Evaluation Report of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G), 2014

Evaluation report of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G), 2014

Advisory Board:

C.R. Denby, L.M. Andreassen, A. Arendt, J.G. Cogley, A. Gardner and V. Ryabinin

Preface

The Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G) was established in 1998. Since its creation, the GTN-G has been run by the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) in rather informal cooperation with the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) and the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space initiative (GLIMS). In 2009, Terms of Reference for the GTN-G Steering Committee were established together with the International Association of Cryospheric Sciences (IACS). According to the Terms of Reference the GTN-G Steering Committee consists of:

a) an Executive Board that is responsible for (i) the development and implementation of the international observation strategy for glaciers and ice caps, (ii) providing standards for the monitoring of glacier fluctuations (e.g., front variations, mass balance) and for the compilation of glacier inventories, and (iii) the compilation and distribution of such information in a standardized form, and b) an Advisory Board that is responsible to (i) support, (ii) consult, and (iii) periodically evaluate the work of the Executive Board and its three operational bodies concerning the monitoring of glaciers and ice caps.

The first Advisory Board was established in 2011 under the lead of Prof. Julian Dowdeswell, and four members were appointed. All these four members are in the current board. In 2012 C.R Denby was appointed head of the Glacier and Ice Sheet division of IACS and subsequently leader of the Advisory Board. In July 2014 the Advisory Board was also extended with one new member as a second representative from the data users.

2014 Advisory Board:

Division Head for Glaciers and Ice Sheets of IACS C.R. Denby 2012– 1 Representative of data producers (field observations) L. Andreassen 2011–2015 1 Representative of data producers (remote sensing) A. Arendt 2011–2015 1‐2 Representatives of data users (glaciological community) J.G. Cogley 2011–2015 A.S. Gardner 2014– 1 Representative of an international umbrella organization V. Ryabinin 2011–2015

The evaluation of the Executive Board and its three operational bodies is conducted periodically, now every eight years. The previous evaluation was in 2006 under the lead of Prof. Jon Ove Hagen. At that time only the World Glaciological Monitoring Service (WGMS) was evaluated.

Executive summary

This evaluation report is based on a self-evaluation report by the three operational bodies of GTN-G, WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS, and a site visit in June 2014 by the Advisory Board at NSIDC in Boulder, where representatives of all bodies were present.

Recommendations to GTN-G A vision of what is needed of glaciological data from the standpoint of actual and potential users should be developed. The Advisory Board therefore suggests the following vision for the GTN-G activities:

•Products of value within and beyond glaciology

•A community that is willing to contribute data

•Secured long-term funding for stewardship, access, and accommodation of future needs

•A rich, highly visible and user-friendly one-stop portal

Seeking increased and more stable funding for GTN-G database enhancements should be a continuing priority for each of WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS. We suggest that the GTN-G Executive Board take the lead in jointly exploring funding prospects and coordinating proposals.

As a practical measure, the GTN-G web portal should be an early focus for improvements in publication of, and access to, services that are already provided. Prospects for new funding will be improved by demonstrating that every effort has been made to optimize the service within current constraints. Another practical measure would be for the Executive Board to offer suggestions to major funding agencies for the encouragement of wider sharing of glaciological data.

The Advisory Board also encourages all the three bodies WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS to continue with their excellent outreach and educational activities, including summer schools, generation of scientific papers, and collaborations.

Recommendations to WGMS The WGMS staff does an admirable job with data compilation, outreach, training activities as well as scientific production. Their first priority should be to adjust the evolving balance between continuing to do what they do best – providing current data products of high quality and with increased richness – and investing effort in extension and modernization. The Advisory Board recognizes the challenges in distributing and archiving low level mass balance data derived from air and space borne sensors that are the raw materials for mass balance calculations. While we do not see the WGMS as a primary portal for these data sets, we do see strong potential for WGMS to act as a distributor of high level data derived from remote sensing products, for example glacier-wide mass balances determined from laser altimetry.

The publishing of the biennial Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin and the pentadal Fluctuations of Glaciers takes up much of the service’s capacity. The Advisory Board supports the idea of merging the two products as a biennial Fluctuations of Glaciers, which will free resources and offer the public a more timely product.

iii

Recommendations to NSIDC The Advisory Board commends the NSIDC for its comprehensive website providing access to a wide range of cryospheric data. The Advisory Board considers that the World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection are valuable and important resources that it is essential to curate and preserve. Prospects for expansion and greater scientific use of the Glacier Photograph Collection should be explored and exploited when possible.

Recommendations to GLIMS The Advisory Board recognizes the high quality and broad scope of the GLIMS data model. However much of its potential appears to be underutilized, and we recommend that efforts should be made to increase awareness among current and potential users, and to improve data ingestion capabilities. One suggestion is to utilize the GLIMS interface for online (cloud-based) editing of outlines by the broader community, as a fast and simple method to improve the global inventory. The website should be updated with respect to some of the metadata and team membership. In the web map server we encourage a more graphically-rich environment that includes, for example, geographic features to aid in finding specific glaciers.

Recommendations to the IACS Bureau The Advisory Board found the site visit at NSIDC very valuable for progress in and support for glacier monitoring, and therefore recommends that the IACS Bureau consider increasing the frequency of site visits from about once every eight years to about once every four years.

The Advisory Board suggests that staggered 4-year terms for its members would be a useful innovation to maintain institutional memory.

The Advisory Board suggests that the Bureau and the President of IACS send formal letters of thanks to the supporting agencies of WGMS, GLIMS and NSIDC. This letter could also outline the importance of these organizations for the world. When describing the occasion for the letter, i.e. the site visit, the Bureau could emphasize and reinforce the leading point to emerge from the Advisory Board’s assessment, namely that present funding is not adequate.

Table of contents

Introduction ...... 1 Evaluation of World Glacier Monitoring Service ...... 2 Institutional framework ...... 2 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 2 Data products ...... 2 Website and data access ...... 3 International relationships ...... 3 Outreach activities ...... 3 Accomplishments and challenges ...... 4 Evaluation of National Snow and Ice Data Center ...... 5 Institutional framework ...... 5 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 5 Data products ...... 6 Website and data access ...... 6 International relationships ...... 7 Outreach activities ...... 7 Evaluation of Global Land Ice Measurements from Space ...... 8 Institutional framework ...... 8 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 8 Data products ...... 9 Website and data access ...... 9 International relationships ...... 9 Outreach activities ...... 10 Evaluation of Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers ...... 11 Organizational framework ...... 11 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 12 Website and data access ...... 12 A broader vision for GTN-G ...... 13 Summary and recommendations ...... 15 Appendix A: Acronyms ...... 17 GTN-G Self-evaluation report

Introduction The Terms of Reference of the Steering Committee of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G) provide for an Advisory Board that has as one of its duties a periodical evaluation of the work of the GTN-G Executive Board and the three GTN-G operational bodies: WGMS, the World Glacier Monitoring Service, based in Zurich; NSIDC, the National Snow and Ice Data Center, based in Boulder; and GLIMS, the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space initiative, also based in Boulder. The evaluation is to be based on a self-evaluation report by the Executive Board, a site visit at the location of one of the operational bodies, and an evaluation report by the Advisory Board.

This document is the Advisory Board’s report on its most recent evaluation, and is based on a site visit at Boulder on 9-10 June 2014 and a self-evaluation report (Appendix B) received by the Advisory Board in May 2014.

The site visit at NSIDC consisted of one full day of presentations by the representatives of the operational bodies, and a second day during the morning of which the Advisory Board discussed the self-evaluation report, the work accomplished on the first day, and the outline of its own evaluation report. In parallel, the representatives of WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS addressed themselves to technical matters in a joint session. The afternoon of the second day was devoted by all participants to the planning of next steps and action items.

The Advisory Board is most grateful to NSIDC and GLIMS for the warm welcome they extended to their visitors, and to all three of the operational bodies both for the thoroughness of their self- evaluation and for their detailed and thoughtful presentations during the site visit. The atmosphere throughout the visit was friendly and cooperative, leading to extended informal discussions that were highly productive. Particular thanks are due to two of those present during the visit but without formal association with GTN-G: Waleed Abdalati, Director of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences, the host of NSIDC at the University of Colorado, and Stephen Plummer, Climate Office Scientist at the European Space Agency. These colleagues gave us the benefit of their experience in the funding of environmental monitoring in general and glacier monitoring in particular.

The evaluation report is organized body by body, with separate evaluations in turn of WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS followed by an evaluation of GTN-G as a whole. The report concludes with a summary of findings and recommendations. A list of used acronyms is given in Appendix A and the self-evaluation report is attached as Appendix B.

Evaluation of World Glacier Monitoring Service

Institutional framework As well as being a component of GTN–G, the WGMS is a service of the International Council for Science’s World Data System. Since 1995, the WGMS has been hosted by the Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Switzerland. The service consists of an operational team of director M. Zemp and two halftime staff, and a strategic team without dedicated funding but with a strong interest in glacier monitoring activities.

Outline of how activities are funded In the 1990s, the WGMS used to receive substantial funding from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). After this funding was terminated, WGMS was funded only by research grants related to glacier monitoring, until in 2003 the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment provided temporary bridging funding. Based on a decision by the Swiss Federal Council, since 2010 the Swiss GCOS (Global Climate Observing System) Office of the Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology (MeteoSwiss) has been funding the operation of central WGMS service at the level of two full-time positions. The Department of Geography at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, provides the infrastructure and administrative hosting of the service.

The GTN-G Advisory Board expresses its deep gratitude to the Swiss Federal Council, the Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology, and the Swiss GCOS Office for the invaluable support to WGMS permitting the service to run sustainably.

Data products WGMS has a focus on the compilation, management, and dissemination of glacier fluctuations, i.e. standardized data on changes in glacier length, area, volume, and mass. In response to annual calls- for-data, observations are contributed through an international scientific collaboration network which consists of WGMS National Correspondents and Principal Investigators in more than 30 countries. After a basic quality check, data are converted into standardized formats and uploaded into the Fluctuations of Glaciers database. Each version of the database gets a digital object identifier and is made publicly available. WGMS publishes two periodical reports: mass balance data every second year in the Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin series, and changes in glacier length, area, volume and mass, as well as special events, every five years in the Fluctuations of Glaciers series. The WGMS data sets have been cited in all five assessment reports of Working Group I of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and have been used in numerous scientific publications.

In a world of multiplying sources and quantities of data, the WGMS database needs to be extended. The recent expansion to include data sets on glacier thickness and point mass balance is indeed positive. The WGMS database in its current form consists of tabular data, with each table entry keyed to a well-defined “glacier”. However much recent glaciological data obtained by satellite remote sensing refers not to single glaciers but to entire regions. This is particularly true of data on altimetric and gravimetric mass balance and on changes of area, for which it is necessary to describe explicitly the glacier system to which the data pertain.

Current WGMS holdings are weak in data from these new sources, and the Advisory Board suggests that it will be important to expand the database to include spatial data. Linking all table entries to spatial data in a shapefile will have value for “traditional” glaciers as well as for glacier systems.

Website and data access The WGMS website (http://www.wgms.ch) provides an overview of the WGMS, data products and current activities. The glacier fluctuation data sets are made digitally available in three different ways: (i) the WGMS MetaData Browser (http://www.wgms.ch/metadatabrowser.html) is available for overview and selection by spatial and other criteria; (ii) more complex queries and requests for larger data sets can be sent to the WGMS Mailbox ([email protected]); (iii) current and earlier versions of the entire database including metadata can be downloaded from the digital-object- identifier landing page (http://www.wgms.ch/doi.html).

The WGMS metadata browser launched in 2013 is an important advance. It allows data providers to correct errors and to correct or enrich the submitted data and metadata, and data users to select the information that best meets their needs. The mailbox is read and answered on a daily basis by WGMS staff members and is a good service to the users. The availability of the entire database, which is not large by modern standards, is an important step forward for more open data exchange with the community, and is especially valuable for users whose interests focus on large spatial scales.

Future improvements in data access could include providing frequently requested data and graphs in pre-packaged form. The Advisory Board supports the idea of near-time reporting for reference glaciers for a more timely product (assuming that the data providers are willing and able to submit this data).

International relationships The WGMS is a service of the International Council for Science’s World Data System. It is also a recognized part of the activities of the International Association for Cryospheric Sciences of the International Union for Geodesy and Geophysics and is professionally affiliated with the IACS Division II on Glaciers and Ice Sheets. WGMS is recognized by the UNEP, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) as an important contributor to their goals and objectives.

Members of the WGMS team are involved in a large number of international bodies dealing with climate change and its impacts on the environment. For example, they have served as lead and contributing authors as well as reviewers of the IPCC assessment reports, as members of the Terrestrial Observations Panel for Climate, and as contributors to the WMO Global Cryosphere Watch (http://globalcryospherewatch.org) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Global Observing System Information Centre (http://gosic.org). The WGMS contact with the European Space Agency has been fostered over the recent years through two major glacier monitoring projects: GlobGlacier and Glaciers_cci that have started to produce large volumes of both glacier inventory and fluctuation data products using a range of satellite sensors.

Outreach activities The outreach activities over the last 10 years of the WGMS team include visits to most of the contributing countries and hosting more than 30 trainees and guest scientists. The service organizes a General Assembly of its National Correspondents approximately every decade, the latest held in

2010. WGMS organized a summer school for glaciologists from Asia and the Andes in 2013, and has in recent years set up a lecture series at master’s level at the University of Zurich. New projects are being planned to continue summer schools, capacity building and training activities. The service has been involved in glaciological and geodetic surveys of glaciers in Kyrgyzstan, Colombia and Ecuador.

Accomplishments and challenges The GTN-G Advisory Board acknowledges that the strength of WGMS is the active compilation of standardized glacier fluctuation data, which are submitted by the glaciological community. A moderately serious problem is that a small but significant proportion of measurements are not submitted, in most cases because those who make them are either unaware of WGMS or too busy to format them for submission. Nevertheless, with the available resources and staff, the service does an admirable job with data compilation, outreach and training activities as well as scientific production.

The publishing of the biennial Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin and pentadal Fluctuations of Glaciers takes up much of the service’s capacity. We acknowledge that having printed publications has benefits (hard deadlines for submitting data, visibility, etc). The Advisory Board supports the idea of merging the two products as a biennial Fluctuations of Glaciers, which will free resources and offer the public a more timely product.

WGMS acknowledges in its self-evaluation that a big challenge is to develop the WGMS and its data products further to tap the potential of new remote sensing data without compromising the traditional in-situ products. The advisory board recommends an expansion of current efforts to host and distribute mass balance calculations derived from air and space borne geodetic surveys. These high-level products would complement rather than duplicate the raw level-1 data currently held for example at NSIDC. The first priority for WGMS, however, should be to monitor and adjust the evolving balance between continuing to do what they do best – providing current data products at high quality and with increased richness – and investing effort in extension and modernization.

Evaluation of National Snow and Ice Data Center

Institutional framework The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), Mark Serreze Director, is a part of the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Science (CIRES), at the University of Colorado, Boulder. The NSIDC structure comprises:

• scientists conducting research, mostly focusing on the cryosphere; • an Administration team; • a Programs and Projects group comprising the leads or principal investigators of agency funded data management projects. Currently there are three small projects with their own place in the reporting structure: NOAA@NSIDC (Florence Fetterer), passive microwave for snow (Mary Jo Brodzik), and informatics (Ruth Duerr); and one large one, the NSIDC Distributed Active Archive Center, or DAAC (Ronald Weaver with Amanda Leon); • Science Communications, a large team with a Publications group that is responsible for outreach such as press releases and the Highlights pages, a Technical Writers group responsible for product documentation, and a User Services group that answers inquires about NSIDC data. All NSIDC programs use the technical writers, and may include user services representatives on their teams as well; • Technical Services, made up of an operations group, security, and system administrators; • a team of developers that works for almost all of the projects across the Center. Developers fall in two loosely defined groups: the scientific programmers, who help develop algorithms, for instance, and those more oriented toward production software who, for example, work to integrate remote sensing algorithms into the larger NSIDC software environment.

Outline of how activities are funded The sizes of the agency-funded programs that form the bulk of NSIDC work vary significantly. The service groups and the operations team are structured and staffed primarily to support the work of the NASA-funded DAAC with its long term mission of archiving and distributing large volumes of remote sensing data and data-derived products. The DAAC is by far the largest project, accounting for over 80% of NSIDC’s budget.

Scientific research at NSIDC, as distinct from data management, is supported by individual project grants administered by principal investigators. Data set development is usually a by-product and not the main objective of the funded research work. Grants are usually for 3 years. The support comes primarily from the National Science Foundation and NASA, although the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), Office of Naval Research, NOAA, and Department of Energy may also fund scientific work.

The NOAA@NSIDC data management program has particular relevance to GTN-G. The program manages, archives, and publishes data sets with an emphasis on in situ data, data sets from operational communities, and digitized versions of older analog data. Stewardship of both the World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection is a NOAA@NSIDC responsibility. NOAA@NSIDC also helps to develop educational pages, contributes to larger center-wide projects, and supports the Roger G. Barry Archives and Resource Center at NSIDC. The program used to be funded at the level of k$267 per year until October 2014. This is just over 2% of the NSIDC budget.

For the financial year 2014 the funding will drop to k$243. The reduced funding reflects not dissatisfaction with NSIDC performance but rather how NOAA itself is funded and the intersection of that process with national priorities and internal NOAA structure. Florence Fetterer has led NOAA@NSIDC work since 1996, when one of the first accomplishments of the team was to publish the World Glacier Inventory on line in partnership with WGMS. Current support is at the level of between 1.20 and 1.35 full-time-equivalent positions.

Data products The NSIDC compiles and distributes an extensive array of satellite, airborne and field data sets that focus on the cryosphere and its interactions with other systems. The World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection are data sets of immediate interest to GTN–G, but many others are relevant and in some cases important. Across the Center, there is a strong focus on products collected by various NASA airborne and satellite missions, including ICESat, MODIS (Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer) and Operation IceBridge. Major research themes related to the data products include studies of Arctic sea ice, snow, permafrost, glacier and ice sheet responses to climate change, and impacts of changes on Arctic communities.

