of these is spring fed and which is runoff fed

Figure 2 caption
-- Google should be capitalized
-- remove "from" before 50-90°?

Line 222: just "imagery were clear"?

Lines 228-235: I was surprised to find this text here, because you had discussed these two systems earlier, at lines 193-200. Is there merit in considering moving the text at 228-235 up so that it brings together the discussion of these two systems? That would also mean switching the order of Figures 3 and 4, which also makes some sense to me.

Line 246: "When" should not be capitalized

Figure 5: this is blurry in the version of the manuscript that I have; please just double check when you receive the proofs that this (and all of the other figures) appear clearly

Line 286: extra space before 36%

Line 287: Do you mean that models 1 and 2 resemble model 4? Otherwise this logic is not completely clear to me, with reference to the prior sentence.

Line 305: what does "time of LW" mean?

Line 332: either make point cloud one word (as at line 328) or two words, as here

Line 337: no comma after El Tatio streams

Thank you for providing the data via GitHub!