DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Documentation Union Glacier 2013-14

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ANTARCTIC LOGISTICS & EXPEDITIONS ADVENTURE NETWORK INTERNATIONAL Environmental Documentation Union Glacier 2013-14 Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions LLC Adventure Network International Inc 3478 South Main Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84115 USA Tel: +1 (801) 266 4876 Fax: +1 (801) 266 1592 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.antarctic-logistics.com E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.adventure-network.com ALE Environmental Documentation Union Glacier, 2013 January 2014 Update Contents Multi-Year IEE of Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions Activities-2013 Update ................ 3 Vehicle Expedition to Leverett Glacier Supplementary Information 2013 ................. 77 Fuel Caching by Airdrop Supplementary Information 2013 ..................................... 83 National Science Foundation Waste Management Permit Application ...................... 90 WMP ACA 2011-WM-002 M1............................................................................... 101 Advance Notification .......................................................................................... 103 DOS Determination, August 21, 2013 .................................................................. 109 Cover image: Kenn Borek Air Twin Otter DHC6-300 landing at Union Glacier © Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions LLC 2014 No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without the prior written permission of Antarctic Logistics and Expeditions LLC Page 2 of 109 ANTARCTIC LOGISTICS & EXPEDITIONS LLC Submission to the US Environmental Protection Agency Multi-Year Initial Environmental Evaluation of Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions Activities 2013 Update v3 ANTARCTIC LOGISTICS & EXPEDITIONS LLC 3478 South Main Street Salt Lake City, UT 84115 USA Tel: +1 (801) 266 4876 Fax: +1 (801) 266 1592 E-mail: [email protected] Web: www.antarctic-logistics.com Page 3 of 109 ANTARCTIC LOGISTICS & EXPEDITIONS LLC Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions Environmental Documentation 2013 NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY This Initial Environmental Evaluation is submitted by Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions LLC to the US Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Federal Activities, to meet the requirements of Article 8 and Annex I of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty and the provisions of 40 CFR Part 8, “Environmental Impact Assessment of Nongovernmental Activities in Antarctica; Final Rule”. The IEE is a multi-year application, as provided in Section 8.4(e) of the Environmental Protection Agency's Final Rule at 40 CFR Part 8, and contains details of ALE’s proposed activities in Antarctica for the five year period from the 2010–11 to the 2014–15 season. Advance Notification will be provided to the US State Department and an application to the National Science Foundation for a Multi-Year Waste Management Permit will be submitted. ALE is a Member of the International Association of Antarctica Tour Operators. 1.1 Description of the Proposed Activity Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions LLC (ALE) proposes to offer standard programs, such as South Pole Flights, Mt Vinson, Ski South Pole All the Way, Last Degree, Ski Antarctica, etc., to the tourist market, and proposes to support expeditions that wish to travel in these areas. ALE also offers support to National Operators and peer-reviewed scientific expeditions. Large transport aircraft will be used for intercontinental flights between Punta Arenas, Chile and naturally formed, blue-ice runways at the Ellsworth Mountains. Ski aircraft will be used for transport within Antarctica. 1.2 Alternatives Five alternatives to the proposed activities have been examined and assessed for their likely environmental impacts: Establishment of Permanent Facilities Changes to Itineraries Changes in Intensity and Duration of Site Visits Changes to type of aircraft and vehicles used Don't Go Alternative All these alternatives were rejected for environmental, logistic or commercial reasons. 1.3 Assessment of Potential Impacts Likely impacts resulting from the proposed activities have been assessed, including emissions to air; fuel & oil spills; domestic waste water; solid waste; noise; physical disturbance; introduction of alien species and translocation of diseases; associated and dependent ecosystems. Cumulative impacts of the proposed activities are considered. 1.4 Minimization and Mitigation Measures to minimize and mitigate adverse impacts of the proposed activities are described. Potential impacts will be minimized by strict adherence to Antarctic Treaty Measures, Resolutions and Recommendations, the U.S. Antarctic Conservation Act, and IAATO guidelines. Standard procedures have been prepared and minimization will be further enhanced by contracting qualified staff, who will receive thorough training, client briefings, low client to guide ratios, and careful monitoring. 1.5 Conclusion Direct, indirect and cumulative impacts of the proposed activities and alternatives are considered. It is concluded that the proposed activities, provided minimization and mitigation measures are followed, will have no more than a minor or transitory impact upon the Antarctic environment. Page 4 of 109 ANTARCTIC LOGISTICS & EXPEDITIONS LLC Antarctic Logistics & Expeditions Environmental Documentation 2013 Contents NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY ........................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Description of the Proposed Activity ................................................................................. 4 1.2 Alternatives ................................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Assessment of Potential Impacts ..................................................................................... 4 1.4 Minimization and Mitigation ............................................................................................. 4 1.5 Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 4 1. Contact Details ...................................................................................................................... 8 2. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Environmental Documentation ......................................................................................... 8 2.2 Consolidation of Environmental Documentation ................................................................. 8 2.3 Legislation, Standards and Guidelines............................................................................... 8 2.4 Site Coordinates and Acronyms ....................................................................................... 9 3. Proposed Activities—General Information ................................................................................. 9 3.1 Union Glacier Blue-Ice Runway ........................................................................................ 9 3.2 Duration of ALE’s Activities............................................................................................ 11 3.3 Extent of ALE’s Activities ............................................................................................... 13 3.4 Operational Overview ................................................................................................... 13 3.5 Camp Overview ........................................................................................................... 14 3.6 Runways ..................................................................................................................... 16 3.7 Location of Main Activities ............................................................................................. 18 3.8 Aircraft ....................................................................................................................... 21 3.9 Flights to and from Antarctica ....................................................................................... 22 3.10 Flights within Antarctica................................................................................................ 23 3.11 Vehicles and Other Combustion Engines ......................................................................... 24 3.12 Fire safety Equipment .................................................................................................. 25 3.13 ALE’s Environmental Policy ............................................................................................ 25 3.14 Policies and Standing Procedures ................................................................................... 26 3.15 Operator versus Contractor ........................................................................................... 26 3.16 Search and Rescue, and Medical Evacuation ................................................................... 28 3.17 Fuel, Caches and Fuelling ............................................................................................. 29 3.18 Waste Collection and Disposal ....................................................................................... 30 3.19 Renewable Energy Sources ........................................................................................... 32 3.20 Compliance with Protected Areas, Management Plans and Guidelines ................................ 32 4. Clients and Staff .................................................................................................................
Recommended publications
  • University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan GEOLOGY of the SCOTT GLACIER and WISCONSIN RANGE AREAS, CENTRAL TRANSANTARCTIC MOUNTAINS, ANTARCTICA