The Advisory Board considers that the World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection are valuable and important resources. The World Glacier Inventory is unlikely to grow substantially, but it contains information that can be found nowhere else and it is essential that it be curated and preserved as an accessible resource. The Glacier Photograph Collection is a venture that has prospects for expansion and for greater use as a source of historical data. These prospects should be explored and exploited when possible.

Website and data access The NSIDC website provides several options for access to information. The main page includes a gallery of images that cycle through projects and data sets, with links to more descriptive pages for each topic. There is a news feed on the bottom of the main page, and the side and upper panels provide menus and options for accessing data and for learning more about specific topics. The "Data" menu links to a page providing options for searching, downloading, visualizing and submitting data. Data can be queried by keyword, with optional spatial and temporal filters, or by data collection, the collections being arranged mostly by measurement platform but also by topic. Links are also offered to other data pools or data collection centers (e.g. Earth Observing System Data and Information System).

The Advisory Board commends the NSIDC for its comprehensive website providing access to a wide range of cryospheric data. With respect to the glaciological datasets, we suggest that steps toward standardization of data products and formats would, by improving accessibility and ease of use, be beneficial to the research community. At present the wide range of formats and software tools needed to access the data can be difficult to navigate. The appearance of the same data set within different portals can also create confusion. Finally, a standardization of querying options across data sets would help researchers find the data they need for their application. For example, some data products can be queried in space across measurement times, while others are restricted to a specific measurement campaign (such as Operation Ice Bridge data).

International relationships NSIDC is an accredited World Data Center within ICSU’s Word Data System. NSIDC is relied on widely in the international arena. For example, NSIDC data analyses serve as the main source of cryospheric data used in production of theWMO’s annual statements on climate and other publications. NSIDC scientists participate actively in international programs and coordination activities, such as IPCC assessments, UNEP publications, projects and activities supported by the World Climate Research Programme Climate and Cryosphere project, the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research, and the International Arctic Science Committee. NSIDC has partner agreements with ten institutions in eight countries.

Outreach activities NSIDC conducts a wide range of outreach activities related to the cryosphere. The NSIDC website has a section “About the Cryosphere”, which is an extremely rich source of popular and at the same time highly accurate and professionally prepared information about all elements of the cryosphere, and about glaciers in particular. The Glacier Photograph Collection is used in many highly visible education-minded projects, sometimes without NSIDC involvement. For example, the Adopt a Glacier web page was created as part of an attempt led by Allaina Wallace to raise funds for an archive endowment (http://nsidc.org/rocs/adopt-a-glacier/). According to NSIDC, some school teachers give credit to their students when they “adopt” glaciers. Other outreach and education activities and tools include an educational iPad application for the NASA Science Mission Directorate, publications on climate change and cryosphere for schools and teachers, and a crowd-sourced project on repeated glacier photography.

The CHARIS project has as part of its mandate the training of Asian experts. In May 2013, CHARIS researchers from NSIDC and the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research conducted short courses on remote sensing of glaciers and glacier mapping, isotope geochemistry, and glacier mass balance. This training was well received, and more workshops will be conducted on glacier mapping and other topics in the autumn of 2014. The University of Arizona has also undertaken several workshops to train students and technical staff in glacier mapping by remote sensing, image differencing, differencing of digital elevation models, and other techniques. Approximately 150 students have taken part, mostly from Nepal.

Evaluation of Global Land Ice Measurements from Space

Institutional framework The structure of GLIMS is based on Regional Centers, within which operate individuals known as stewards. GLIMS is directed from the University of Arizona (J.S. Kargel, Director) and its database is maintained at and distributed from NSIDC (R. Armstrong, Principal Investigator; B.H. Raup, database manager). In addition to those just mentioned, there are funded part-time GLIMS affiliates at Texas A&M University (M.J. Bishop) and the University of Dayton (U.K. Haritashya).

Outline of how activities are funded The origins of GLIMS at the U.S. Geological Survey date from the mid-1990s, but the first substantial funding from NASA became available in the early 2000s to support the exploitation of imagery from the Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer (ASTER) radiometer on board the Terra satellite. NASA has continued to be the main source of support for GLIMS operations through various channels in addition to the ASTER Science Team, and small but valuable grants have also been received from sources such as the USAID Climber-Scientist program and the Visiting Scientist program of the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development (ICIMOD), Kathmandu.

Total funding for the core activities of GLIMS amounts to 3.0 FTE, mainly at the University of Arizona but also at Texas A&M University and the University of Dayton. There is an urgent need for a continuation of this funding. Funding of GLIMS database development at NSIDC was made possible by NASA and National Science Foundation grants between 2000 and 2009, but at present only the bare essentials of database maintenance are supported, to the extent of 0.1–0.3 FTE, by the NASA Distributed Active Archive Center at NSIDC. 1-year contingency funding of about 1.0 FTE from the NASA Cryosphere program has recently been secured for NSIDC and the University of Arizona, and will allow the charting of future directions and work on the fusion of the GLIMS and Randolph Glacier Inventory (RGI) databases to proceed. An additional 0.1 FTE is also devoted to GLIMS purposes from the USAid-funded project CHARIS (Contribution to High Asia Runoff from Ice and Snow).

This summary of direct funding of GLIMS neglects the fact that most of the work of data capture and analysis is done by glaciologists around the world. These colleagues, about 200 in all, include direct contributors either to GLIMS or to the closely-related RGI, algorithm and database developers, and many support personnel. Most if not all of them are supported by national and other agencies, but funding totals are not known and it is fair to regard GLIMS as an outstanding example of the success of voluntarism in science.

The RGI is a parallel example. It achieved complete global coverage in a short time (about two years) at the cost of omitting most of the attributes that can be attached to glaciers in GLIMS. It too was an example of what can be achieved with voluntary mechanisms, but like GLIMS it is unlikely to be sustainable and developable without secure funding. As was recognized by all participants during the site visit, defining the relationship between the RGI and “GLIMS Classic” is an essential task for the near future. The Advisory Board welcomes the emerging vision of the future of GLIMS that has been labelled as “GLIMS 2“ within the GLIMS community.

Data products The GLIMS team is responsible for compiling and disseminating spatial data used to monitor glacier variations. The GLIMS data model accommodates not just digital glacier outlines (polygons) but also vector and tabular information on snow lines, hypsometry, velocity and other variables. In practice, submissions to GLIMS have been almost entirely of glacier polygons, and therefore GLIMS has focused almost entirely on the management and distribution of these polygons and their associated metadata. The GLIMS glacier database is used to store the digital outlines, and is designed to accommodate glacier variations through time. GLIMS also hosts the RGI, which is a snapshot of the most current global glacier extent, but is not set up to track temporal variations. The RGI also has a more limited set of attributes and metadata than the GLIMS glacier database.

Website and data access The GLIMS website is accessed either via the NSIDC data pages or directly at its own web address. The main page includes a brief description of the GLIMS project, with a set of buttons on the sidebar providing links to additional information and data access. The data access page is entirely text-based, and provides three options for data access: the GLIMS glacier viewer, a text search interface and a Web Map Service/Web File Service, enabling direct connection to GLIMS products from within a Geographic Information System. The GLIMS glacier viewer is likely the most used data access portal, and it leads to a Java-based map server. Here users can download digital outlines by identifying a bounding box of interest. Data are provided in a choice of several formats including ESRI shapefiles. RGI data are accessed through a separate interface accessed only through the GLIMS home page and not linked through the data page.

The Advisory Board recognized the high quality of the GLIMS data model, and the fact that its comprehensive set of data tables related to other elements of glacier monitoring is currently underutilized. The limited exploitation of the database’s abilities is likely to be due in part to lack of publicity for those abilities, but perhaps also to lack of demand for some of them. We recommend efforts to increase awareness among potential users, and improvements in data ingest capabilities in order to encourage more extensive use by members of the community. We raised the question of utilizing the GLIMS interface for online (cloud-based) editing of outlines by the broader community, as a fast and simple method to improve the global inventory. This would require strict version and quality checking by someone at GLIMS. In general we find that the website needs to be updated with respect to some of the metadata and team membership. In the web map server we encourage a more graphically-rich environment that includes for example geographic features, to aid in finding specific glaciers.

International relationships GLIMS has, and indeed is, a network of collaborators from approximately 30 countries. International communications have nodes at NSIDC and University of Arizona, and the GLIMS mailing list is an essential medium, supplementary to the cryosphere-wide CRYOLIST, for holding the network together. GLIMS has also spawned several international activities that go beyond its original scope, such as the Glacier and Permafrost Hazards in Mountains (GAPHAZ) Scientific Steering Group of IACS and the International Permafrost Association; a variety of field surveys, especially with the involvement of ICIMOD; and outreach activities that are discussed below. More generally, GLIMS is now the primary repository of digital glacier mapping data in the world.

Outreach activities GLIMS-affiliated scientists have been active in villages affected by glacier hazards and have conducted several public town hall type meetings, which were very well attended by a broad spectrum of Nepalese society. GLIMS leadership is actively engaged in outreach through the US and world media (television, radio, and print media) including NASA public information outlets such as Earth Observatory. Locally, NSIDC and GLIMS personnel engage in school outreach via an annual open house with the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research, as well as visits to schools.

Evaluation of Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers

Organizational framework

Figure 1: Schematic overview of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G) and its interactions with international organizations, the scientific community, national agencies, the media, and the general public. The figure shows the flow of data compilation and dissemination (blue arrows) as well as the main sources of funding (orange dots) and the formal links to international bodies (red and green dots).

The Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G, Figure 1) was established in 1998, among the first GT-Nets. Since its creation, the GTN-G has been run by the WGMS in rather informal cooperation with NSIDC and GLIMS. In 2009, Terms of Reference for the GTN-G Steering Committee were established by the IACS. According to the Terms of Reference, the GTN-G Steering Committee consists of an Executive Board and an Advisory Board. The Executive Board, consisting of representatives from WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS, meets at least once a year to coordinate activities and discuss latest developments and general strategies. Since 2007, eleven of these meetings have been held, usually during international conferences (e.g. General Assembly of the European Geoscience Union, Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union). At these conferences, so far a total of seven joint sessions on glacier monitoring from in-situ and remotely sensed observations have been organized.

Outline of how activities are funded GTN-G is an organizational framework without dedicated budget. All GTN-G activities are funded through its operational bodies, WGMS, NSIDC, and GLIMS.

Website and data access In 2010, a GTN-G website was set up by WGMS to provide information about the GTN-G and its tasks, the monitoring strategy, and the global network of collaborations. It also provides an overview of glacier data available through GTN-G. The different data sets are explained and hyperlinks are provided to the websites at which the data sets are available. A GTN-G MetaData Browser was set up by NSIDC to allow map- and text-based search for data sets. Due to limited resources, the GTN-G MetaData Browser was not developed beyond prototype status and the website has never officially been announced.

The GTN-G Advisory Board recognizes the importance of the MetaData Browser for cross-database integration, display and search, and for the visibility of GTN-G in the community. We recommend that the GTN-G bodies prioritize finishing the work so that the MetaData browser can be launched to the community in the near future.

A broader vision for GTN-G The low level at which each of GTN-G’s components is currently funded is a significant barrier to progress in making glaciological data widely available and more readily usable. Seeking increased and more stable funding for database enhancements should be a continuing priority for each of WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS. We suggest that the GTN-G Executive Board could take the lead in jointly exploring funding prospects and coordinating proposals. As a start, a vision should be developed and documented of what is needed and desirable from the standpoint of users, actual and potential, of glaciological data. Targets for funding of the elements of this ideal service could be identified piecemeal and informed about how their possible contributions would fit into the broader vision while also serving to advance their own priorities.

As a practical measure, the GTN-G web portal should be an early focus for improvements in publication of and access to services that are already provided. Prospects for new funding will be improved by demonstrating that every effort has been made to optimize the service within current constraints.

A second barrier to progress is the present model for submission of data to GTN-G, which was established as an inexpensive way to populate the central repositories by voluntary contributions from the community. The contributors, however, often lack the time or the resources to “finish the job” by submitting the results of their work to GTN-G. Many contributors are unaware that they have such an option, and still fewer that making their data widely available is rapidly becoming a responsibility in modern science. The result is that for several important glaciological variables the central repositories are incomplete, and in some cases very incomplete. The simplest way to remove this barrier is to increase GTN-G’s in-house capacity for processing and formatting data, both solicited actively from those who hold the data and “harvested” indirectly from the literature. Thus this second barrier, like the first, is a financial barrier.

What follows is a preliminary sketch of what is needed, on the assumption that the financial barriers have been surmounted.

The three organizations need to become better able to upgrade and extend their databases, which at present is practicable only in limited ways. For this purpose the Advisory Board considers that stronger version control is highly desirable as a preliminary step. Documentation of standards for data types and formats should become more explicit. A more systematic organization of the data into “levels”, as practiced at remote-sensing data centers, should also be considered. For example mass- balance data could be organized as point data (Level 0), elevation-band data (Level 1), whole-glacier data (Level 2) and regional-scale data (Level 3); this form of organization is already partly in place, but adopting it more explicitly would facilitate the expansion of the present meagre WGMS holdings to the proposed Level 3.

Sources of demand for glaciological data should be identified clearly and their varying needs should be reflected in the products that are made available. For example modeling of the evolution of large numbers of individual glaciers, and compositing the results with the aim of projecting regional and global contributions to freshwater supplies and to sea-level rise, have become possible in recent years. Emerging climate services have water, including the water originating from glaciers, as their highest priority. These examples imply a need for a review of current and anticipated future requirements for GTN-G data beyond the basic UN Framework Convention on Climate Change

13 monitoring requirements (which represent the GTN-G contribution to the monitoring role of the Global Climate Observing System). Of course this also implies identifying and engaging stakeholders.

It is not likely that all the potential stakeholders are engaged with GTN-G now. Decision making and policy making at local and regional levels depend more and more on environmental information. Funding bodies reflect this tendency by emphasizing the applied side of projects, which presents a challenge and an opportunity for GTN-G. A vision, and eventually a plan, for the development of GTN-G and its components should reflect awareness of the concerns of service-oriented agencies as well as those of research-funding agencies.

The allocation of resources between stewardship and keeping the databases current should be assessed continuously. It will be difficult to maintain long-term funding for archives that become progressively harder to use. Archives that are readily extensible and responsive to evolving needs have a better chance of survival.

GTN-G can and should be more than the sum of WGMS, NSIDC’s glaciological part and GLIMS. For example it could take the lead in setting standards for the collection of glaciological data and in increasing both awareness and adoption of the standards. To take WGMS as an example, mass- balance data collected in the field already have standards, not always adhered to, but practices emerging in the literature from research with remotely-sensed data await standardization. GTN-G could also encourage adoption of the same data formats for observations and modeling. The setting of standards would require a mandate, based on documented proposals after wide consultation, from authoritative organizations, specifically the International Association for Cryospheric Sciences and the International Union for Geodesy and Geophysics.

GTN-G should also take a leadership role in making funding agencies and program managers aware of the need for improved sharing of and access to glaciological data created or collected as part of research funded by their agencies. This could come in the form of a letter to the agencies from GTN- G and published as an op-ed in an association newsletter (e.g. EOS) or relevant journal (e.g. the Journal of Glaciology). In this letter GTN-G could provide specific advice to these agencies as to what data should be shared, standard formats, and which repositories are best equipped to handle the data.

Summary and recommendations

Recommendations to the GTN-G Executive Board • The GTN-G Executive Board is recommended to take the lead in jointly exploring funding prospects and coordinating proposals to seek increased and more stable funding for database enhancements for each of WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS. • A vision should be developed and documented of what is needed and desirable from the standpoint of users, actual and potential, of glaciological data. • We believe it would be valuable for the GTN-G Executive Board to draft a letter to major funding agencies and program managers of glaciological research to inform them of glaciological data that it is important to share with the scientific community, standard formats, and which repositories are best equipped to handle these data. • We recommend that the GTN-G bodies prioritize the completion of work on the GTN-G MetaData Browser so that the browser can be launched to the community in the near future.

Recommendations to WGMS • WGMS should continue to do what it does best – provide current data products at high quality and with increased richness – and should invest effort in extension and modernization. • The Advisory Board supports the idea of merging the biennial Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin and pentadal Fluctuations of Glaciers as a biennial Fluctuations of Glaciers to free resources and offer the public a more timely product. • WGMS should continue its excellent educational and outreach activities including summer schools and generation of scientific papers and collaboration.

Recommendations to NSIDC • The Advisory Board commends the NSIDC for its comprehensive website providing access to a wide range of cryospheric data. However, more standardization of data products, formats and querying options would be beneficial to the research community. • The Advisory Board considers that the World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection are valuable and important resources that it is essential to curate and preserve. Prospects for expansion and greater scientific use of the Glacier Photograph Collection should be explored and exploited when possible.

Recommendations to GLIMS • The Advisory Board recognizes the high quality of the GLIMS data model, and the fact that its comprehensive set of data tables related to other elements of glacier monitoring is currently underutilized. We recommend efforts to increase awareness among potential users, and improvements in data ingest capabilities to encourage more extensive use by the community. One suggestion is to utilize the GLIMS interface for online (cloud-based) editing of outlines by the broader community, as a fast and simple method to improve the global inventory. • The website needs to be updated with respect to some of the metadata and team membership. In the web map server we encourage a more graphically-rich environment that includes for example geographic features, to aid in finding specific glaciers.

• Defining the relationship between the Randolph Glacier Inventory and “GLIMS Classic” is an essential task for the near future. The Advisory Board welcomes the emerging vision of the future of GLIMS that has been labelled as “GLIMS 2“ within the GLIMS community.

