Forest Cover Change and the Effectiveness of Protected Areas in the Himalaya since 1998
, Pei Zhao 3, Qiong Chen 3, Shicheng Li 4, Lanhui Li 5, Linshan Liu 1,* and Yili Zhang 1,2,6,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
This is review of the manuscript “Forest cover change and the effectiveness of Protected Areas in Himalayas since 1998” by Changjun Gu submitted for publication in sustainability. I feel that the content of this MS is interesting, but the set question c) (Lines 86-87) is not well discussed. I recommend that this MS not be accepted without major revision.
Many abbreviations make it difficult to read overall.
Line 151: Replace “Vegetation” into “Water”.
Lines 258-259: This sentence is different from the result in Table 1. Is “1998-2018” not “1998-2008”?
Line 265: Replace “Table 1” into “Table 2”.
Line 271: Replace “100m” into “1000m”.
Line 272: Replace “Table 1” into “Table 2”.
Lines 281: The change in “small core” and “medium core” has a small absolute value and cannot be read from Figure 7.
Lines 315: The layout of “LC” and “MC” in Figure 9 should be upside down.
Line 342: There is one unnecessary horizontal rule in Table 3.
Lines 384-438: I think that Section “4.1” is mostly general citation with many references, and the main issue obtained from the data does not reach the reader.
Lines 465-467: I can’t really understand this sentence of “Building the buffer-zone around the PA seems to be important and necessary”.
Lines 469-470: In this study, can you numerically show how much the cloudy conditions and topographic shadows were limited by?
Lines 488-489: This sentence is the same expression as Lines 392-393.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
My comments are in the enclosed PDF file.
Comments for author File: Comments.pdf
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript has been revised well. I think this manuscript will be acceptable after some corrections have been done.
Line 49: Replace “Km2” into “km2”. Check carefully for similar misspellings.
The manuscript I received contains two different tables as Table 1, so make sure they are correct.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
There are still mistakes in the writing that need to be corrected. The authors have made efforts, but all the mistakes have not been corrected.
Author Response
Please see the attachment
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