    University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan GEOLOGY of the SCOTT GLACIER and WISCONSIN RANGE AREAS, CENTRAL TRANSANTARCTIC MOUNTAINS, ANTARCTICA

    This dissertation has been /»OOAOO m icrofilm ed exactly as received MINSHEW, Jr., Velon Haywood, 1939- GEOLOGY OF THE SCOTT GLACIER AND WISCONSIN RANGE AREAS, CENTRAL TRANSANTARCTIC MOUNTAINS, ANTARCTICA. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1967 Geology University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan GEOLOGY OF THE SCOTT GLACIER AND WISCONSIN RANGE AREAS, CENTRAL TRANSANTARCTIC MOUNTAINS, ANTARCTICA DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University by Velon Haywood Minshew, Jr. B.S., M.S, The Ohio State University 1967 Approved by -Adviser Department of Geology ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report covers two field seasons in the central Trans- antarctic Mountains, During this time, the Mt, Weaver field party consisted of: George Doumani, leader and paleontologist; Larry Lackey, field assistant; Courtney Skinner, field assistant. The Wisconsin Range party was composed of: Gunter Faure, leader and geochronologist; John Mercer, glacial geologist; John Murtaugh, igneous petrclogist; James Teller, field assistant; Courtney Skinner, field assistant; Harry Gair, visiting strati- grapher. The author served as a stratigrapher with both expedi­ tions . Various members of the staff of the Department of Geology, The Ohio State University, as well as some specialists from the outside were consulted in the laboratory studies for the pre­ paration of this report. Dr. George E. Moore supervised the petrographic work and critically reviewed the manuscript. Dr. J. M. Schopf examined the coal and plant fossils, and provided information concerning their age and environmental significance. Drs. Richard P. Goldthwait and Colin B. B. Bull spent time with the author discussing the late Paleozoic glacial deposits, and reviewed portions of the manuscript.
  • The Antarctic Treaty System And