Recommendations to the IACS Bureau • The Advisory Board found the site visit at NSIDC and GLIMS extremely valuable and rewarding as a way of focusing attention on the practicalities of progress in and support for glacier monitoring. Substantial progress was in fact achieved during the visit. The Advisory Board therefore recommends that the IACS Bureau consider increasing the frequency of site visits from about once every eight years to about once every four years. This would double costs but would more than double benefits. • The Advisory Board suggests that staggered 4-year terms for its members would be a useful innovation to maintain institutional memory. • The Advisory Board suggests that the Bureau and the President of IACS consider sending formal letters of thanks for support of GTN-G to the agencies that have provided such support to WGMS, GLIMS and NISDC. This letter could also outline the importance of these organizations for the world. When describing the occasion for the letter, i.e. the site visit, the Bureau could emphasize and reinforce the leading point to emerge from the Advisory Board’s assessment, namely that present funding is not adequate.

Appendix A: Acronyms

ASTER Advanced Spaceborne Thermal Emission and Reflection Radiometer

CHARIS Contribution to High Asia Runoff from Ice and Snow

DAAC Distributed Active Archive Center

GAPHAZ Glacier and Permafrost Hazards in Mountains

GCOS Global Climate Observing System

GLIMS Global Land Ice Measurements from Space

GTN-G Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers

IACS International Association of Cryospheric Sciences

ICIMOD International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IUGG International Union for Geodesy and Geophysics

MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer

NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

NSIDC National Snow and Ice Data Center

RGI Randolph Glacier Inventory

UNEP United Nations Environment Programme

UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization

USAID United States Agency for International Development

WGMS World Glacier Monitoring Service

WMO World Meteorological Organization

GTN-G Self-evaluation report

Evaluation of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers

Self-evaluation report written by its operational bodies

17 May 2014

Michael Zemp 1, Richard Armstrong 3, Florence Fetterer 3, Isabelle Gärtner-Roer 1, Wilfried Haeberli 1, Martin Hoelzle 2, Jeffrey S. Kargel 5, Samuel U. Nussbaumer 1, Frank Paul 1,4 and Bruce H. Raup 3

1World Glacier Monitoring Service, University of Zurich, Switzerland 2World Glacier Monitoring Service, University of Fribourg, Switzerland 3U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center, Boulder, U.S.A. 4Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, University of Zurich, Switzerland 5Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, University of Arizona, U.S.A. Contents

1. Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers 1.1 Historical background and organizational framework ...... 2 1.2 Monitoring strategy ...... 3 1.3 Organisational framework and funding ...... 4 1.4 Website and data access ...... 4

2. World Glacier Monitoring Service 2.1 Institutional framework ...... 6 2.2 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 6 2.3 Datasets, products and services...... 6 2.4 Website and data access ...... 8 2.5 Evaluation by data contributors and data users ...... 9 2.6 International relationships ...... 9 2.7 Outreach activities ...... 10 2.8 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats ...... 10 2.9 Key tasks for the coming years ...... 11

3. U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center 3.1 Institutional framework ...... 13 3.2 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 14 3.3 Data products ...... 15 3.4 Website and data access ...... 17 3.5 International relationships ...... 17 3.6 Outreach activities ...... 18 3.7 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats ...... 19 3.8 Key tasks for the coming years ...... 19

4. Global Land Ice Measurements from Space 4.1 Institutional framework ...... 20 4.2 Outline of how activities are funded ...... 20 4.3 Data products ...... 21 4.4 Website and data access ...... 22 4.5 International relationships ...... 23 4.6 Outreach activities ...... 24 4.7 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats ...... 25 4.8 Key tasks for the coming years ...... 27

5. Conclusions and outlook for GTN-G ...... 28

References ...... 30

Appendix A: GoogleScholar overview on the citation of WGMS data reports ...... 32 Appendix B: Summary of the survey feedback on WGMS data and information products ...... 33 Appendix C: The GLIMS Book ...... 40 Appendix D: The GLIMS Bibliography ...... 42

- 1 -

1. Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers 1.1 Historical background and organizational framework 1 Internationally coordinated glacier observation was initiated in 1894 with the founding of the Commission Internationale des Glaciers (CIG) at the 6th International Geological Congress in Zurich, Switzerland. In the beginning, glacier monitoring focused mainly on glacier fluctuations, particularly with the collection and publication of front variation data (commonly named length changes) and after the late 1940s of glacier-wide mass balance measurements (Haeberli 1998, 2008). Periodical publishing of compiled information on glacier fluctuations started in 1895 on behalf of the CIG, which later transformed into the International Commission on Snow and Ice (ICSI), and in 2007 into the International Association of Cryospheric Sciences (IACS; see Radok 1997, Jones 2008). Starting in 1967, the data were compiled and published by the Permanent Service on the Fluctuations of Glaciers (PSFG; Kasser 1970, Radok 1997). The need for a worldwide inventory of existing perennial surface ice masses was first considered during the International Hydrological Decade (IHD; 1965−74). As a result of the related activities, a Temporal Technical Secretariat for the World Glacier Inventory (TTS/WGI) was established in 1975 (Radok 1997, WGMS 1989) with the aim to prepare guidelines for the compilation of such an inventory and to collect available datasets from different countries. In 1986, the World Glacier Monitoring Service (WGMS) started to maintain and continue the collection of standardized information about ongoing glacier changes, when the two former ICSI services PSFG and TTS/WGI were combined (Haeberli 1998, 2008).

Figure 1.1: Schematic overview of the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G) and its interactions with international organizations, the scientific community, national agencies, the media, and the general

1 Mainly based on Zemp (2012).

- 2 -

public. The figure shows the flow of data compilation and dissemination (blue and green arrows, respectively) as well as the main sources of funding (orange dots) and the formal links to international bodies (red and green dots).

In the 1990, the Second World Climate Conference called for the urgent establishment of a coordinated climate system monitoring. As a consequence, the Global Climate Observing System (GCOS) and the Global Terrestrial Observing System (GTOS) were established in 1992 and 1996, respectively, under the auspices of FAO, ICSU, UNEP, UNESCO, and WMO. Within GCOS/GTOS the Terrestrial Observation Panel for Climate (TOPC) was created to design a global observing strategy and set in place a Global Terrestrial Network (GTN) for all Essential Climate Variables (ECV) in the terrestrial domain in support of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC; GCOS 2010, Bojinski et al. 2014). Among the first GT-Nets, the Global Terrestrial Network for Glaciers (GTN-G) was established in 1998 (Haeberli et al. 2000). It is led by the WGMS in close collaboration with the US National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Boulder and the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) initiative, being responsible for the collection and dissemination of glacier inventory data (Raup et al. 2007). A schematic overview of the various parties and their link with the GTN-G is shown in Figure 1.

1.2 Monitoring strategy 2 The GTN-G aims at combining: (a) in-situ observations with remotely sensed data, (b) process understanding with global coverage, and (c) traditional measurements with new technologies by using an integrated and multi-level strategy (Haeberli et al. 2000). As part of this strategy, the GTN-G is designed to provide quantitative, comprehensive and easily understandable information related to questions about process understanding, change detection, model validation and environmental impacts in an interdisciplinary knowledge transfer to the scientific community as well as to policymakers, the media and the public. A Global Hierarchical Observing Strategy (GHOST) was developed to bridge the gap in scale, logistics and resolution between detailed process studies at a few selected sites and global coverage of glaciers using techniques of remote sensing and geo-informatics. Thereby, GTN-G provides observations at the following levels:

• extensive glacier mass balance and flow studies within major climatic zones for improved process understanding and calibration of numerical models • determination of glacier mass balance using cost-saving methodologies within major mountain systems in order to assess the regional variability • long-term observations of glacier length changes and remotely sensed volume changes for large glacier samples within major mountain ranges for assessing the representativeness of mass balance measurements • glacier inventories repeated at time intervals of a few decades by using remotely sensed data

2 Mainly based on Haeberli (1998) and Zemp (2012).

- 3 -

This multi-level monitoring system across environmental gradients is providing the basic datasets required for integrative studies and assessments of the distribution and changes of glaciers and ice caps by combining in-situ, remote sensing, and numerical modelling components.

1.3 Organizational framework and funding After its creation in 1998, the GTN-G has been run by the WGMS in rather informal cooperation with NSIDC and GLIMS. Since 2009, Terms of Reference and a Steering Committee were established for GTN-G (see Appendix A). The GTN-G Steering Committee consists of:

(a) an Executive Board that is responsible for (i) the development and implementation of the international observation strategy for glaciers and ice caps, (ii) providing standards for the monitoring of glacier fluctuations (e.g., front variations, mass balance) and for the compilation of glacier inventories, and (iii) the compilation and distribution of such information in a standardized form, and

(b) an Advisory Board that is responsible to (i) support, (ii) consult, and (iii) periodically evaluate the work of the Executive Board and its three operational bodies concerning the monitoring of glaciers and ice caps.

In about annual or seasonal Executive Board Meetings, representatives from WGMS, NSIDC and GLIMS coordinate their activities and discuss latest developments and general strageties. Since 2007, eleven of these meetings have been held, usually during international conferences (e.g., General Assembly of the European Geoscience Union, Fall Meeting of the American Geophysical Union). At these conferences, so far a total of seven joint sessions on glacier monitoring from in- situ and remotely sensed observations have been organized.

GTN-G is an organizational framework without dedicated budget. All GTN-G activities are funded through its operational bodies and (e.g in cas of GLIMS) contributions from various projects.

1.4 Website and data access In 2010, a GTN-G website (http://www.gtn-g.org) was set up (by WGMS) to inform about the GTN-G and its tasks, the monitoring strategy, and the global network of collaborations. It also provides an overview on glacier data available through GTN-G. An overview text explains the different datasets and provides hyperlinks to the websites and web-interfaces from where the datasets are available. A GTN-G MetaData Browser was set up (by NSIDC) to allow map and text based search for datasets. Due to limited resources, the GTN-G MetaData Browser has not been developed beyond prototype status. Due to the unfinished work at the GTN-G MetaData Browser, the website has never officially been announced and there are no web-statistics available yet. A Google search (for “www.gtn-g.org”) finds about 4,300 links to this website, mainly from websites of other international organisations. For comparison, a corresponding search for links to the URLs of WGMS/GLIMS/ NSIDC results in 16,200/15,500/154,000 hits, respectively.

- 4 -

Within GTN-G, ICSU’s fundamental principle of full and open exchange of data and information for scientific and educational purposes is endorsed. A one-year retention period is granted to allow all investigators and data contributors time to properly analyse, document, and publish their data and results before submitting them in standardized format to the GTN-G operational bodies. All data submitted to GTN-G are considered public domain for non-commercial use and are made digitally available through the operational services at no cost. The use of data and information from GTN-G requires acknowledgement to the respective GTN-G operational bodies (WGMS, NSIDC, GLIMS) and/or the original investigators and sponsoring agencies according to the available meta-information.

Based on long-term experience and feedback from the data providers (WGMS 2010), we introduced common citation recommendations and digital object identifiers (cf. Paskin 2005) for glacier datasets made available within GTN-G, according to the following generic structure:

GTN-G-BODY-ACRONYM (YEAR): DATASET-TITLE. EDITORS (eds.), GTN-G-BODY, CITY, COUNTRY. DIGITAL-OBJECT-IDENTIFIER-OF-DATASET.

Currently, the following glacier datasets are made available within the framework of GTN-G:

• WGMS (2013, and earlier versions): Fluctuations of Glaciers Database . World Glacier Monitoring Service, Zurich, Switzerland. DOI: 10.5904/wgms-fog-2013-11. Online available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5904/wgms-fog-2013-11 • WGMS and NSIDC (1989, updated 2012): World Glacier Inventory . Compiled and made available by the World Glacier Monitoring Service, Zurich, Switzerland, and the National Snow and Ice Data Center, Boulder CO, USA. DOI: 10.7265/N5/NSIDC-WGI-2012-02. Online available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7265/N5/NSIDC-WGI-2012-02 • NSIDC (2002, updated 2009): Glacier Photograph Collection . National Snow and Ice Data Center/World Data Center for Glaciology, Boulder, Colorado, USA. DOI: 10.7265/N5/NSIDC-GPC-2009- 12. Online available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7265/N5/NSIDC-GPC-2009-12 • GLIMS and NSIDC (2005, updated 2012). GLIMS Glacier Database . National Snow and Ice Data Center/World Data Center for Glaciology, Boulder, Colorado, USA. DOI: 10.7265/N5V98602. Online available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.7265/N5V98602 • NSIDC (2014, and earlier versions): Glacier observations from NASA's Operation IceBridge Aircraft Missions . Online available from: http://nsidc.org/data/icebridge/index.html • Arendt, A., T. Bolch, J.G. Cogley, A. Gardner, J.-O. Hagen, R. Hock, G. Kaser, W.T. Pfeffer, G. Moholdt, F. Paul, V. Radić, L. Andreassen, S. Bajracharya, M. Beedle, E. Berthier, R. Bhambri, A. Bliss, I. Brown, E. Burgess, D. Burgess, F. Cawkwell, T. Chinn, L. Copland, B. Davies, E. Dolgova, K. Filbert, R. Forester, A. Fountain, H. Frey, B. Giffen, N. Glasser, S. Gurney, W. Hagg, D. Hall, U.K. Haritashya, G. Hartmann, C. Helm, S. Herreid, I. Howat, G. Kapustin, T. Khromova, Kienholz, M. Koenig, J. Kohler, D. Kriegel, S. Kutuzov, I. Lavrentiev, R. LeBris, J. Lund, W. Manley, C. Mayer, X. Li, B. Menounos, A. Mercer, N. Mölg, P. Mool, G. Nosenko, A. Negrete, C. Nuth, R. Pettersson, A. Racoviteanu, R. Ranzi, P. Rastner, F. Rau, J. Rich, H. Rott, C. Schneider, Y. Seliverstov, M. Sharp, O. Sigurðsson, C. Stokes, R. Wheate, S. Winsvold, G. Wolken, F. Wyatt, N. Zheltyhina (2013): Randolph Glacier Inventory [v3.2]: A Dataset of Global Glacier Outlines . Global Land Ice Measurements from Space, Boulder Colorado, USA. Digital Media. Online available from: http://www.glims.org/RGI/randolph.html

- 5 -

2. World Glacier Monitoring Service

2.1 Institutional framework Since 1995, the WGMS has been hosted by the Department of Geography, University of Zurich, Switzerland. The service is run by an operational team, with corresponding funding, in close collaboration with a strategic team with no dedicated funding but a strong interest in glacier monitoring activities. At present the two teams are staffed as follows:

WGMS Operational Team • PD Dr. Michael Zemp, Director (85%) • Dr. Isabelle Gärtner-Roer, Science Officer (45%) • Dr. Samuel U. Nussbaumer, Science Officer (50%)

WGMS Strategic Team • WGMS Operational Team • Prof. em. Dr. Wilfried Haeberli, Immediate-Past Director • Prof. Dr. Martin Hoelzle, Science Advisor • Dr. Frank Paul, Science Advisor

In addition, the WGMS hosts several trainees (usually students at master level) and guest scientists per year.

2.2 Outline of how activities are funded In the 1990s, the WGMS received substantial funds from UNEP. After a strong cut in the UNEP budget, the work of the WGMS was mainly cross-funded through research projects related to glacier monitoring. After 2003, the Swiss National Science Foundation and the Swiss Federal Office for the Environment provided temporary bridging credits with the obligation to set up a long-term solution. Based on a decision by the Swiss Federal Council, the WGMS is funded by the Swiss GCOS Office at the Federal Office of Meteorology and Climatology (MeteoSwiss) for the operation of the central service with a total of two positions since 2010. The Department of Geography at the University of Zurich, Switzerland, provides the infrastructure and administrative hosting of the service.

2.3 Datasets, products and services The work of the WGMS has a focus on the compilation, management, and dissemination of glacier fluctuations, i.e. standardized data on changes in glacier length, area, volume, and mass. In annual calls-for-data sent out every October, corresponding observations are actively compiled through an international scientific collaboration network which consists of WGMS National Correspondents (NCs) and Principal Investigators (PIs) in more than 30 countries. The monitoring activities of the NCs and PIs are funded through their own agencies and projects. The WGMS sends out a call-for-data every fall, respecting a one year retention period as described above. By end of each year, preliminary mass balance results (from the penultimate hydrological year) are made available on the WGMS Website (http://www.wgms.ch). In the beginning of a year, the received fluctuation datasets are checked for plausibility. In the case of ambiguities the - 6 -

investigators are contacted for explanation and potential revision. After this basic quality check, all data are converted into standardized formats and uploaded into the Fluctuations of Glaciers (FoG) database. Every new version of the database gets a digital object identifier and is made publically available.

Dataset Number of glaciers Number of observations

Front variations 1,968 41,086

Glaciological mass balance 272 4,462

Geodetic volume change 445 1,105

Special events 287 411

Table 2.1: FoG database statistics , version: DOI:10.5904/wgms-fog-2013-11

Figure 2.1: Glacier mass balance records over time . The temporal coverage of available mass balance records from geodetic and glaciological methods above and below the time axis, respectively, are shown. The latest increase in data availability is indicated in pale blue and corresponds to the data coverage at publication time of WGMS (2012) as compared to WGMS (2008a, and earlier series).

