Dear Jozef Šupinský,

thank you for submitting your manuscript to TC. In general, all three Referees found your paper well-suited for the journal. However, two of the Referees have pointed to several major aspects to be improved, as well as to multiple minor corrections. Therefore, I would like to encourage you to address and incorporate their remarks, and resubmit a revised version of the manuscript for further editorial evaluation.

Best regards,
Evgeny Podolskiy

Dear Jozef Šupinský,

thank you for submitting the revised version of your manuscript.

Based on results of the second round of review by the two referees, and my own reading, I would like to invite you to incorporate a number of minor corrections (technical- and language related) for improving the readability of the paper. This was pointed by the Referee #1 and I also find that there is a strong need for that.

You will find my detailed comments in the attachment (integrated directly into the most recent version of your manuscript and easily seen with freely available Adobe Acrobat Reader).

Best regards,
Evgeny Podolskiy

Dear Jozef Šupinský,

thank you for incorporating my editorial comments. Nevertheless, please, also consider the following technical corrections as you prepare your final files.

Last sentence of Abstract:
You have made a significant effort to integrate meteorological observations and related discussion into the revised manuscript. Moreover, you start your Abstract by proposing that "Ice caves can be considered as an indicator of the long-term changes in the landscape." However, none of this is reflected in the Abstract, especially in the last sentence, which says: "The presented analysis of the inter-seasonal dynamics of the ice volume demonstrates that there has been a significant decrement of ice in the monitored period." In my opinion, this is somewhat unfinished, because it leaves the reader wondering why, e.g., due to a climate change and warming? I understand that at this point it is difficult to say given relatively short-duration of your measurements and, indeed, there is no need to introduce speculations. However, to avoid this unfinished-phrase feeling, I invite you to think of the most meaningful phrase to close the Abstract. Say,

"The presented analysis of the inter-seasonal dynamics of the ice volume demonstrates that there has been a significant decrement of ice in the monitored period. However, further long-term observations are necessary to clarify the mechanisms behind this change."

p. 2
repeatedly and, reliably.
repeatedly, and reliably.

Fig. 5 caption
generating of time-series
->generating time-series

p. 13
I still have a difficulty to understand this sentence ("were" is a verb to which nouns?):

"Selecting the points representing the cave ceiling, we derived the planes and normals of the plane centroids were determined according to the same parameters as in the phase 4."

-> should it be something like:

"Through a selection of the points representing the cave ceiling, we derived the planes and normals of the plane centroids, which were determined according to the same parameters as in the phase 4." ?

p. 14
included in to the computation.
-> included {into}...

p. 23
"Our research was based on observations from in the middle of the 20th century ..."
Since, you do not have old records in your own analysis, I suppose, you mean:
"Our research was inspired by the observations made in the middle of the 20th century ..."

Best regards,
Evgeny Podolskiy

Dear Jozef Šupinský,

thank you for incorporating all previously suggested revisions. I am pleased to accept the final version of your manuscript for its publication in The Cryosphere.

Thank you for submitting your work to the journal.

Best regards,
Evgeny Podolskiy