    The Antarctic Treaty System And

    The Antarctic Treaty System and Law During the first half of the 20th century a series of territorial claims were made to parts of Antarctica, including New Zealand's claim to the Ross Dependency in 1923. These claims created significant international political tension over Antarctica which was compounded by military activities in the region by several nations during the Second World War. These tensions were eased by the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957-58, the first substantial multi-national programme of scientific research in Antarctica. The IGY was pivotal not only in recognising the scientific value of Antarctica, but also in promoting co- operation among nations active in the region. The outstanding success of the IGY led to a series of negotiations to find a solution to the political disputes surrounding the continent. The outcome to these negotiations was the Antarctic Treaty. The Antarctic Treaty The Antarctic Treaty was signed in Washington on 1 December 1959 by the twelve nations that had been active during the IGY (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, United Kingdom, United States and USSR). It entered into force on 23 June 1961. The Treaty, which applies to all land and ice-shelves south of 60° South latitude, is remarkably short for an international agreement – just 14 articles long. The twelve nations that adopted the Treaty in 1959 recognised that "it is in the interests of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord".
  • Dustin M. Schroeder

    Dustin M. Schroeder

    Dustin M. Schroeder Assistant Professor of Geophysics Department of Geophysics, School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences 397 Panama Mall, Mitchell Building 361, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305 [email protected], 440.567.8343 EDUCATION 2014 Jackson School of Geosciences, University of Texas, Austin, TX Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Geophysics 2007 Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering (B.S.E.E.), departmental honors, magna cum laude Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) in Physics, magna cum laude, minors in Mathematics and Philosophy PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2016 – present Assistant Professor of Geophysics, Stanford University 2017 – present Assistant Professor (by courtesy) of Electrical Engineering, Stanford University 2020 – present Center Fellow (by courtesy), Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment 2020 – present Faculty Affiliate, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence 2021 – present Senior Member, Kavli Institute for Particle Astrophysics and Cosmology 2016 – 2020 Faculty Affiliate, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment 2014 – 2016 Radar Systems Engineer, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology 2012 Graduate Researcher, Applied Physics Laboratory, Johns Hopkins University 2008 – 2014 Graduate Researcher, University of Texas Institute for Geophysics 2007 – 2008 Platform Hardware Engineer, Freescale Semiconductor SELECTED AWARDS 2021 Symposium Prize Paper Award, IEEE Geoscience and Remote Sensing Society 2020 Excellence in Teaching Award, Stanford School of Earth, Energy, and Environmental Sciences 2019 Senior Member, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 2018 CAREER Award, National Science Foundation 2018 LInC Fellow, Woods Institute, Stanford University 2016 Frederick E. Terman Fellow, Stanford University 2015 JPL Team Award, Europa Mission Instrument Proposal 2014 Best Graduate Student Paper, Jackson School of Geosciences 2014 National Science Olympiad Heart of Gold Award for Service to Science Education 2013 Best Ph.D.
  • Review of the Geology and Paleontology of the Ellsworth Mountains, Antarctica