Based on the received data, two periodical reports are published. Every second year, general and detailed information on measurements of glacier-wide mass balance, using the glaciological method, are published in the Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin series (GMBB; http://www.wgms.ch/ gmbb.html). At pentadal intervals, changes in glacier length, area, volume and mass are published in the Fluctuations of Glaciers series (FoG; http://www.wgms.ch/fog.html) along with special events (on glacier surge, calving, avalanche, or lake outburst events), index measurements (e.g., end-of-summer snow-line, mass balance index stakes), and an annex of selected maps. The printing of these data reports has proven to be an essential motivation for data submission within given deadlines. Furthermore, the printing and shipment of these reports as hardcopies to about 500 institutions and libraries with an interest in glaciology around the globe is our guarantee for data availability over at least the next century. All data reports back to 1894 – as well as all published maps – have been scanned and made available in digital formats from the WGMS website. Over time, the WGMS has collected a library of more than 500 books and more than 1,200 printed research articles. A corresponding reference list is regularly updated and made available on the WGMS website (http://www.wgms.ch/wgmslibrary.html). - 7 -

The WGMS has repeatedly initiated and contributed to guidelines and best practices in glacier monitoring (e.g., GTOS 2009, Paul et al. 2009, Cogley et al. 2011, Zemp et al. 2013) as well as to global assessments of glacier distribution and changes (e.g., UNEP 2007, WGMS 2008b, Voigt et al. 2010). The WGMS datasets have been cited in all five assessment reports of the IPCC Working Group I and have been used in a large number of key publications in research on global and regional glacier changes (for a list of selected publications see: http://www.wgms.ch/ literature.html).

2.4 Website and data access The WGMS website (http://www.wgms.ch) provides an overview of the WGMS and its organizational framework, tasks, datasets, products, related literature, and current activities.

Year Website FoG GMBB MetaData visits downloads downloads Browser visits

2008 2,400 110 210 na

2009 3,000 250 140 na

2010 3,800 220 360 na

2011 1,750 na na 1,650

2012 1,300 na na 3,500

2013 1,400 na na 2,400

Table 2.2: WGMS website user statistics . Monthly visits of website and WGMS MetaData Browser as well as number of monthly downloads of FoG and GMBB reports as PDF.

The glacier fluctuation datasets are made digitally available in three different ways: (i) the WGMS MetaData Browser (http://www.wgms.ch/metadatabrowser.html) allows to browse for glaciers with available observation series and to download minimal data series of individual glaciers (i.e., year and observations with a reduced set of metadata); (ii) more complex queries and requests for larger datasets can be sent to the WGMS Mailbox ([email protected]); (iii) current and earlier versions of the entire database including the full metadata description can be downloaded from the DOI landing page (http://www.wgms.ch/doi.html).

Over the past decade, the WGMS has received and answered a few hundred data and a few dozens of information requests every year. The WGMS website records a few thousand visits every month (see Table 2). In March 2014, we asked both data providers and data users for their feedback on WGMS data and information product. In spite of frequent data request and clear citation recommendations, the FoG data or corresponding data reports are hardly referenced in scientific papers. A brief analysis using GoogleScholar shows a total of only 254 citations of all official WGMS reports (see Appendix A). In many cases, the WGMS is just mentioned in the

- 8 -

acknowledgements of the publication or the dataset is referenced as a publication of one of our prominent data users (e.g., Dyurgerov and Meier 2005, Cogley 2009). The widespread ignorance of data citation recommendations in the glaciological community is challenging because it limits the reproducibility of the scientific results and it impedes the demonstration of relevance of the WGMS datasets. The latter is a key argument for ensuring and extending the funding of a data service. However, the introduction and propagation of digital object identifiers for datasets (Paskin 2005) and its linking to scientific citation indices (e.g., Thomson Reuters 2012) are an encouraging indication of a changing attitude in this regard.

2.5 Evaluation by data contributors and data users For this evaluation report we separately asked 130 data contributors and 130 data users for their feedback on WGMS data and products. Within three weeks we received feedback from 44 data contributors and 35 data users. They evaluated our data and service products in general as good to very good. Best scores are given to our email data & information service, to the glaciological mass balance dataset, and to the FoG and GMBB publication series. The front variation dataset got good scores but was not known to everybody. The geodetic mass balance and the special event datasets got lower scores and seemed to be partly unknown. The glacier monitoring sessions at the AGU and EGU conferences got high scores but are still widely unknown, especially to data users. The largest difference between the feedbacks from data contributors and data users was found to be in the evaluation of our data reports: both the FoG and the GMBB were clearly rated better by the data provider and seem to be unknown to many data users. Both groups provided interesting specific feedback on where they see the strengths of the WGMS and where they identify the highest priority for improving our data and information products. A detailed summary of this survey is given in Appendix B.

2.6 International relationships The WGMS is a service of the International Council for Science’s World Data System (ICSU/WDS) as well as of the International Association for Cryospheric Sciences of the International Union for Geodesy and Geophysics (IUGG/IACS) and works under the auspices of UNEP, UNESCO, and the WMO. Besides the close contacts to its GTN-G partners, the US NSIDC and GLIMS, the WGMS is well linked through its scientific collaboration with glaciological institutions in more than 30 countries. Members of the WGMS team have been involved in a large number of international bodies dealing with climate change and its impacts on the environment, e.g. as lead and contributing authors as well as reviewers of the IPCC assessment reports, as members of the Terrestrial Observation Panel for Climate (TOPC) from WCRP/GCOS/GTOS/WMO, or as contributors to WMO’s Global Cryosphere Watch (http://globalcryospherewatch.org) or to NOAA’s Global Observing System Information Centre (http://gosic.org). The contact to the European Space Agency (ESA) has been fostered over the past years through two large glacier monitoring projects: GlobGlacier (http://www.globglacier.ch) and Glaciers_cci (http://www.esa- glaciers-cci.org). These projects start producing large quantities of both glacier inventory and fluctuation products using a range of satellites/sensors (e.g., Landsat/TM and ETM+, Terra/ASTER, ICESat/GLAS, ALOS/PALSAR, EnviSat/ASAR, SRTM DEM and GDEM). Further details on the related activities can be found in Section 4.

- 9 -

2.7 Outreach activities The WGMS has a long tradition in closely collaborating with glacier investigators around the world. Over the past ten years, members of the WGMS team have visited most of the contributing countries and the service has hosted more than 30 trainees and guest scientists. About every decade, the WGMS organizes a General Assembly of its National Correspondents (WGMS 1998, 2010). In recent years, the WGMS has been able to professionalize and extend its capacity building and twinning activities within projects associated to the WGMS but funded through the Swiss Agency for Development and Cooperation: Within the Capacity Building and Twinning for Climate Observing Systems project (CATCOS), the WGMS revived glaciological mass balance programmes at Golubin and Abramov glaciers in Kyrgyzstan and helped to complement ongoing glaciological programmes with geodetic surveys at Glaciar Conejeras in Colombia and at Antizana 15 Alpha in Ecuador. In 2013, a summer school on mass balance measurements and analysis was organized in Zermatt, Switzerland, for glaciologists from the Andes and from Asia. A second project on Sustainable Mountain Development for Global Change (SMD4GC) aims at compiling a status report on the implementation of glacier monitoring for all developing countries in the WGMS network as a basis for subsequent capacity building and twinning activities. This new programmes will allow to continue the organization of summer schools and help to strengthen and extend the worldwide glacier monitoring network.

Over the past years, the WGMS team has set up a lecture series at master level entitled Monitoring of the Cryosphere in High Mountain Environments which is read at the Department of Geography, University of Zurich. In addition, the members of the WGMS team represent the internationally coordinated glacier monitoring at numerous public talks and educational and public outreach activities.

2.8 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats The strength of the WGMS is the active compilation of standardized glacier fluctuation data through its scientific collaboration network around the globe. The dissemination of these data in both digital formats and printed reports (i) gives the data contributors important visibility at international level which helps them getting funding for the continuation of their monitoring programmes, (ii) provides the scientific community with freely available data for regional to global-scale studies, and (iii) informs the international organizations and agencies on the latest global glacier changes. With the currently available resources and staff, the WGMS is able to get the majority of in-situ observations on glacier front variations and glaciological mass balance provided in time and to archive and further disseminate the data. However, the corresponding samples are limited to a few thousand and a few hundred glaciers worldwide, respectively. Over the past five years, a major effort was made to extend the dataset on geodetic glacier volume changes from data mining and literature review. However, this task is laborious and usually does not allow access to the full richness of the observation series (i.e., in research papers, often just one volume change value per glacier is found with limited metadata and no access to distributed thickness change information, e.g. the original dh/dt grids). There is likely a potentially large pool of geodetic surveys from air and space borne sensors available for many thousand glaciers but the corresponding investigators seem to be less willing to share their data with the scientific community even after results have been published. At the same time, new sensors from air and - 10 -

space borne platforms have the potential for providing glacier length, area, and volume changes for entire mountain ranges. The WGMS needs additional staff and resources in order to bring these new geodetic data streams into standardized glacier products that can be loaded into and disseminated through the FoG database. The biggest challenge of the current situation is to develop the WGMS and its data products further to tap the great potential of new remote sensing data without losing the link to the traditional in-situ products.

2.9 Key tasks for the coming years The WGMS aims at tackling the challenges summarized above by the following key tasks: • Secure the long-term funding in order to continue the compilation and dissemination of standardized glacier fluctuation data. • (Re-)focus on the active compilation of changes in glacier length, area, volume and mass. More specifically, the main efforts shall be focused on: o Glaciological mass balance: key for process understanding and for assessing individual mass balance at seasonal or annual time resolution. Additionally, complement glacier-wide values with stake observations. o Geodetic thickness and volume change: key for validation and calibration of individual glaciological mass balance series as well as for assessing decadal mass changes of glacier ensembles over entire mountain ranges. Additionally, complement glacier-wide values with point observations such as from ICESat-missions. o Glacier front variations (length changes): key for assessing the full variability of large glacier ensembles over entire mountain ranges and back into the Little Ice Age period and beyond. Important also for calibration/validation of numerical models. o Glacier area changes are to be continued as part of decadal geodetic surveys (and annual mass balance measurements). However, this parameter can be derived at a much larger scale from repeat inventories (e.g. derived from the GLIMS or national databases). • Continue to foster the free data and information access through web interface and email service. • Apply for additional funding and resources in order to address additional tasks such as: o Actively extend the present (mainly in-situ) dataset with remotely sensed observations, e.g. from • data harvesting from literature reviews, • products resulting from ESA and NASA projects (e.g., Glaciers_cci, IceBridge), • data (re-)processing by WGMS. o Address data quality issues by introducing flags according to transparent criteria such as for: • richness of the data series (based on report information), • plausibility of the data records (based on redundant data and plotting), • data processing issues (e.g., re-analysis status) and cross-comparison.

- 11 -

o Revise the current data products in order to • provide easy and up-to-date web access to glacier fluctuation data, e.g. by introducing near-time data reporting for reference glaciers, adding fluctuation graphs and information on Principal Investigators &, Sponsoring Agencies to the WGMS MetaData Browser; • periodically publish a report on global and regional glacier changes integrating glaciological and geodetic balance as well as front variations; • optimize the staff and funding efforts. o Actively integrate the community in the data compilation such as by • continuing to foster the scientific collaboration network, • initiating and contributing to working groups and workshops related to important tasks related to glacier monitoring (cf. Paul et al. 2009, Cogley et al. 2012, Zemp et al. 2013) • outsourcing the compilation and update of index datasets (e.g., point mass balance for the modelling community, glacier thickness observations, special events, end-of-summer-snowlines) to ad hoc working groups (e.g., linked to IACS) and host the resulting file-based datasets with digital object identifiers.

- 12 -

3. U.S. National Snow and Ice Data Center

3.1 Institutional framework The National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) is a Center within the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Science (CIRES) at the University of Colorado, Boulder.

Six groups do the work of the Center under Director and CIRES Fellow Mark Serreze: The Administration team consists of Finance, HR, and Facilities (J. Reeves) and the Director’s office. J. Reeves coordinates Finance and HR with like CIRES offices. Programs and Projects are the leads or PIs of agency funded data management projects. Currently there are three small projects with their own place in the reporting structure (Figure 1): NOAA@NSIDC (Florence Fetterer), passive microwave for snow (Mary Jo Brodzik), informatics (Ruth Duerr); and one large one, the NSIDC Distributed Active Archive Center, or DAAC (Ronald Weaver with Amanda Leon). Science Communications is a large team with a Publications group that is responsible for outreach such as press releases and the Highlights pages 3, a Technical Writers group responsible for product documentation, and a User Services group that answers inquires about NSIDC data. All programs use the technical writers, and may include user services representatives on their teams as well. Technical Services is made up of an operations group, security, and system administrators. Projects across the data center vary greatly in their need for this group’s services. Finally, a Developers team does work for almost all of the projects, large and small, across the Center. Developers fall in two loosely defined groups: the scientific programmers, who help develop algorithms, for instance, and those more oriented toward production software who would for example, work to integrate a remote sensing algorithm into the larger NSIDC software environment.

Figure 3.1: The NSIDC reporting structure .

3 e.g. https://nsidc.org/monthlyhighlights/2013/03/austin-post-glacier-photograph-collection/

- 13 -

NSIDC is a matrixed organization. This means, for example, that developers and technical writers are shared among programs and projects. This is relevant to GTN-G because it provides flexibility in staffing projects that can help when funding varies unpredictably from year to year. It sometimes comes at the cost, however, of speed and efficiency that can help with data set upkeep and development, because the staff most familiar with a particular data set may be drawn away to work on some other project.

3.2 Outline of how activities are funded When considering NSIDCs structure, it is important to keep in mind the relative sizes of the agency-funded programs that support the work. The NASA funded DAAC is by far the largest, accounting for over 80% of NSIDCs budget. Service groups, the operations team for example, are structured and staffed primarily to support the work of the DAAC with its long term mission of archiving and distributing large volumes of remote sensing data and data-derived products.

Science, as distinct from data management, at NSIDC is supported by individual project grants administered by PIs. These may or may not involve the development of a data set, but when they do it is usually a by product and not the main objective of the funded work. Grants are usually for 3 years. The support comes primarily from NSF and NASA, although USAID, ONR, NOAA, and DOE may fund scientific work.

NOAA@NSIDC was funded at 267K per year until October 2014, when funding dropped to 243K for FY2014. This is just over 2% of NSIDC budget. The NOAA portion looks larger in Figure 2 because it includes short term grants to a scientist, and it reflects and artifact of timing 4.

The NOAA@NSIDC data management program has particular relevance to GTN-P. Both the World Glacier Inventory and the Glacier Photograph Collection fall under the NOAA@NSIDC banner, meaning that stewardship of these data sets is a NOAA@NSIDC responsibility. This program’s focus is different from that of the DAAC:

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) team at NSIDC manages, archives, and publishes data sets with an emphasis on in situ data, data sets from operational communities such as the U.S. Navy, and digitizing old and sometimes forgotten but valuable analog data. We also help develop educational pages, contribute to larger center-wide projects, and support the Roger G. Barry Archives and Resource Center (ARC) at NSIDC. – from http://nsidc.org/noaa/

Funding had been constant since 1996, with no increases for inflation, until in 2013 the program took a 7% cut. This paucity of funding does not reflect a lack of satisfaction with the job we do,

4 All NOAA support had to be spent out in 2013 because the CIRES Cooperative Agreement with NOAA was coming to an end. CIRES is largely funded by NOAA, but by the NOAA research line (Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research). NOAA@NSIDCs funding comes for the NOAA Satellite and Information Service (NESDIS) line, through our affiliation with the National Geophysical Data Center.

- 14 -

rather, it reflects how NOAA itself is funded and the intersection of that process with national politics and internal NOAA structure. Eight of the top 20 most used NSIDC data sets (Figure 3.3) are from the NOAA@NSIDC collection of about 70 data sets. The entire NSIDC collection numbers about 400 data sets.

Figure 3.3: Number of users in 2013 for NSIDCs top 20 data sets. The NOAA@NSIDC data sets are named. The Glacier Photograph Collection is not shown, although it usually comes in second after the Sea Ice Index. It is more difficult to obtain statistics for the glacier photo collection because of the way the database is integrated into the larger NSIDC system. The World Glacier Inventory ranked number 14.

Florence Fetterer has led NOAA@NSIDC work since 1996, when upon joining NSIDC, one of the first accomplishments of the team (at the time consisting of Florence and scientific programmer Christopher Haggerty) was to publish the WGI on line in partnership with WGMS. At present the team consists of Florence (40%) as well as Ann Windnagel who acts as technical writer, as Product Owner when software development agile team work is undertaken, and as website developer (70%) and Kara Gergely, User Service representative (10%). NOAA funding also supports the Operations group (10%), and the Archives and Resource Center (5%). Percentages are of a full time equivalent salary, and may vary from month to month.

3.3 Data products

The Glacier Photograph Collection The online collection originated with photographic prints. Tens of thousands of these were scanned under a NOAA program. See the online documentation 5 for a short history of the

5 http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g00472_glacier_photos/index.html

- 15 -

collection. This collection has been extremely popular and photographs from it have appeared in books, films, and large public displays (once at Washington Reagan National Airport).

From 2004 through 2013, Allaina Wallace was the archivist who managed and developed this collection. The funding situation made her position unsustainable, and in March 2014 she resigned from NSIDC, but not before laying the groundwork for moving the analog collection to the University of Colorado library system. This move will depend on that library obtaining a grant that has been applied for. On occasion, Allaina Wallace was contacted by individuals with analog material that they wished to donate. These inquiries were sometimes made by the relatives of deceased glaciologists. On rare occasions, Allaina would accept the material. If the CU library is successful in obtaining the grant that will allow us to move the collection, we anticipate referring those who contact us to the CU science librarian. We will be in partnership with the CU library system, with that system handling analog material, while we will continue to steward related digital material. The digital photograph collection needs to be maintained and updated, and we are behind in doing so. For example, about 1,000 images taken in Lake Clark National Park and Preserve in Alaska wait to be added to the database.

