Dear authors,

You have addressed the comments well and I am almost happy to accept it as it is now. I have only few minor issues left:
It seems that you do not include a discussion but at least some discussions are provided in the section 3 (“Results”). Please rename the section in “Results and Discussion” and check if you can include some more discussions in this section (e.g. more comparisons to existing studies with respect to the retreat of Imja Glacier, similar glacial lakes in the Himalaya). You could (just as a suggestion, it is also a matter of style) also move some of the information from the Introduction to the Discussion and discuss it with resepct to your results.
P. 2, L. 21f.: You present here the different mass balance estimates for Imja-Lhotse Shar Glacier and refer to the possibility of refinements of the mass balance estimate due to improved knowledge of the aqueous losses. This is a good and valuable information. However, please check if all the mentioned studies already consider the aqueous losses and, if possible, provide information how large the possible errors/improvements due to the improved bathymetry would be. I think this issue would fit better in the discussion section but it is your decision where you think this information would fit best.
You have now deleted the old Figure 6 where you presented the existing data about Imja Lake area. I think it would be valuable to keep and think it would be possible to illustrate it in a way so that the different information can be seen (e.g. with including a zoom for this parts where there are too many data existing). However, this is just a suggestion and you can also finally decide.

Please do not hesitate to ask in case you have any questions.

I am looking forward to your revised manuscript.

Best regards,

Tobias Bolch – TC Editor

Dear authors,
I am happy to accept your fine manuscript and thank you once again for choosing “Thy Cryosphere”.
I only ask you for the following:
Abstract L. 15: Please give either an uncertainty rage or write “about 52 m yr-1 … by ~0.04 km² yr-1”
Figure 1: Include the map source in the caption. It is hardly readable in the figure.
You do not need to acknowledge myself. If you want to keep nevertheless, please just write “the editor” as the name of the editor appears directly after the acknowledgements.
Best regards,
Tobias Bolch – TC Editor