    Review of the Geology and Paleontology of the Ellsworth Mountains, Antarctica

    U.S. Geological Survey and The National Academies; USGS OF-2007-1047, Short Research Paper 107; doi:10.3133/of2007-1047.srp107 Review of the geology and paleontology of the Ellsworth Mountains, Antarctica G.F. Webers¹ and J.F. Splettstoesser² ¹Department of Geology, Macalester College, St. Paul, MN 55108, USA ([email protected]) ²P.O. Box 515, Waconia, MN 55387, USA ([email protected]) Abstract The geology of the Ellsworth Mountains has become known in detail only within the past 40-45 years, and the wealth of paleontologic information within the past 25 years. The mountains are an anomaly, structurally speaking, occurring at right angles to the Transantarctic Mountains, implying a crustal plate rotation to reach the present location. Paleontologic affinities with other parts of Gondwanaland are evident, with nearly 150 fossil species ranging in age from Early Cambrian to Permian, with the majority from the Heritage Range. Trilobites and mollusks comprise most of the fauna discovered and identified, including many new genera and species. A Glossopteris flora of Permian age provides a comparison with other Gondwana floras of similar age. The quartzitic rocks that form much of the Sentinel Range have been sculpted by glacial erosion into spectacular alpine topography, resulting in eight of the highest peaks in Antarctica. Citation: Webers, G.F., and J.F. Splettstoesser (2007), Review of the geology and paleontology of the Ellsworth Mountains, Antarctica, in Antarctica: A Keystone in a Changing World – Online Proceedings of the 10th ISAES, edited by A.K. Cooper and C.R. Raymond et al., USGS Open- File Report 2007-1047, Short Research Paper 107, 5 p.; doi:10.3133/of2007-1047.srp107 Introduction The Ellsworth Mountains are located in West Antarctica (Figure 1) with dimensions of approximately 350 km long and 80 km wide.
  • Itinerary Changes 2021

    Itinerary Changes 2021

    ITINERARY CHANGES 2021 Due to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic ALE has made some adjustments to our operations in order to ensure the well-being of our guests and staff and to minimize the risk of bringing the infection into Antarctica. Below, you will find how our itineraries across all of our experiences for the 2021-22 season will be modified. Punta Arenas • You will be required to arrive in Punta Arenas 4 nights prior to your departure. • Welcome and Safety Briefings will be done virtually. • There will be no fitting periods for Rental Clothing in the Punta Arenas office, instead clothing will be picked up at a specified location and time. Further information will be given upon arrival in Punta Arenas. • Your Gear Checks will be done virtually and we will explain to you how this will be done once you arrive in Punta Arenas. • Flight Check in and Baggage Drop Off will be done using COVID-19 safe practices and you will receive more information on how this will be done on arrival in Punta Arenas. • You will be required to complete and sign a COVID-19 Declaration prior to your departure. Antarctica ALE has developed COVID-19 management procedures for Antarctica. These will be covered in your briefings in Punta Arenas and on arrival at Union Glacier. Please visit our FAQ for more detailed information on ALE’s COVID-19 Management Strategy https:// bit.ly/3g5e4ql EMPERORS & EXPLORERS Experience two Antarctic icons in one action- WALK WITH packed adventure. Fly by ski aircraft to the Gould Bay Emperor Penguin Colony on the remote coast EMPERORS of the Weddell Sea.
  • 2. Disc Resources