The World Glacier Inventory Like the Glacier Photograph Collection, the World Glacier Inventory (WGI) can be searched through an online interface. The Background section of the documentation 6 gives a short history of the origin and development of the Inventory. Like the Glacier Photograph Collection, the WGI greatly increased its holdings because of a multi-year NOAA program in the 1990s that permitted us to add inventories from China and the former Soviet Union to the existing digital glacier inventory, and to provide these data to the WGMS. In 2012, the WGI was updated once again to bring it in line with WGMS holdings. The documentation acknowledgements section states “Sincere thanks go to Kathrin Naegeli and Michael Zemp of WGMS for initiating and leading the 2012 update work. Ann Windnagel, Jon Davis, Bruce Raup, and Daniel Crumly carried out the work at NSIDC.” Note that this update would have been greatly delayed had it not been possible, through the agency of Michael Zemp, to have Kathrin Naegeli travel to NSIDC and work with the team here. Also, note that this team included two members of the operations group and one scientific programmer for a certain number of weeks or months. The online inventory has grown from about 25,000 glaciers in 1996 to over 130,000 today.

The GLIMS database After the establishment of the GLIMS initiative in 1999, a geographic database and web interface were designed and implemented at NSIDC thanks to funding from NASA to host and distribute the these glacier outline data. The GLIMS database is designed to be a logical extension of the WGI and stores the full complement of the WGI-defined glacier characteristics. Each analysis received by the GLIMS team at NSIDC is ingested into the GLIMS Glacier Database and made available to the public via the World Wide Web using an interactive mapping web site based on the open source package MapServer. The web interface thus acts as a visual front-end providing easy access to the GLIMS Glacier Database. New glacier data are continually being added to the

6 http://nsidc.org/data/docs/noaa/g00472_glacier_photos/index.html

- 16 -

database. The GLIMS MapServer web site allows users to view and query several thematic layers, including glacier outlines, ASTER footprints, GLIMS Regional Center locations, and the World Glacier Inventory. Query results can be downloaded into a number of GIS-compatible formats, including ESRI Shapefiles, MapInfo tables, and Geographic Mark-up Language (GML). The web site allows users to perform a variety functions on the data including attribute querying, selecting, and exporting the glacial data through the use of a visual selection map and/or a form- based selection process. The data are stored in a spatially enabled database (PostGIS), which has sophisticated functions for spatial data analysis and query. The GLIMS Glacier Database also allows the user to view reduced-resolution ASTER browse images and to query the ASTER image metadata. The MapServer application can serve data from the GLIMS Glacier Database to other OGC-compliant services via OGC-standard protocols, thereby increasing the utility of this glacier data set. The GLIMS database stores digital outlines and detailed information from 122,489 glaciers with a total sum of glacier area of 526,500 km 2. (as of May 2014). More details on the GLIMS initiative are given in Chapter 4.

IceBridge Data NSIDC manages data for products derived from NASA's Operation IceBridge aircraft missions, and implements tools and services extending the uses of IceBridge data products. The Operation IceBridge mission, initiated in 2009, collects airborne remote sensing measurements to bridge the gap between NASA's Ice, Cloud and Land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) mission and the upcoming ICESat-2 mission. IceBridge mission observations and measurements include coastal Greenland, coastal Antarctica, the Antarctic Peninsula, interior Antarctica, the southeast Alaskan glaciers, and Antarctic and Arctic sea ice. More details and data are found on the IceBridge website.

3.4 Website and data access Relevant websites are: • NOAA@NSIDC: http://nsidc.org/noaa/ • Glacier Photograph Collection: o home: http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_photo/index.html o search and order: http://nsidc.org/cgi-bin/glacier_photos/glacier_photo_search.pl (Note: high resolution files must be ordered because their distribution method requires staging of the files, but mid and low resolution files are obtained online without the need for any action on NSIDCs part.) • World Glacier Inventory: o home: http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_inventory/ o search: http://nsidc.org/data/glacier_inventory/query.html • GLIMS@NSIDC: http://nsidc.org/data/nsidc-0272 • IceBridge Data: http://nsidc.org/data/icebridge/

3.5 International relationships Through NSIDC’s role in the GTN-G, NOAA@NSIDC could claim to be contributing to the Global Climate Observing System. This was a priority for earlier NOAA administrations, but its relevance may have passed. - 17 -

3.6 Outreach activities These are beyond the scope of what funding allows. However, the Glacier Photograph Collection serves on its own as an outreach activity, because it is used in many highly visible education- minded projects, without our involvement. For example, as part of an attempt led by Allaina Wallace to raise funds for an archive endowment, the Adopt a Glacier page was created (http://nsidc.org/rocs/adopt-a-glacier/). We have learned that some schoolteachers give credit to their students when they “adopt” glaciers.

Here is a listing of some of the descriptions of user projects coming from those users who registered in 2012 or 2013. Note that registration is not required. The outreach and education aspects are quite evident. • educational i-Pad app for NASA Science Mission Directorate • I am working on a book about Mount Adams Washington (title below) There are twelve glaciers on the volcano and one chapter will be devoted to glacier change between 1901 and 2006 The list of sixteen H F Reid photos selected constitutes your entire collection of Reids 1901 Mount Adams glacier photos Many are titled no glacier but I am 100 sure that they were taken on Adams and I would be happy to identify the glaciers for you some day Two of Reids no glacier1901 shots are duplicated under the labels mazama1901_1056 and mazama1901_1058 which are correctly named (Italics added – FF) • We would like to have high resolution versions of these two images to use on the cover of our fall 2012 journal The Earth Scientist The fall issue will focus on climate change education for teachers • Project is to measure long-term glacier and climate changes Photos are for use in mapping terminus position change and possibly for use making multiple DEMs of glacier for glacier volume change with time with photogrammetric software • Data to be used in a middle school science class • My masters work includes developing a 10Be cosmogenic exposure chronology of Latest Pleistocene and Holocene glacial activity in the Alapah and Arrigetch Mountain region of the Central Brooks Range AK I will use these photographs to compile a 101 year photographic record of the glaciers in the Arrigetch Peaks Region (1911-1012) • We are using photos to document rapid recession of the glaciers in the Wind River range and to create educational posters with matched pairs showing changes over time • Im teaching about energy issues to non-science students • AAP is a crowd-sourced citizen science project that engages participants in repeating historic photographs of glaciers and alpine ecosystems

The second user in the list above offered to identify a glacier for us. This illustrates one way in which an increase in funding would help us: with more staff time, someone would be assigned to be product owner for this data collection. They would then add this information to the Notes section of the metadata (“in 2013, a user identified this as Adams Glacier”). If it could not be done immediately, they would keep track of this “to do” item until it was taken care of. This is data stewardship at its most elementary.

- 18 -

3.7 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats Simply maintaining the GPC and WGI has been a challenge, because the NOAA team is stretched very thin. NOAA has a pressing need to forecast sea ice, thus, maintenance of the NOAA@NSIDC sea ice products takes precedence over glacier products when a choice must be made. However with GTN-G’s present day level of involvement, energy and dedication, we have an opportunity to plan together that we must not miss.

3.8 Key tasks for the coming years (as described in the minutes of the Executive Board meetings in 2013) • Urgently increase the available funding and capacities for the maintenance of glacier datasets • Securing resources for glacier monitoring activities • Maintenance of World Glacier Inventory (WGI) database • Maintenance of Global Land Ice Measurement from Space (GLIMS) database • Maintenance of Glacier Photograph Collection (GPC) database • Revision of the GTN-G MetaData Browser based on feedback from GTN-G Advisory Board • Introduce active data compilation (e.g., through annual calls-for-data)

- 19 -

4. Global Land Ice Measurements from Space

4.1 Institutional framework GLIMS started as a USGS initiative, and quickly developed an international structure of collaborations, which primarily have been termed Regional Centers, within which operate individuals, known as stewards. Regional Centers and their stewards can be co-located or can be multi-institutional. The original idea was to have regional established along the geographic lines of drainage basins or mountain ranges (physiographic); this was rarely achieved, and most regional centers are nationally organized due to limitations imposed by funding agencies. As GLIMS developed in the first years of the 2000s, the core leadership became distributed, at first including Eros Data Center (Sioux Falls, SD, USA), and soon also NSIDC after Bruce Raup changed institutions and went to NSIDC. Kargel then left USGS also and went to the U of Arizona and carried his international coordination/core institutional roles with him. In recent years, WGMS has been incorporated into the core leadership, but Eros Data Center was dropped due to their low commitment needed (their role with ASTER data product and distribution developments largely having been completed); thus, GLIMS workshops and GLIMS- led conference symposia and related meetings almost necessarily involve U of A, NSIDC, and WGMS, plus any regional center personnel who are able to participate. Core leadership, University of Arizona GLIMS coordination center (current staff): J.S. Kargel (PI), G.J. Leonard, Roberto Furfaro; and affiliates at Texas A&M University (Michael Bishop, Jeffrey Olsenholler, and a student) and University of Dayton (Umesh Haritashya and a student). NSIDC/glacier database, U of Colorado (current staff): Richard Armstrong (PI), Bruce Raup (database architect and manager).

4.2 Outline of how activities are funded Funding, University of Arizona and affiliates (GLIMS Coordination Center): NASA is the historical major supporter of GLIMS, but it started as a USGS initiative, at first without direct funding. The first indirect funding for GLIMS started in 1994 at USGS when a portion of Hugh Kieffer’s ASTER Science Team grant was used to support Kargel (then also at USGS) quarter-time for purposes of developing an international dimension of the initiative and the overarching glaciological objectives of the initiative. At that time GLIMS was not yet active but was developing in anticipation of the launch of ASTER. This funding was expanded when first Bruce Raup and then Rick Wessels were hired (officially by Arizona State University due to a hiring freeze at USGS, but they worked at USGS) for other aspects of GLIMS development. The first dedicated GLIMS funding was a $30,000 seed-money grant around 1999 from the U.S. Geological Survey, back when GLIMS coordination was undertaken by Hugh Kieffer and Jeff Kargel. After the launch of ASTER, proposals were written by Jeff Kargel as the PI, as Hugh Kieffer soon retired. Through these grants, the Eros Data Center activity related to GLIMS was supported under Kargel’s grant until they obtained a separate, steady line item of support, which continues under a very minimal level (probably 1% FTE). During Kargel’s first push for GLIMS funding, he organized all the American PIs who were planning an ASTER proposal, presented to NASA a rationale for funding all of them, and in a year of historically low budgets of Earth science research, every GLIMS proposal was funded. Thus, GLIMS in the U.S. was off to its first healthy period. Meanwhile, GLIMS in Europe also was ramping up. NASA has supported GLIMS through a succession of four - 20 -

3-year grants from programs such as the Science of Terra & Aqua, with funding directed through Kargel’s ASTER Science Team membership, plus other grants to NSIDC (described below) and other U.S. institutions. A history of supplemental funding to Kargel has been derived from the NASA International Polar Year program, NASA/USAID SERVIR Applied Sciences Team, successful unsolicited proposals to NASA to undertake glacier remote sensing of targeted countries (which is how much of his and Greg Leonard’s heavy time investment in the GLIMS book was supported) and emergency response activities, and small grants from the USAID Climber-Scientist program and ICIMOD Visiting Scientist program. Kargel has supported one assistant at a time (Rick Wessels when we were at USGS, then Greg Leonard at the University of Arizona), plus other assistants at low FTE for specific purposes, such as Deborah Soltesz for website development and students for certain narrow tasks. Kargel has also supported a small fraction of Roberto Furfaro (a Systems Engineer and radiative transfer expert at the University of Arizona), and colleagues at the University of Nebraska at Omaha (Jack Shroder, Michael Bishop, Jeffrey Olensholler, and Ulrich Kamp), Texas A&M University (Michael Bishop and Jeffrey Olsenholler after they moved there, and a student), and University of Dayton (Umesh Haritashya and a student). These are all colleagues represented as GLIMS book authors, in journal publications, and/or GLIMS data in the database. Some, such as University of Omaha are no longer receiving GLIMS funds from Kargel.

Current time commitments on Kargel’s grants are, in % FTE: Kargel 50%, Leonard 100%, Furfaro 5%, Haritashya 25%, Haritashya student 50%, Bishop 10%, Bishop student 50%, Bishop assistant Olsenholler 10%; total 3.0 FTE. About half of this is directly GLIMS related, the other half is applied science and capacity building related to GLIMS but not GLIMS. There is an urgent need to find additional funding to continue our work, as the non-applied science and GLIMS leadership funds will dry to a trickle starting midsummer 2014 without further funds.

Funding, NSIDC: From 2000 to 2003, NSIDC received funding for the initial development of a data storage system for GLIMS. PI was Greg Scharfen, NASA grant number NAG5-9722. From 2004 to 2009, the construction of a database system, web interface, and general website at NSIDC was supported by a NASA REASoN Cooperative Agreement Notice (CAN). PI: Richard Armstrong, grant number NNG04GF51A. Currently, GLIMS work at NSIDC is supported at a low level by the DAAC (0.1 to 0.3 FTE, for maintenance and data ingest). A USAID-funded project, Contribution to High Asia Runoff from Ice and Snow (CHARIS) has partially overlapping objectives with GLIMS such that an additional 0.1 FTE has been put to GLIMS purposes. While this level of funding has allowed the incorporation of new data (if GLIMS-formatted) and basic maintenance to continue, improvements to the web interfaces have not been possible.

4.3 Data products The main GLIMS data product is the GLIMS Glacier Database, which is hosted in a PostgreSQL/ PostGIS database on the main database server at NSIDC. Glacier outlines are created primarily by GLIMS Regional Centers and are packaged into a prescribed format for transmission to NSIDC. There, the data are unpackaged, analyzed for quality and completeness, and after passing automated and human inspections, and ingested into the database. They immediately become visible in the web map application. Data providers may specify an embargo period to prevent download of the submitted outlines for up to a year, to allow them time to publish research - 21 -

based on the data. The database is backed up as a matter of course, along with the other data stores at NSIDC. The data are disseminated via web interfaces, described below. According to website and download metrics, the GLIMS Glacier Database is one of the most popular data sets at NSIDC, in third place behind two prominent sea ice products.

The GLIMS database is the largest contributor to the Randolph Glacier Inventory (RGI), which may be considered a direct spin-off of GLIMS, since our database was used as a key input, our collaboration network was used, our ASTER data was one of the satellite image cornerstones of the RGI, our analysis methodology largely was used in part, and the GLIMS glacier database architecture was modified for the RGI.

The GLIMS community has written a book on the technical foundations and scientific fruits of GLIMS glacier mapping (see Appendix C); this book will be published in the second quarter of 2014. It is hoped that this long-anticipated work will become a standard reference for glacier mapping and a foundation for the next era of GLIMS. Many publications in the scientific literature report directly on GLIMS activities (see Appendix D).

4.4 Website and data access The GLIMS initiative has a public consortium website hosted at NSIDC. The site was first developed under a grant to Kargel (D. Soltesz/USGS working with techs at and funded by NSIDC), and then since about 2006 improvements and maintenance have occurred at NSIDC. Public Web interfaces to the GLIMS Glacier Database (accessible via the general GLIMS website) consist of an interactive map application and a text-based search function. The database and web interfaces were both built as a prototype system under the support of a NASA REASoN cooperative agreement notice grant to NSIDC (CAN). This prototype system became operational over time by default, and while the database itself is solid and production quality, the user interfaces are based on older technology that is becoming increasingly brittle and browser- dependent. For example, each zoom or pan of the GLIMS map results in a complete page refresh, and the Java applet used in the map does not work the same in all browsers. Several more modern map interfaces have been developed as experiments, prototypes, or for internal use. One of these became the GTN-G Metadata Browser, hosted at http://glims.org and included in the website at http://www.gtn-g.org. It is planned that a new map interface will be developed during summer 2014 to replace the existing production one. This new interface will make use of existing web services.

Users can use the map and text interfaces to discover GLIMS data and narrow their search to the data they are interested in. Once a subset of data has been selected, either by zooming on the map or by filtering by metadata in the search application, that subset can be downloaded at the click of the mouse in a choice of data and file formats. This functionality will be duplicated in the newly developed interface. In addition to the search and download capability described above, the complete data set can be downloaded in the form of a pre-staged archive file. These files are created after each insertion of new data.

- 22 -

The web mapping application includes related data stores as optional map layers. These include the World Glacier Inventory (WGI), the Fluctuations of Glaciers (FoG) data set, the Glacier Photograph Collection, the Digital Chart of the World (DCW), and the locations of GLIMS Regional Centers. The map interface also includes a layer for ASTER footprints, but due to technical changes at the EROS Data Center, the harvesting of ASTER metadata has ceased.

4.5 International relationships A crucially important part of GLIMS and one of its biggest achievements is the international network of scientists and technical experts it has built. As described elsewhere, starting in 1994 with the first public presentation of the GLIMS concept by Hugh Kieffer and Jeff Kargel and the first solicitation of international participation, GLIMS has built a network of collaborators from institutions around the world (Kieffer et al. 2000, Kargel et al. 2005, Kieffer 2014).

NSIDC: Most of these institutions communicate directly with NSIDC and University of Arizona personnel to coordinate data submission and ingest, to collaborate on science research, data availability, and to consult on technical problems and solutions. In addition, NSIDC’s CHARIS project has led to the formation of many new collaborative ties to researchers in the greater Himalayan region; NSIDC has partner agreements with ten institutions in eight countries through this project. Part of the work for this project involves training our partners in techniques for glacier mapping from remote sensing, as well as other topics such as glacier mass balance and isotope geochemistry. New glacier maps produced within the CHARIS project will be submitted to NSIDC for incorporation into the GLIMS Glacier Database.

University of Arizona: The U of A (and USGS until Kargel moved to U of A in 2005) has led the coordination activities. All of the participants are further integrated into GLIMS through ties to NSIDC, and some of them also through WGMS. In addition to GLIMS, which involves people from over over 30 nations, Kargel has developed or is involved in several GLIMS-related international activities that pertain to but are not GLIMS: Founding member of the IACS-supported Glacier and Permafrost Hazards in Mountain Areas working group; Kargel is the first American participant in NASA’s newly defined PESEP program (Professional Engineering and Scientific Exchange Program, where Kargel’s first mission is to engage with the Indian Space Research Organization; SERVIR Applied Science Team member and USAID Climber Scientist Program, where projects involve close interaction with Nepali researchers and residents; occasional Visiting Scientist at ICIMOD. Research colleagues of Kargel are also involved internationally; for example, Umesh Haritashya has recently undertaken field research in Nepal, and our SERVIR project involves several Nepalese investigators from ICIMOD, Tribhuvan University, and other institutions in Nepal .

