Dear authors,

Please submit your revised manuscript which will then be sent for another round of reviews (to the same referees who indicated that major revisions are needed). I will consult the reviewers on whether you addressed all their key concerns and revised the manuscript to the level acceptable for publication.

Best regards,
Valentina

Dear authors,

Your revised manuscript was sent for another round of reviews (to the same referees who reviewed your first draft) as one of the referees asked for major revisions. I've now received the reviews (see bellow). Based on these comments, I ask you to implement the minor revisions and, subsequently, upload the revised manuscript which will then be accepted for publication.

Best regards,
Valentina

Comments from a referee:
The new version a of the MS and the response to reviewers
by Vincent et al fully satisfies the questions raised by me in the
previous review.

Although satisfied, I do have a few editorial suggestions of lesser significance:

Li 83 "Horizontal velocities have been obtained from the position of the bottom tip of accumulation stakes,"; rephrase, since it is not clear what bottom tip is. Is it the lowest part of the stake buried deep in snow, or the lowest part of the stake
sticking up from the snow surface at the time the survey was done?

Li 96 "GLONAS" should probably be GLONASS

Li 330 "correspond to an increase of 0.004 in density". What is the unit, % or mwe or kgm-3?

Li 331 "It is therefore unlikely that melting increase is responsible for the", consider to change this to "It is therefore unlikely that an increase in melting is responsible for the.."

Li 332 "..observed slight density increase that is may be rather linked to reduced snow accumulation.", consider to change this to "observed slight density increase which instead may be related to reduced snow accumulation."

Annex S1. Give units on the X-axis of the two graphs.