    2. Disc Resources

    An early map of the world Resource D1 A map of the world drawn in 1570 shows ‘Terra Australis Nondum Cognita’ (the unknown south land). National Library of Australia Expeditions to Antarctica 1770 –1830 and 1910 –1913 Resource D2 Voyages to Antarctica 1770–1830 1772–75 1819–20 1820–21 Cook (Britain) Bransfield (Britain) Palmer (United States) ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ ▼ Resolution and Adventure Williams Hero 1819 1819–21 1820–21 Smith (Britain) ▼ Bellingshausen (Russia) Davis (United States) ▼ ▼ ▼ Williams Vostok and Mirnyi Cecilia 1822–24 Weddell (Britain) ▼ Jane and Beaufoy 1830–32 Biscoe (Britain) ★ ▼ Tula and Lively South Pole expeditions 1910–13 1910–12 1910–13 Amundsen (Norway) Scott (Britain) sledge ▼ ▼ ship ▼ Source: Both maps American Geographical Society Source: Major voyages to Antarctica during the 19th century Resource D3 Voyage leader Date Nationality Ships Most southerly Achievements latitude reached Bellingshausen 1819–21 Russian Vostok and Mirnyi 69˚53’S Circumnavigated Antarctica. Discovered Peter Iøy and Alexander Island. Charted the coast round South Georgia, the South Shetland Islands and the South Sandwich Islands. Made the earliest sighting of the Antarctic continent. Dumont d’Urville 1837–40 French Astrolabe and Zeelée 66°S Discovered Terre Adélie in 1840. The expedition made extensive natural history collections. Wilkes 1838–42 United States Vincennes and Followed the edge of the East Antarctic pack ice for 2400 km, 6 other vessels confirming the existence of the Antarctic continent. Ross 1839–43 British Erebus and Terror 78°17’S Discovered the Transantarctic Mountains, Ross Ice Shelf, Ross Island and the volcanoes Erebus and Terror. The expedition made comprehensive magnetic measurements and natural history collections.
  • Englacial Architecture and Age‐Depth Constraints Across 10.1029/2019GL086663 the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Key Points: David W

    Englacial Architecture and Age‐Depth Constraints Across 10.1029/2019GL086663 the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Key Points: David W

    RESEARCH LETTER Englacial Architecture and Age‐Depth Constraints Across 10.1029/2019GL086663 the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Key Points: David W. Ashmore1 , Robert G. Bingham2 , Neil Ross3 , Martin J. Siegert4 , • We measure and date individual 5 1 isochronal radar internal reflection Tom A. Jordan , and Douglas W. F. Mair horizons across the Weddell Sea 1 2 sector of the West Antarctic Ice School of Environmental Sciences, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK, School of GeoSciences, University of Sheet Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK, 3School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, • – – Horizons dated to 1.9 3.2, 3.5 6.0, UK, 4Grantham Institute and Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, London, UK, and 4.6–8.1 ka are widespread and 5British Antarctic Survey, Cambridge, UK linked to previous radar surveys of the Ross and Amundsen Sea sectors • These form the basis for a wider database of ice sheet architecture for Abstract The englacial stratigraphic architecture of internal reflection horizons (IRHs) as imaged by validating and calibrating ice sheet ice‐penetrating radar (IPR) across ice sheets reflects the cumulative effects of surface mass balance, basal models of West Antarctica melt, and ice flow. IRHs, considered isochrones, have typically been traced in interior, slow‐flowing regions. Here, we identify three distinctive IRHs spanning the Institute and Möller catchments that cover 50% of Supporting Information: • Supporting Information S1 West Antarctica's Weddell Sea Sector and are characterized by a complex system of ice stream tributaries. We place age constraints on IRHs through their intersections with previous geophysical surveys tied to Byrd Ice Core and by age‐depth modeling.
  • PDF-TITEL-AA-CHILE-EMPEORSADVENTURE Kopie.Pages