Global FTE committed to GLIMS: There are perhaps four overlapping types of participants in GLIMS. Each type serves important functions. (1) Direct contributors to NSIDC’s Glacier Database. (2) Direct contributors to the WGMS- and INSTAAR-led Randolph Glacier Inventory. (3) Algorithm and database developers. (4) Various types of support personnel providing image analysis services, support for algorithm development, field validation studies, glaciological expertise, or other needed direct support or value-added services. As mentioned, these types overlap. Thus, there are tight thematic and personnel relationships, many shared people, and - 23 -

partially shared database architectures between the GLIMS Glacier Database and Randolph Glacier Inventory; between those people developing algorithms and those applying them; between those undertaking remote sensing analysis and those validating results; between those populating databases and those interpreting results and deriving applications of the results. Most of these people generally also have other duties distinctly unaffiliated with GLIMS. Relatively few people are what may be termed full-time GLIMS personnel. As such, at the margins of “GLIMS personnel” there would be a big blurry list of people, and at the core very few who work full time on GLIMS. There is furthermore a blurry middle ground between GLIMS activities and some non-GLIMS activities, such as glacier mapping and snow mapping, or glacier flow vector mapping and glacier dynamical flow modeling. This stated, it may be estimated that about 200 people currently have some connection to GLIMS. Worldwide, it may be estimated (somewhat a guess), that of the 200 current GLIMS people, defined loosely, they average 25% FTE on GLIMS, for a total FTE of order 50 worldwide.

4.6 Outreach activities The U of Arizona is heavily invested into technical training in Nepal. We have undertaken several workshops to train students and tech staff in glacier mapping by remote sensing, image differencing, DEM differencing, and other techniques. The workshops have been ‘sold out’ every time. We have had close to 150 students, perhaps 100 different students (some have taken part more than once); most students are Nepali, but there also have been many foreigners. We also have been active in the villages affected by glacier hazards; we have conducted several public townhall type meetings, which every time have been very well attended by a broad spectrum of Nepali society. Kargel and his group have been very active in outreach through the national and world media (television, radio, and print media) and through NASA public information outlets such as Earth Observatory.

As mentioned above, the CHARIS project has as part of its mandate the training of our Asian partners. In May 2013, CHARIS researchers from NSIDC and INSTAAR (Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research) conducted short courses on remote sensing of glaciers and glacier mapping, isotope geochemistry, and glacier mass balance. This was training was well received, and more workshops will be conducted on glacier mapping and other topics in the autumn of 2014. Because GLIMS is now the primary repository of glacier mapping data in the world, we are teaching these short courses in the GLIMS context and using methods developed within the GLIMS initiative.

Locally, NSIDC and GLIMS personnel engage in school outreach via an annual open house with INSTAAR, as well as visits to local public schools.

4.7 Accomplishments, challenges, opportunities, and threats The GLIMS consortium is very well published. A literature compilation is still in progress and Appendix D is still not complete. Preliminary compilations are given in the Appendices D-1 and D-2. Each of the appendices portrays a different aspect of the publication record. Appendix D-1 is purely ASTER-centric and gives a good overview of the type of glacier research (GLIMS or not) that has been enabled partly through Kargel’s ASTER Science Team membership. Appendix D-2 - 24 -

provides a totally different perspective by listing papers that portray themselves as having a direct connection specifically to GLIMS. Appendix C is the Table of Contents and List of Contributors for the GLIMS book. A salient statistic from Appendix D-1 is that out of 200 papers that include ASTER data and are focused on glaciers, 128 (64%) are works by GLIMS participants (people who have contributed to the database or the GLIMS book or have contributed algorithms and presented them at GLIMS meetings and have shared them with the GLIMS community and others).

Accomplishments: USGS and then U of Arizona: The accomplishments of the GLIMS Initiative are considerable. A network of close to 200 collaborators from over 80 institutions and over 30 countries has been created, with the support of ASTER Science Team funding. The USGS- and then Arizona-led group has dedicated effort to: 1. International organization 2. GLIMS website development (with NSIDC) 3. ASTER image acquisition planning and replanning, and interfacing with ASTER Mission Operations for (a) both routine observations and special requests pertaining to disasters or field work or special studies, and (b) representing GLIMS science on the joint U.S./Japan ASTER Science Team. 4. Algorithm development and testing, including development of terrain surface classifiers (led by Kargel, e.g., Kargel et al. 2005), development of advanced artificial intelligence approaches to glacier and terrain classification and mountain processes (led by Furfaro), radiative insolation modelling of landscapes including some terms pertaining to landscape properties that are not usually treated (led by Bishop), radiative transfer modelling geared towards realistic glacier mixtures of ice and sediment (led by Furfaro), and differencing of multispectral images and ASTER DEMs (led by Kargel and Leonard). 5. Response to crises of a physical nature (e.g., Attabad landslide, Pakistan army base disaster in Kashmir, Seti River outburst flood). 6. Response to crises of a public relations/public information nature, e.g., the Palcacocha affair, 2035 ‘Himalayagate’ affair, Times Atlas “Atlasgate” error regarding Greenland). 7. Media interactions and public town-hall meetings regarding GLIMS science and the above- mentioned crises. 8. Authorship or coauthorship of GLIMS research journal articles and book chapters. 9. Organizing and pushing or contributing to GLIMS consortium publications, e.g., Bishop et al. 2004, Kargel et al. 2005, Raup and et al. 2007, and Kargel et al. (2014, the GLIMS book). See Appendix 3 for the GLIMS book Table of Contents and List of Contributors. 10. Validation field studies in Alaska and the Himalaya 11. Capacity-building activities in Nepal (training of >>100 students and tech persons both in the lab and the field. About 10 of them show much promise or are thriving as part of the foundations of ICIMOD, thus helping ICIMOD and Tribhuvan University build to their current prodigious capability in a significant hub of glacier remote sensing/GIS science. 12. Participation in international conferences either as presenters or symposium conveners, and organization of GLIMS workshops and smaller, less formal gatherings.

- 25 -

Accomplishments, NSIDC: A system of glacier IDs has been created to allow different Regional Centers to assign IDs independently. The funding from NASA that NSIDC received as a REASoN CAN supported the construction of the database, ingest and QC processes, and first-generation web interfaces. GLIMS has become widely known and respected in the glaciological community. GLIMS activities have fostered N publications that directly related to glacier mapping and monitoring. GLIMS data users have downloaded a total of several terabytes since 2005. The GLIMS Glacier Database now contains data on 122,000 glaciers, more than 3,000 of which have outlines from more than one time. About many 10,000 outlines have been transferred to the Randolph Glacier Inventory.

Challenges and opportunities, U of Arizona: Stable funding is the #1 challenge and bottlenecks in funding or possibility of terminated funding are a triennial threat. After resigning from USGS in 2005 in protest against a suppression of science incident, Kargel was funded at about 0.5 FTE from 2005-2008. After surviving a severe bottleneck of funding in 2008, a breakthrough was reached and two grants were held simultaneously from then until 2014, and FTE at U of Arizona rose to 1.5 (including GLIMS-related applications science). But in 2014 we again have reached a tight bottleneck. We will see following a meeting at NASA HQ what will emerge from the bottleneck this year. We have very strong support from ASTER team, IPCC, and elements in NASA HQ, and the assurance has been given by NASA that Kargel’s ASTER Science Team membership will continue whether money continues or not. Kargel is supporting a longer term solution to help spur free availability of ASTER images no matter what happens to GLIMS funding; this is important, because even after ASTER fails, there will exist a large legacy archive of images; in addition, improved awareness of the association between free satellite imagery and high scientific productivity and innovation is bound to apply to other imaging systems as well. Key opportunities also have arrived. Commercial high-resolution satellite data is available to Kargel at no cost, and steps have been taken to bring these data into play in GLIMS. (The commercial outfits impose sharp restrictions on redistribution of the data, but we are working on that angle and hope to arrive soon at a solution, which may involve downsampling.) In the near term, considering the funding threat, our challenge is to take a great opportunity given to us to put on a 1-hour “dog and pony show” at NASA HQ, organized by Kargel for May 30. NSIDC, TAMU, and U of Arizona will be sending people to undertake this presentation, which will feature updates on where GLIMS stands and what it has achieved, as well as present a vision for a “GLIMS 2.” So long as we have some funding to allow us to live and fight another day, GLIMS 2 is our biggest opportunity and our biggest challenge, and we intend to win. In Boulder we shall describe what we envisage for GLIMS 2.

Challenges, NSIDC: With limited funding in recent years, one challenge is the modernization of the web interfaces to the database. The infrastructure at NSIDC has changed over the last three years as well, and it will become increasingly important to bring the data ingest and web application deployment systems in line with the new and improved directions in which NSIDC is now headed. While these can be viewed as challenges, they are also opportunities, because these new procedures will reduce human workloads and reduce chances of error. The mapping of global glaciers within GLIMS happened too slowly to satisfy one need: IPCC-motivated research into contribution from glaciers to sea level. This need was filled by a data set called the - 26 -

Randolph Glacier Inventory (RGI), which is more geographically complete than GLIMS but at the cost of much of the attribute data that GLIMS has. While these data sets are different in richness and serve different needs, there is a threat that the RGI will come to be perceived as the “new and best” glacier inventory, leading to deterioration in the reputation of GLIMS and increased difficulty in obtaining funding for GLIMS. This perception would be based on some false assumptions, but is a real threat nonetheless. The dual GLIMS glacier database and Randolph Glacier Inventory also provides a rich opportunity to serve differing needs on the needed timeframes, as we shall explain in Boulder.

4.8 Key tasks for the coming years (as described in the minutes of the Executive Board meetings in 2013) • Formalization of GLIMS leading structures and extension of GLIMS leading team with active scientists and clearly assigned tasks and responsibilities • Introduction of annual calls-for-data for glacier inventory data with a main focus on vector outlines for GLIMS • Time-stamping and attribution of high-quality glacier outlines from the Randolph dataset and integration into GLIMS database • Active fostering of baseline and repeat glacier inventories • Bring the GLIMS Book to print • Initiate a periodical GLIMS publication

- 27 -

5. Conclusions and outlook for GTN-G

Accomplishments: Glacier monitoring has been internationally coordinated for 120 years, i.e. since 1894. Until the 1990s, the WGMS and its predecessor organizations have been in charge of compiling standardized data and information on glacier distribution and changes. Thanks to the more formalized collaboration with NSIDC and GLIMS since the turn to the 21 st century, GTN-G is jointly (again) taking responsibility for the compilation and dissemination of all related datasets. The WGMS has mainly been in charge for the compilation of in-situ glacier fluctuations. With the available long-term resources of about two positions it is possible to actively compile these observations through its scientific collaboration network in more than 30 countries around the world. The data are made available through a web-based interface, via email, and as a full database download. The data are periodically published in the Fluctuations of Glaciers and the Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin series as well as in ad-hoc assessment reports. The WGMS is well connected to the various international organizations and has a leading role in operating the GTN- G. NSIDC – in its role as World Data Center for Glaciology – has taken the responsibility of hosting the glacier inventory datasets (WGI, GLIMS, RGI) as well as the Glacier Photograph Collection. Web-based user interfaces maintained by NSIDC allow direct access to these datasets. GLIMS was set up in the late 1990s as a bottom-up initiative of the scientific community with the aim of compiling a global glacier inventory including digital glacier outlines based on common guidelines and a database that enables to store multi-temporal inventories for change assessment. Continued free availability of ASTER satellite data for GLIMS participants enabled the community to work with ASTER data in their studies.

Challenges: The major drawback for many years has been the very limited funding available for long-term glacier monitoring activities as well as for the maintenance and extension of related databases. The currently two positions at WGMS allow compiling data from the relatively small community of in-situ observers but are not enough for tapping the much larger potential of fluctuation data from remotely sensed observations. For several years already, NSIDC has been left with less than 20% of a position for the maintenance of all its glacier databases. This does not allow for actively compiling the related data and sometime event not to ingest new data within a reasonable amount of time. From the very beginning, GLIMS has been running without funding for a coordination office. The development of the GLIMS database at NSIDC and the related data management of the first years were funded by NASA. With the original leading GLIMS team becoming more absorbed with tasks at their home institutions, the initiative has lost an essential part of its momentum. As a result, it is – with the limited resources at NSIDC – currently hardly able to deal with the work load related to the integration of the new Randolph dataset (RGI) into the GLIMS database or with reviving the data submission from the research community. The GTN-G MetaData Browser aims to be the key tool to provide users an integrative map-based overview of all available glacier datasets. However, the current interface, run by NSIDC, has never got beyond a test version status and is not up to the tasks.

- 28 -

Opportunities: The growing number of satellite and airborne data made available at low or no costs have a great potential for boosting glacier monitoring at global level. Multispectral image data such as available through the USGS Global Visualization Viewer provide a real data treasure for glacier inventory tasks or repeat assessments of glacier velocity. Multi-spectral (optical) and RADAR sensors provide information on surface topography from the related digital elevation models (SRTM DEM, ASTER GDEM) and open the way for assessing topographic glacier information for all glaciers worldwide. When the currently compiled world DEM from the TanDEM-X mission is made freely available to the community, geodetic volume changes for all glaciers worldwide can be determined, leading to a new era of knowledge about global glacier mass changes. In the meantime, point-measurements from altimeters such as ICESat provide information on global-scale trends in glacier volume changes. Combined with the existing in-situ network, this comprehensive global data availability has the potential to fully implement the integrative multi-level glacier monitoring strategy as described in Section 1. First joint projects with the space agencies (e.g., GLIMS, GlobGlacier, Glaciers_cci) started to set up data order and process chains to derive glacier products dedicated to global glacier monitoring.

Threats: The emerging availability of remote sensing data comes along with an increased pressure on the research community to produce and publish innovative results. At the same time, the fundraising for long-term glacier monitoring activities (based on established methods) has become even harder. Without a fundamental change in the funding strategy for monitoring activities as well as for related data centres and services, the current system has not the capacities to tap the great potential of remote sensing data and to truly link traditional methods with new technologies. In the present mainly research-based system a corresponding change requires a new perception of the values of standardized monitoring data for achieving scientific results.

Joint key tasks for the coming years • Continue coordination of activities through annual meetings of the GTN-G Executive Board • Joint organisation of conference sessions dedicated to glacier monitoring from in-situ and remotely sensed observations; e.g. at EGU and AGU • A better representation of the internationally coordinated glacier monitoring community within international organisations and agencies.

- 29 -

References Bojinski, S., Verstraete, M., Peterson, T. C., Richter, C., Simmons, A., & Zemp, M. (2014). The concept of Essential Climate Variables in support of climate research, applications, and policy. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 140129070609001. doi:10.1175/BAMS-D-13-00047.1 Cogley, J. G. (2009). Geodetic and direct mass-balance measurements: comparison and joint analysis. Annals of Glaciology, 50(50), 96–100. doi:10.3189/172756409787769744 Cogley, J. G., Hock, R., Rasmussen, L. A., Arendt, A. A., Bauder, A., Braithwaite, R. J., … Zemp, M. (2011). Glossary of Glacier Mass Balance and Related Terms. IHP-VII Technical Documents in Hydrology No. 86, IACS Contribution No. 2. Paris: UNESCO-IHP. Dyurgerov, M. B., & Meier, M. F. (2005). Glaciers and the changing Earth system: a 2004 snapshot (No. 58). Boulder CO, USA. GCOS (2010). Implementation Plan for the Global Observing System for Climate in Support of the UNFCCC (2010 Update) (No. GCOS-138 (WMO/TD No. 1523)) (Vol. 138, p. 180). GTOS (2009). Assessment of the status of the development of the standards for the terrestrial Essential Climate Variables: Snow cover (No. GTOS-60) (p. 13). Haeberli, W. (1998). Historical evolution and operational aspects of worldwide glacier monitoring. In W. Haeberli, M. Hoelzle, & S. Suter (Eds.), Into the second century of worldwide glacier monitoring: Prospects and strategies (pp. 35–51). Paris, France: UNESCO-IHP. Haeberli, W. (2008). Changing views of changing glaciers. In B. Orlove, E. Wiegandt, & B. H. Luckman (Eds.), The darkening peaks: Glacial retreat in scientific and social context (pp. 23–32). University of California Press. Haeberli, W., Cihlar, J., & Barry, R. G. (2000). Glacier monitoring within the Global Climate Observing System. Annals Of Glaciology, 31, 241–246. Jones, H. G. (2008). From Commission to Association : the transition of the International Commission on Snow and Ice ( ICSI ) to the International Association of Cryospheric Sciences ( IACS ). Annals Of Glaciology, 48(1), 1–5. Kasser, P. (1970). Gründung eines “Permanent Service on the Fluctuations of Glaciers.” Zeitschrift Für Gletscherkunde Und Glazialgeologie, 6(1-2), 193–200. Paskin, N. (2005). Digital object identifiers for scientific data. Data Science Journal, 4, 1–10. Paul, F., Barry, R. G., Cogley, J. G., Frey, H., Haeberli, W., Ohmura, A., Ommanney, C. S. L. Raup, B.H., Rivera, A. and Zemp, M. (2009). Recommendations for the compilation of glacier inventory data from digital sources. Annals of Glaciology, 50(53), 119–126. Radok, U. (1997). The International Commission on Snow and Ice (ICSI) and its precursors, 1894-1994. Hydrological Sciences Journal-Journal Des Sciences Hydrologiques, 42(2), 131–140. Retrieved from http://iahs.info/hsj/420/hysj_42_02_0131.pdf Raup, B., Kääb, A.; Kargel, J.S., Bishop, M.P., Hamilton, G., Lee, E., Paul, F., Rau, F., Soltesz, D., Khalsa, S.J.S., Beedle, M. and Helm, C. (2007). Remote Sensing and GIS Technology in the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) Project. Computers and Geosciences 33: 104-125. Thomson Reuters (2012). Collaboorative science solving the issues of discovery, attribution and measurement in data sharing. October Issue. Retrieved from http://thomsonreuters.com/products/ip-science/04_037/collaborative-science-essay.pdf UNEP (2007). Global outlook for ice and snow (p. 235). Arendal, Norway: United Nations, GRID-Arendal. Voigt, T., Füssel, H.-M., Gärtner-Roer, I., Huggel, C., Marty, C., & Zemp, M. (Eds.). (2010). Impacts of climate change on snow, ice, and permafrost in Europe: Observed trends, future projections, and socio- economic relevance (p. 117). European Topic Centre on Air and Climate Change, Technical Paper, 2010 (13). Retrieved from http://acm.eionet.europa.eu/reports/ETCACC_TP_2010_13_Cryosphere_CC_Impacts

- 30 -

WGMS (1989). World glacier inventory - Status 1988. (W. Haeberli, H. Bösch, K. Scherler, G. Østrem, & C. C. Wallén, Eds.) (p. 458). Zurich, Switzerland: IAHS(ICSI)/UNEP/UNESCO, World Glacier Monitoring Service. WGMS (1998). Into the second century of worldwide glacier monitoring: Prospects and strategies. (W. Haeberli, M. Hoelzle, & S. Suter, Eds.). Paris, France: UNESCO-IHP. WGMS (2008a). Fluctuations of Glaciers 2000-2005 (Vol. IX). (W. Haeberli, M. Zemp, A. Kääb, F. Paul, & M. Hoelzle, Eds.) (p. 266). Zurich, Switzerland: ICSU(FAGS)/IUGG (IACS)/UNEP/UNESCO/WMO, World Glacier Monitoring Service. Retrieved from http://www.wgms.ch/fog.html WGMS (2008b). Global Glacier Changes: facts and figures. (M. Zemp, I. Gärtner-Roer, A. Kääb, M. Hoelzle, F. Paul, & W. Haeberli, Eds.) (p. 88). Zurich, Switzerland: UNEP, World Glacier Monitoring Service. Retrieved from http://www.grid.unep.ch/glaciers/ WGMS (2010). Summary report on the WGMS General Assembly of the National Correspondents 2010. (M. Zemp, I. Gärtner-Roer, S. U. Nussbaumer, F. Paul, M. Hoelzle, & W. Haeberli, Eds.) (p. 45). Zurich, Switzerland: World Glacier Monitoring Service. WGMS (2012). Fluctuations of Glaciers 2005-2010 (Vol. X). Zemp, M., Frey, H., Gärtner-Roer, I., Nussbaumer, S.U., Hoelzle, M., Paul, F. and W. Haeberli (eds.), ICSU (WDS) / IUGG (IACS) / UNEP / UNESCO / WMO, World Glacier Monitoring Service, Zurich, Switzerland: 336 pp. Publication based on database version: doi:10.5904/wgms-fog-2012-11 Zemp, M. (2012). The monitoring of glaciers at local, mountain, and global scale. Habilitationsschrift zur Erlangung der Venia Legendi, Schriftenreihe Physische Geographie, University of Zurich, Switzerland, Vol. 65: 72 pp & Appendix. Zemp, M., Thibert, E., Huss, M., Stumm, D., Rolstad Denby, C., Nuth, C., … Andreassen, L. M. (2013). Reanalysing glacier mass balance measurement series. The Cryosphere, 7(4), 1227–1245. doi:10.5194/tc-7-1227-2013

- 31 -

Appendix A: GoogleScholar overview on the citation of WGMS data reports

…

- 32 -

Appendix B: Summary of the survey feedback on WGMS data and information products

Question

Feedback data contri butors Feedback data users

How do you evaluate the WGMS website? (http://www.wgms.ch)

How do you evaluate the WGMS MetaData Browser? (http://www.wgms.ch/metadatabrowser.html)

How do you evaluate our Email data&information service? ([email protected])

- 33 -

How do you evaluate the front variation dataset?

How do you evaluate the glaciological mass balance dataset?

How do you evaluate the geodetic mass balance dataset?

How do you evaluate the glacier special event dataset?

- 34 -

How do you evaluate the Fluctuations of Glaciers publication series? (http://www.wgms.ch/fog.html)

How do you evaluate the Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin publication series? (http://www.wgms.ch/gmbb.html)

How do you evaluate our Glacier Monito ring Sessions at AGU and EGU? (E.g., http://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU2014/session/14130)

- 35 -

How do you evaluate our data and service products in general?

Where do you see the strengths of the WGMS?

> Internet > Comprehensive data and information > The measured data is a kind of most important > In comparison to Randolph it is good and handy resource for glaciological studies. WGMS not only has > WGMS is an excellent 'go-to' place for glacier mass long series of measured data in history, but also "has" a balance data. "group" with members from different regions in the > Helpful data, excellent response time and assistance by world producing measured data every year, of course email when necessary. also in the future. > Email data&information service & publication series > International data storage and data provider, International forum for standards > international network, long-term experience in data collection, link to/embedded in national and international > valuable database -official published reports organisations > The data submitted and gathered for glacier mass > Data well organised and easy to use and read balance around the world > I have used the data service for student teaching on > Openness of data, observations on the main mountain glacier response to climate. They were very helpful in systems of the world supplying just the data that I asked for in a usable format > Glacier Mass Balance Bulletin publication series are and timely fashion. Glaciers are not my research area, so I really good. cannot comment on anything else. > 1. Demonstration of importance and wide scope of > the scientific publications glacier monitoring to policy-makers all over the world > Direct exchange with data investigators! (valuable for non-scientists). 2. Providing possibility for operative assessment of glacier changes in different > The service is very efficiently responding to any queries mountains, evaluated in terms of comparable or even from the user universal methodical grounds (valuable for scientists). > Data used for projects was sent to me quickly 3. Coordinative role, i.e. arranging professional discussion > Worldwide information at one location of the most acute glaciological problems among representatives of various countries and national > continuity in data collection and distribution. service to scientific schools, leading to unification/uniformity of the users. basics for data collection and analysis. 4. Motivation for > Surface-based glacier monitoring young generations of glaciologists. > Consistent measurements of frontal variations > Capable of bringing together all the data related to > WGMS is necessary, the data are precious to world's glaciers and capacity building in glacier understand how global glacier change. monitoring. > Very clear and simple to use > Consistent data acquisition and publication > Is a very good reference for any sort of glaciological > The strengths in the strengths of the WGMS, in studio measurements. are always important and interesting, it is important to > Quick response to data request. know as in the other countries is carried out and the data recopilaciond discharged to the WGMS. > - completeness of the data - great service regarding data and information requests > WGMS gathers very important data from all the world > There is no details database available for the Western > - Collection and dissemination of glacier historical and Karakorum. especially Mass balance data recent glacier data on a global scale. -Highly respected institution. > global database

- 36 -

-Strong network of collaborators. > gathering and providing global glacier data > the whole world and long time serial observation data > I see that the best side, organization, ability to work in different countries every years improved measurement methods > Worldwide coverage. > Availability of quantitative data for many stakeholders. > homogeneous data set and continuous; availability and easy management on the web > Importance of providing relevant information to society in relation to climate changes > 1) Worldwide recognition 2) Technical support 3) The Bulletins are reliable and practical > The strength of the WGMS is the collection (in a single database) of the data measured by many institutes in the world, otherwise hardly available for scientific and popularizing purposes. > Quantity of data and different places > Periodic and non-periodic publications of the data are very high quality and the web site has all necessary information. > in the mass balance evaluation worldwide > The large amount the information and To review all the information > WGMS is the key player to compile and disseminate the cryospheric measurements within and beyond the scientific community to raise awareness about the actual conditions with facts and figures of continuous measurements. > Compilation > Managing the large amount of scientists that collaborate and editing and publishing their results on glaciological research. > Easy access to data and easy to use tools. > - to collect all the data and provide it in quality controlled homogenized way - provide guidelines for data collectors - train data collectors - encourage studies based on the gained dataset and contribute with your knowledge - support local data collectors in fundraising for their measurement series > on the site > Due to its structure there are good relationships to those who have measured which gives high confidence in data and meta information. > very professional; Access to all worldwide data very important; > Collection and free delivery of unique datasets concerning glacier fluctuations > networking science and results > Compilation and storage of data

- 37 -

Where do you see the highest priority for improving our data and information products?

> Internet and Int. journals > access to metadata records for individual datasets. > For me, the data and information products are both ok. > in demarcating the glaciers needs more accuracy for > Data quality mass balance studies. > faster publication of data & publications > I think it would be great if the WGMS could pressure contributors to provide errors for their measurements. > To start gathering data related to meteorological observations on glaciers in which mass balance > It's difficult to go to a particular glacier when you have observations are carried out to click through 100+ that you don't want in order to get there--making that searchable according to specific > monitoring of bigger number of glaciers, increase data criteria would be very helpful, as would being able to reliability, improving procedure of glaciers mass balance request data on all glaciers in a particular region, instead monitoring of just individual ones. > Glacier monitoring sessions especially remotely sensed > The scientific environment is changing and we can observations are not very good. nowadays process huge amount of data in an automated > In paying more attention to mass balance components. way (e.g. validation, calibration of models). I believe the > Device strategies for promoting glacier monitoring in WGMS should keep to its main strengths but modernize key data gap areas such as HKH region. the data bases, data structure and publication strategy: > The data browser calls upon existing data, and should Focus on few data bases of high quality; adapting existing be better, many glaciers are missing or misallocated. data bases, e.g. less of a focus on total glacier mass Better development of both a glacier ELA or AAR data set balance and more focus on raw data (obviously also where mass balance is not determined, not just where it depends on the willingness to submit such data); could is. Better terminus fluctuation data from areas beyond personal resources be freed by modifying the publication Europe. The data is in publications, just has to make it strategy, e.g. is it necessary to publish a huge document your way every five years while the data are available online? > Improving the data, I see to help representatives from > It was hard to split the data by dates. Maybe clearer each country to fully understand the formats, to talk definition between months, years etc. about a single management protocol get information > make the online data more interactive. about glaciers and resolve and dissolve doubts > More global observation network. Publish point data for representatives to tell whether correct form filling data glaciological data (of the past) / re-analysis of past data. and information handling as camntidad can expand to > The service relies on the quality of the mass balance study glaciers in its scope. data provided by others and they are of variable quality. > One of the highest priorities should be the This is inherent to the service and you cannot do much incorporation of more and/or unpublished records of about it. glaciers in underrepresented regions. Should stress the > Make the webpage more clear in where to find certain need for these records and promote/support the aspects of information such as data initiation of serious, long-term monitoring programs in such regions. > Timeliness in the publication of worldwide length variations (FoG has a delay of > 2 years) > It should strengthen application statistic analysis of the long time serial observation data. > complete archive of all available data (frontal change, MB, geodetic changes). > With the highest priority for improving data capacity think theoretically courses, one of the problems its > Supplementing the present mass balance data with topographic maps, satellite images available of which 30 seasonal (winter and summer) balance data. m resolution hard to see the boundary between the > Gaps in mass balance data glaciers madder. > I think you should hold some classes and trains to > More detail on local sources would be appreciated. people who monitor glacier in situ to ensure the accuracy > meta data browser of measurement. I think many glaciers field works were completed by tyro. > continuing the publication of measurement series about the global glacier areas > Glacier variation datasets in France > 1) Include more glaciological variables (eg. Glacier > Increase the completeness of the data sets. Include hydrology, volume glacier) point mass balance measurements in the data base. 2) Include more glaciers around the world > Make data available for self-download rather than by e- > It should be interesting the improvement of a website mail request. section with comparison images of glaciers (past- > - improved access to the data via the website - present), with the collaboration of contributors and additional information on the website (not only in the national correspondent. publication series), for instance on specific glaciers, > It would be good to compile the raw mass balance data measurement techniques and regional changes - 38 -

(stakes and snow pit) beacause there are a large variety > if the organization will contact the research institutes of methods used to process that data. that are working on glaciers there data may be very > mass balance helpful for future researcher. > Improving information graphics > - improving the quality of data (correctness) - Visualization of the data (diagram,…) > Adding new glacier mass balance (GMB) sites and its detailed information, for those mountain ranges without > gathering benchmark data from remote regions GMB data; in addition to that collect the geodetic GMB data. > The most of the data is no checked by photogrammetry > Get involved more scientists and their research results > Improve the metadata browser (allow other selection parameters, e.g. glacier size). Improve some menues of the website (e.g. when listing products, a set of acronyms appear, many of which can be unknown to the user, especially for new users: gmbb, fog, wgi, ...). > encourage people to send more point data and metadata > In recent years some studies on global scale glaciology were published, using Cogley's data instead of WGMS. I do not know why, but it seems that Cogley's data for whatever reason is preferred in the 'modellers community'. The WGMS should first ask the users what is needed and then think how to provide it. Also, I think there can be a way to merge both datasets and avoid the amount of labour in maintaining competing datasets. > do n o t reduce to collect all available glaciogical data because of less funding! > guidelines review, i.e. taking into account some climate change adaptions in the case of the wgi splitting of glaciers) > Collection of point data, i.e. raw measurements, and not just interpreted mass balance values such as glacier- wide quantities

- 39 -

Appendix C: The GLIMS Book

- 40 -

- 41 -

Appendix D: The GLIMS Bibliography

D-1: ASTER papers that deal with glaciers

The following list is just up through February 2013. It does not include abstracts, and if two papers were found that appear to be in antecedent and final forms, the less rigorous one was deleted.

Red = Glacier dynamics papers not focused on length, area, or thickness fluctuations or mass balance, but perhaps focus on flow vector fields, debris cover, glacier lakes, or other dynamics that are related to GLIMS but are not among the core database parameters. *= core GLIMS authorship, mentioning GLIMS or written by GLIMS authors

Green = Glacier inventory/mapping/systematic change/mass balance analysis papers *= core GLIMS authorship, mentioning GLIMS or written by GLIMS authors

Blue = Methodology and test applications papers * = core GLIMS algorithms/test applications produced in the context of GLIMS/written by GLIMS authors

Adler, J. J. (2010), Assessing supraglacial water volume and the changing dynamics of the surface topography near the Jakobshavn Glacier, Greenland, PhD dissertation, 159pp. Ahmad, S., S. I. Hasnain, C. D. (. Arha, V. S. (. Ramamurthy, K. N. (. Mathur, and U. K. (. Bassi (2004), Analysis of satellite imageries for characterization of glacio-morphological features of the Gangotri Glacier, Ganga headwater, Garhwal Himalaya; ; Workshop on Gangotri Glacier; ; proceedings [modified], Special Publication Series - Geological Survey of India, 80 , 61-67. Ahn, Y. and I. M. Howat (2011), Efficient automated glacier surface velocity measurement from repeat images using multi- image/multichip and null exclusion feature tracking, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 49 (8), 2838-2846, doi:10.1109/TGRS.2011.2114891. Aizen, V. B., V. A. Kuzmichenok, A. B. Surazakov, and E. M. Aizen (2006), Glacier changes in the central and northern Tien Shan during the last 140 years based on surface and remote- sensing data; ; Papers from the international symposium on High-elevation glaciers and climate records, Annals of Glaciology, 43 , 202-213. Aizen, V. B., V. A. Kuzmichenok, A. B. Surazakov, and E. M. Aizen (2007), Glacier changes in the Tien Shan as determined from topographic and remotely sensed data; ; Northern Eurasia regional climate and environmental change, Global Planet. Change, 56 (3-4), 328-340, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.07.016. *Allen, S., I. Owens, and P. Sirguey (2008), Satellite remote sensing procedures for glacial terrain analyses and hazard assessment in the Aoraki Mount Cook region, New Zealand, N. Z. J. Geol. Geophys., 51 (1), 73-87. Allen, S. K., D. Schneider, and I. F. Owens (2009), First approaches towards modelling glacial hazards in the Mount Cook region of New Zealand's Southern Alps, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS), 9 (2), 481-499. *Ananicheva, M. D. and G. A. Kapustin (2011), Izmeneniye sostoyaniya gornykh lednikovykh sistem Rossiyskoy Subarktiki; ; otsenka po kosmicheskim snimkam i katalogu lednikov SSSR/ Change of mountain glacial systems in the Russian sub-Arctic; ; analysis based on space photography and catalog of glaciers in the USSR, in Polyarnaya kriosfera i vody sushi /Polar cryosphere and continental waters, , edited by V. M. Kotlyakov, pp. 114- 121, Moscow, Russian Federation, Paulsen Editions. *Ananicheva, M. D. (2012), Current state of glaciers in the Koryak Range and prediction of their evolution until the middle of the 21st century, Led i Sneg = Ice and Snow, 117 , 15-23. Atwood, D. K., F. Meyer, and A. Arendt (2010), Using L-band SAR coherence to delineate glacier extent, Canadian Journal of Remote Sensing, 36 , S186-S195. *Bamber, J. (2006), Remote sensing in glaciology, in Glacier science and environmental change, , edited by P. G. Knight, United Kingdom (GBR), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom (GBR). Barcaza, G., M. Aniya, T. Matsumoto, and T. Aoki (2009), Satellite-Derived Equilibrium Lines in Northern Patagonia Icefield, Chile, and Their Implications to Glacier Variations, Arctic Antarctic and Alpine Research, 41 (2), 174-182, doi:10.1657/1938-4246-41.2.174. Barker, A. D. and B. Hallet (2010), Thinning of glaciers in the Khumbu Himal from 1955 to 2008, U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report, OF 2010-1099 , @unpaginated. *Barrand, N. E. and T. Murray (2006), Multivariate controls on the incidence of glacier surging in the Karakoram Himalaya, Arct. Antarct. Alp. Res., 38 (4), 489-498. * Berthier, E. and T. Toutin (2008), SPOT5-HRS digital elevation models and the monitoring of glacier elevation changes in North-West Canada and South-East Alaska, Remote Sens. Environ., 112 (5), 2443-2454. *Berthier, E., H. Vadon, D. Baratoux, Y. Arnaud, C. Vincent, K. L. Feigl, F. Remy, and B. Legresy (2005), Surface motion of mountain glaciers derived from satellite optical imagery, Remote Sens. Environ., 95 (1), 14-28. *Berthier, E., Y. Arnaud, R. Kumar, S. Ahmad, P. Wagnon, and P. Chevallier (2007), Remote sensing estimates of glacier mass balances in the Himachal Pradesh (Western Himalaya, India), Remote Sens. Environ., 108 (3), 327-338. *Berthier, E., E. Schiefer, G. K. C. Clarke, B. Menounos, and F. Remy (2010), Contribution of Alaska glaciers to sea-level - 42 -