    PDF-TITEL-AA-CHILE-EMPEORSADVENTURE Kopie.Pages

    Antarktis Flug-Expeditionen EMPEROR PENGUINS Besuch der Kaiserpinguin-Kolonie in der Gould-Bucht ex Punta Arenas / Chile via Basecamp Union Glaciar POLARADVENTURES Schiffs- und Flug-Expeditionen in Arktis und Antarktis Reiseagentur Heinrich-Böll-Str. 40 * D-21335 Lüneburg * Deutschland Tel +49-4131- 223474 Fax +49-4131-54255 [email protected] www.polaradventures.de Saison 2021/22 Veranstalter Direkt-Angebote ab-bis Punta Arenas (Chile) für individuelle Planungen alle Abfahrten der Saison inkl. englischsprachiger Termine POLARADVENTURES Schiffs- und Flug-Expeditionen in Arktis und Antarktis Reiseagentur * Heinrich-Böll-Str. 40 * D-21335 Lüneburg * Deutschland Tel +49-4131- 223474 Fax +49-4131-54255 [email protected] www.polaradventures.de EMPEROR PENGUINS A PHOTOGRAPHER’S PARADISE Immerse yourself in the sights and sounds of the Gould Bay Emperor Penguin Colony on the remote coast of the Weddell Sea. Camp on the same sea ice where thousands of birds come to raise and feed their young. Photograph majestic emperors and their chicks against a spectacular backdrop of ice cliffs, pressure ridges, and icebergs. Spot petrels and seals amongst the endless white expanse. Fall asleep to a chorus of trumpeting calls and wake to find curious penguins outside your tent. Our remote field camp offers you unparalleled access to the emperors as you witness their amazing adaptations to the Antarctic environment alongside our expert guides. ITINERARY Arrival Day Punta Arenas, Chile Pre-departure Day Luggage Pick-Up & Briefing Day 1 Fly to Antarctica Day 2 Explore Union Glacier Day 3 Fly to Emperor Colony Day 4-6 Live with the Emperors Day 7 Return to Union Glacier Day 8 Explore Union Glacier Day 9 Return to Chile Flexible Departure Day Fly Home *Subject to change based on weather and flight conditions.
  • Antarctic Treaty Handbook: Tourism

    Antarctic Treaty Handbook: Tourism

    TOURISM AND OTHER NON-GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Introductory note Commercial tourism Until 1966 virtually all expeditions to the Antarctic had been organized by governments or had some measure of governmental backing. In that year there appeared in Antarctica for the first time a commercially organized, ship-borne tourist expedition. In subsequent years commercial tourism increased, using ships and aircraft. The area most frequently visited by sea was the Antarctic Peninsula. Regular airborne tourism began in 1977 and developed using long range passenger aircraft flying from Australia and New Zealand. Almost all of these flights overflew parts of Antarctica and returned home without landing. Airborne tourism diminished considerably following the tragic crash on Mount Erebus, Ross Island, on 28 November 1979 with the loss of 257 lives. Non-governmental non-tourist expeditions Such expeditions also began to appear in the Antarctic in 1966. The preparedness of such expeditions has varied; the consequent requests for assistance from governmental expeditions have sometimes caused disruption to scientific programs. A major aim of the consideration engendered by these expeditions within the Treaty fora has been to encourage such private expeditions to be adequately prepared and fully self-sufficient. Antarctic Treaty Recommendations XXI: Resolution 3 (1997) Standard Form for Advance Notification and Post-Visit Reporting on Tourism and Non-Governmental Activities in Antarctica The Representatives, Recalling Resolution 3 (1995) which agreed that there would be an advantage in standardized reporting of information on tourism and non-governmental activity in Antarctica; Noting that Attachment A to Recommendation 1 (1994) outlines the requirements for Advance Notice of tourism and non-governmental activities, and that Resolution 3 (1995) outlines requirements for post-activity reports; Recalling that Parties agreed at ATCM XX to trial a standard form for Advance Notification and Post-Visit Reporting during the 1996/97 Antarctic season.
  • Development Pressures on the Antarctic Wilderness

    Development Pressures on the Antarctic Wilderness

    XXVIII ATCM – IP May 2004 Original: English Agenda Items 3 (Operation of the CEP) and 4a (General Matters) DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON THE ANTARCTIC WILDERNESS Submitted to the XXVIII ATCM by the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition DEVELOPMENT PRESSURES ON THE ANTARCTIC WILDERNESS 1. Introduction In 2004 the Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (ASOC) tabled information paper ATCM XXVII IP 094 “Are new stations justified?”. The paper highlighted proposals for the construction of no less than five new Antarctic stations in the context of at least 73 established stations (whether full year or summer only), maintained by 26 States already operating in the Antarctic Treaty Area. The paper considered what was driving the new station activity in Antarctica, whether or not it was necessary or desirable, and what alternatives there might be to building yet more stations. Whilst IP 094 focused on new station proposals, it noted that there were other significant infrastructure projects underway in Antarctica, which included substantial upgrades of existing national stations, the development of air links to various locations in Antarctica and related runways, and an ice road to the South Pole. Since then, ASOC has become aware of additional proposals for infrastructure projects. This paper updates ASOC’s ATCM XXVII IP 094 to include most infrastructure projects planned or currently underway in Antarctica as of April 2005, and discusses their contribution to cumulative impacts. The criteria used to select these projects are: 1. The project’s environmental impact is potentially “more than minor or transitory”; 2. The project results in a development of infrastructure that is significant in the Antarctic context; 3.
  • Mcmurdo Dry Valleys, Southern Victoria Land

    Mcmurdo Dry Valleys, Southern Victoria Land

    Measure 1 (2004) Annex Management Plan for Antarctic Specially Managed Area No. 2 MCMURDO DRY VALLEYS, SOUTHERN VICTORIA LAND 1. Description of values to be protected and activities to be managed The McMurdo Dry Valleys are characterized as the largest relatively ice-free region in Antarctica with approximately thirty percent of the ground surface largely free of snow and ice. The region encompasses a cold desert ecosystem, whose climate is not only cold and extremely arid (in the Wright Valley the mean annual temperature is –19.8°C and annual precipitation is less than 100 mm water equivalent), but also windy. The landscape of the Area contains glaciers, mountain ranges, ice-covered lakes, meltwater streams, arid patterned soils and permafrost, sand dunes, and interconnected watershed systems. These watersheds have a regional influence on the McMurdo Sound marine ecosystem. The Area’s location, where large-scale seasonal shifts in the water phase occur, is of great importance to the study of climate change. Through shifts in the ice-water balance over time, resulting in contraction and expansion of hydrological features and the accumulations of trace gases in ancient snow, the McMurdo Dry Valley terrain also contains records of past climate change. The extreme climate of the region serves as an important analogue for the conditions of ancient Earth and contemporary Mars, where such climate may have dominated the evolution of landscape and biota. The Area is characterized by unique ecosystems of low biodiversity and reduced food web complexity. However, as the largest ice-free region in Antarctica, the McMurdo Dry Valleys also contain relatively diverse habitats compared with other ice-free areas.
  • A New Bed Elevation Model for the Weddell Sea Sector of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet

    A New Bed Elevation Model for the Weddell Sea Sector of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet

    Earth Syst. Sci. Data, 10, 711–725, 2018 https://doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-711-2018 © Author(s) 2018. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. A new bed elevation model for the Weddell Sea sector of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet Hafeez Jeofry1,2, Neil Ross3, Hugh F. J. Corr4, Jilu Li5, Mathieu Morlighem6, Prasad Gogineni7, and Martin J. Siegert1 1Grantham Institute and Department of Earth Science and Engineering, Imperial College London, South Kensington, London, UK 2School of Marine Science and Environment, Universiti Malaysia Terengganu, Kuala Terengganu, Terengganu, Malaysia 3School of Geography, Politics and Sociology, Newcastle University, Claremont Road, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK 4British Antarctic Survey, Natural Environment Research Council, Cambridge, UK 5Center for the Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, USA 6Department of Earth System Science, University of California, Irvine, Irvine, California, USA 7Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35487, USA Correspondence: Hafeez Jeofry ([email protected]) and Martin J. Siegert ([email protected]) Received: 11 August 2017 – Discussion started: 26 October 2017 Revised: 26 October 2017 – Accepted: 5 February 2018 – Published: 9 April 2018 Abstract. We present a new digital elevation model (DEM) of the bed, with a 1 km gridding, of the Weddell Sea (WS) sector of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet (WAIS). The DEM has a total area of ∼ 125 000 km2 covering the Institute, Möller and Foundation ice streams, as well as the Bungenstock ice rise. In comparison with the Bedmap2 product, our DEM includes new aerogeophysical datasets acquired by the Center for Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets (CReSIS) through the NASA Operation IceBridge (OIB) program in 2012, 2014 and 2016.