rise derived from satellite imagery, Nature Geoscience, 3 (2), 92- 95, doi:10.1038/NGEO737. *Bhambri, R., T. Bolch, and R. K. Chaujar (2011), Mapping of debris-covered glaciers in the Garhwal Himalayas using ASTER DEMs and thermal data, Int. J. Remote Sens., 32 (23), 8095- 8119, doi:10.1080/01431161.2010.532821. *Bhambri, R. and T. Bolch (2009), Glacier mapping: a review with special reference to the Indian Himalayas, Prog. Phys. Geogr., 33 (5), 672-704, doi:10.1177/0309133309348112. *Bhambri, R., T. Bolch, R. K. Chaujar, and S. C. Kulshreshtha (2011), Glacier changes in the Garhwal Himalaya, India, from 1968 to 2006 based on remote sensing, J. Glaciol., 57 (203), 543-556. *Bishop, M.P., Barry, R.G., Bush, A.B.G., Copeland, L., Dwyer, J.L., Fountain, A.G., Haeberli, W., Hall, D.K., Kääb, A., Kargel, J.S., Molnia, B.F., Olsenholler, J.A., Paul, F., Raup, B.H., Shroder, J.F., Trabant, D.C., Wessels, R., 2004, Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS): Remote sensing and GIS investigations of the Earth's cryosphere. Geocarto International , 19 (2), 57-85. * Bishop, M. P., J. F. Shroder Jr, U. K. Haritashya, and H. N. N. Bulley (2007), Remote sensing and GIS for alpine glacier change detection in the Himalaya, in Mountains witnesses of global changes; ; research in the Himalaya and Karakoram; ; SHARE-Asia project, , vol. 10, edited by R. Baudo et al, pp. 209-234. Blaszczyk, M., J. A. Jania, and J. O. Hagen (2009), Tidewater glaciers of Svalbard: Recent changes and estimates of calving fluxes, Polish Polar Research, 30 (2), 85-142. *Bolch, T. (2007), Climate change and glacier retreat in northern Tien Shan (Kazakhstan, Global Planet. Change, 56 (1-2), 1-12. *Bolch, T., M. F. Buchroithner, J. Peters, M. Baessler, and S. Bajracharya (2008), Identification of glacier motion and potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the Mt. Everest region/Nepal using spaceborne imagery, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 8 (6), 1329-1340. *Bolch, T., B. Menounos, and R. Wheate (2008), Remotely-sensed Western Canadian glacier inventory 1985-2005 and regional glacier recession rates, Geophysical Research Abstracts, 10 , EGU2008-A-10403. *Bolch, T., T. Pieczonka, and D. I. Benn (2011), Multi-decadal mass loss of glaciers in the Everest area (Nepal Himalaya) derived from stereo imagery, Cryosphere, 5 (2), 349-358, doi:10.5194/tc-5-349-2011. *Bolch, T., M. Buchroithner, T. Pieczonka, and A. Kunert (2008), Planimetric and volumetric glacier changes in the Khumbu Himal, Nepal, since 1962 using Corona, Landsat TM and ASTER data, J. Glaciol., 54 (187), 592-600. *Bolch, T. and U. Kamp (2006), Glacier mapping in high mountains using DEMs, Landsat and ASTER data; ; Proceedings of the eighth international symposium on High mountain remote sensing cartography, Grazer Schriften der Geographie und Raumforschung, 41 , 37-48. *Bolch, T., J. Peters, A. Yegorov, B. Pradhan, M. Buchroithner, and V. Blagoveshchensky (2011), Identification of potentially dangerous glacial lakes in the northern Tien Shan, Nat. Hazards, 59 (3), 1691-1714, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11069-011-9860-2. *Bolch, T., A Kulkarni, A. Kaab, C. Huggel, F. Paul, J.G. Cogley, H. Frey, J.S. Kargel, K. Fujita, M. Scheel, S. Bajracharya, and M. Stoffel, 2012, The State and Fate of Himalayan Glaciers, Science , 336, 310-314, and Supplemental Online Material. *Bown, F., A. Rivera, C. Acuna, and J. (. Jacka (2008), Recent glacier variations at the Aconcagua Basin, central Chilean Andes; ; Papers from the cryospheric section of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics meeting, Annals of Glaciology, 48 , 43-48, doi:10.3189/172756408784700572. Brown, J., J. Harper, W. T. Pfeffer, N. Humphrey, and J. Bradford (2011), High-resolution study of layering within the percolation and soaked facies of the Greenland ice sheet, Annals of Glaciology, 52 (59), 35-42, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/172756411799096286. *Buchroithner, M. F. and T. Bolch (2007), An automated method to delineate the ice extension of the debris-covered glaciers at Mt. Everest based on ASTER imagery; ; Proceedings of the 9th international symposium on High mountain remote sensing cartography, Grazer Schriften der Geographie und Raumforschung, 43 , 71-78. *Bulley, H. N. N., M. P. Bishop, J. F. Shroder, and U. K. Haritashya (2013), Integration of classification tree analyses and spatial metrics to assess changes in supraglacial lakes in the Karakoram Himalaya, Int. J. Remote Sens., 34 (2), 387-411, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2012.705915. *CAI, D., J. MA, Y. NIAN, S. Liu, and D. Shangguan (2006), The study of glacier change using remote sensing in Mt. Muztagta, Journal of Lanzhou University.Natural Science, 42 (1), 13-17. *Casey, K. A., A. Kaab, and D. I. Benn (2012), Geochemical characterization of supraglacial debris via in situ and optical remote sensing methods: a case study in Khumbu Himalaya, Nepal, Cryosphere, 6 (1), 85-100, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-85-2012. *Casey, K. and A. Kaab (2012), Estimation of supraglacial dust and debris geochemical composition via satellite reflectance and emissivity, Remote Sensing, 4 (9), 2554-2575, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rs4092554. Che, T., R. Jin, X. Li, and L. Wu (2004), Glacial Lakes Variation and the Potentially Dangerous Glacial Lakes in the Pumqu Basin of Tibet during the Last Two Decades, J. Glaciol. Geocryol., 26 (4), 397-402. Che, T., R. Jin, X. Li, and L. Wu (2004), The variations and the potential outburst of glacial lakes in the Pumqu Basin, Xizang, China in the past 20 years, Bingchuan Dongtu = Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 26 (4), 397-402. *Cogley, J.G., J.S. Kargel, G. Kaser, C.J. van der Veen, 20 January 2010, Tracking the Source of Glacier Misinformation, Science 326, 924-925. *Copland, L., S. Pope, M. P. Bishop, J. F. Shroder Jr, P. Clendon, A. Bush, U. Kamp, Y. B. Seong, and L. A. Owen (2009), Glacier velocities across the central Karakoram, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (52), 41-49. Ford, A. L. J., R. R. Forster, R. L. Bruhn, C. F. (. Raymond, and K. (. van der Veen (2003), Ice surface velocity patterns on Seward Glacier, Alaska/Yukon, and their implications for regional tectonics in the Saint Elias Mountains; ; Papers from the International symposium on Fast glacier flow, Annals of Glaciology, 36 , 21-28. Foster, L. A., B. W. Brock, M. E. J. Cutler, and F. Diotri (2012), A physically based method for estimating supraglacial debris thickness from thermal band remote-sensing data, J. Glaciol., 58 (210), 677-691, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/2012JoG11J194. *Frey, H., W. Haeberli, A. Linsbauer, C. Huggel, and F. Paul (2010), A multi-level strategy for anticipating future glacier lake formation and associated hazard potentials, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences, 10 (2), 339-352. *Frey, H. and F. Paul (2012), On the suitability of the SRTM DEM and ASTER GDEM for the compilation of topographic parameters in glacier inventories, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf., 18 , 480-490, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2011.09.020. *Frey, H., F. Paul, and T. Strozzi (2012), Compilation of a glacier inventory for the western Himalayas from satellite data: - 43 -

methods, challenges, and results, Remote Sens. Environ., 124 , 832-843, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2012.06.020. *Fujita, K., R. Suzuki, T. Nuimura, and A. Sakai (2008), Performance of ASTER and SRTM DEMs, and their potential for assessing glacial lakes in the Lunana region, Bhutan Himalaya, J. Glaciol., 52 (185), 220-228. *Fujita, K. (2009), Re-evaluation of potential of glacial lake outburst flood in the Himalayas, Summaries of JSSI and JSSE Joint Conference on Snow and Ice Research, 2009 , 169-169, doi:https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jcsir/2009/0/2009_0_169/_article. *Fujita, K., A. Sakai, T. Nuimura, S. Yamaguchi, and R. R. Sharma (2009), Recent changes in Imja Glacial Lake and its damming moraine in the Nepal Himalaya revealed by in situ surveys and multi-temporal ASTER imagery, Environmental Research Letters, 4 (4), 045205, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/4/4/045205. *Gardelle, J., Y. Arnaud, and E. Berthier (2011), Contrasted evolution of glacial lakes along the Hindu Kush Himalaya mountain range between 1990 and 2009, Global Planet. Change, 75 (1- 2), 47-55, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.10.003. Georgiou, S., A. Shepherd, M. McMillan, and P. Nienow (2009), Seasonal evolution of supraglacial lake volume from ASTER imagery, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (52), 95-100. *Gjermundsen, E. F., R. Mathieu, A. Kaab, T. Chinn, B. Fitzharris, and J. O. Hagen (2011), Assessment of multispectral glacier mapping methods and derivation of glacier area changes, 1978-2002, in the central Southern Alps, New Zealand, from ASTER satellite data, field survey and existing inventory data, J. Glaciol., 57 (204), 667-683, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/002214311797409749. Glasser, N. F., T. A. Scambos, J. Bohlander, M. Truffer, E. Pettit, and B. J. Davies (2011), From ice-shelf tributary to tidewater glacier: continued rapid recession, acceleration and thinning of Rohss Glacier following the 1995 collapse of the Prince Gustav Ice Shelf, Antarctic Peninsula, J. Glaciol., 57 (203), 397-406. Glasser, N. and K. Jansson (2008), The Glacial Map of southern South America, Journal of Maps , 175-196. *Glazovskiy, A. F., V. M. Kotlyakov, and G. A. Nosenko (2003), Pervyy opyt obrabotki kosmicheskikh snimkov lednikovykh rayonov Rossii v ramkakh proyekta GLIMS. First experience of space image reduction for glaciated Russian regions within framework of GLIMS Project, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 94 , 194-202. Grant, K. L., C. R. Stokes, and I. S. Evans (2009), Identification and characteristics of surge- type glaciers on Novaya Zemlya, Russian Arctic, J. Glaciol., 55 (194), 960-972. Guo Liuping, Ye Qinghua, Yao Tandong, Chen Feng, and Cheng Weiming (2007), Glacial landforms and changes in glacier and lake area in the Mapam Yumco Basin on the Tibetan Plateau based on GIS, Bingchuan Dongtu = Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 29 (4), 517-524. *Haritashya, U. K., M. P. Bishop, J. F. Shroder, A. B. G. Bush, and H. N. N. Bulley (2009), Space-based assessment of glacier fluctuations in the Wakhan Pamir, Afghanistan, Clim. Change, 94 (1-2), 5-18, doi:10.1007/s10584-009- 9555-9. *Harrison, S., N. Glasser, V. Winchester, E. Haresign, C. Warren, and K. Jansson (2006), A glacial lake outburst flood associated with recent mountain glacier retreat, Patagonian Andes, The Holocene, 16 (4), 611-620, doi:10.1191/0959683606hl957rr. Hasnain, S. I., R. Kumar, S. Ahmad, and S. Tayal (2010), Glaciers of India; ; a study of selected glaciers under the changing climate regime (modified), U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper, P 1386-F, F275-F291. *Heid, T. and A. Kaab (2012), Evaluation of existing image matching methods for deriving glacier surface displacements globally from optical satellite imagery, Remote Sens. Environ., 118 , 339-355, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2011.11.024. *Heid, T. and A. Kaab (2012), Repeat optical satellite images reveal widespread and long term decrease in land- terminating glacier speeds, Cryosphere, 6 (2), 467-478, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-467-2012. Helm, C. W. (2007), Glacier change in Franz Josef Land (thesis, U of Colorado), 1952-2004, 74. Herman, F., B. Anderson, and S. Leprince (2011), Mountain glacier velocity variation during a retreat/advance cycle quantified using sub-pixel analysis of ASTER images, J. Glaciol., 57 (202), 197-207, doi:10.3189/002214311796405942. Herman, F. and J. Braun (2008), Evolution of the glacial landscape of the Southern Alps of New Zealand; ; insights from a glacial erosion model, Journal of Geophysical Research, 113 (F2), F02009, doi:10.1029/2007JF000807. Howat, I. M., I. Joughin, and T. A. Scambos (2007), Rapid changes in ice discharge from Greenland outlet glaciers, Science, 315 (581), 1559-1561. Howat, I. M., I. Joughin, S. Tulaczyk, and S. Gogineni (2005), Rapid retreat and acceleration and Helheim Glacier, East Greenland, Geophys. Res. Lett., 32 (22), 4, doi:10.1029/2005GL024737. Huang, L. and Z. Li (2011), Comparison of SAR and optical data in deriving glacier velocity with feature tracking, Int. J. Remote Sens., 32 (10), 2681-2698, doi:10.1080/01431161003720395. Huss, M. and D. Farinotti (2012), Distributed ice thickness and volume of all glaciers around the globe, Journal of Geophysical Research-Earth Surface, 117 , F04010, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012JF002523. Huss, M., R. Stoeckil, G. Kappenberger, and H. Blatter (2008), Temporal and spatial changes of Laika Glacier, Canadian Arctic, since 1959, inferred from satellite remote sensing and mass- balance modelling, J. Glaciol., 54 (188), 857- 866. *Janicke, J., C. Mayer, K. Scharrer, U. Munzer, and A. Gudmundsson (2006), The use of remote-sensing data for mass- balance studies at Myrdalsjokull ice cap, Iceland, J. Glaciol., 52 (179), 565-573. *Jin, R., X. Li, T. Che, L. Z. Wu, and P. Mool (2005), Glacier area changes in the Pumqu river basin, Tibetan Plateau, between the 1970s and 2001, J. Glaciol., 51 (175), 607-610. *Jiskoot, H. (2011), Long-runout rockslide on glacier at Tsar Mountain, Canadian Rocky Mountains; ; potential triggers, seismic and glaciological implications, Earth Surf. Process. Landforms, 36 (2), 203-216, doi:10.1002/esp.2037. *Jiskoot, H., C. J. Curran, D. L. Tessler, and L. R. Shenton (2009), Changes in Clemenceau Icefield and Chaba group glaciers, Canada, related to hypsometry, tributary detachment, length-slope and area-aspect relations, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 133-143. *Kaab, A. (2005), Combination of SRTM3 and repeat ASTER data for deriving alpine glacier flow velocities in the Bhutan Himalaya, Remote Sens. Environ., 94 (4), 463-474. *Kaab, A., B. Lefauconnier, and K. Melvold (2005), Flow field of Kronebreen, Svalbard, using repeated Landsat 7 and ASTER data, Annals of Glaciology, 42 , 7-13. - 44 -

*Kääb, A., C. Huggel, F. Paul, R. Wessels, B. Raup, H. Kieffer, and J. Kargel (2003): Glacier monitoring from ASTER imagery: Accuracy and applications. EARSeL Workshop on Remote Sensing of Land Ice and Snow, Bern, 11.-13.3.2002. EARSeL Proceedings , 2, 43-53, CD-ROM. *Kaab, A. (2002), Monitoring high-mountain terrain deformation from repeated air- and spaceborne optical data: Examples using digital aerial imagery and ASTER data, ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing, 57 (1-2), 39-52. *Kaab, A. (2008), Glacier volume changes using ASTER satellite stereo and ICESat GLAS laser altimetry. A test study on Edgeoya, Eastern Svalbard, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 46 (10), 2823-2830. *Kaeaeb, A. (2006), The Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) project, in Glacier science and environmental change, , edited by P. G. Knight, United Kingdom (GBR), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom (GBR). *Kaeaeb, A., C. Huggel, L. Fischer, S. Guex, F. Paul, I. Roer, N. Salzmann, S. Schlaefli, K. Schmutz, D. Schneider, T. Strozzi, and Y. Weidmann (2005), Remote sensing of glacier- and permafrost-related hazards in high mountains; ; an overview, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences (NHESS), 5 (4), 527-554. *Kaeaeb, A., C. Huggel, S. Guex, F. Paul, N. Salzmann, K. Schmutz, D. Schneider, and Y. Weidmann (2005), Glacier hazard assessment in mountains using satellite optical data, EARSeL eProceedings, 4 (1), 79-93. *Kaeaeb, A., R. Wessels, W. Haeberli, C. Huggel, J. S. Kargel, and S. J. S. Khalsa (2003), Rapid ASTER imaging facilitates timely assessment of glacier hazards and disasters, EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 84 (13), 117- 124. *Kamp, U., T. Bolch, J. Olsenholler, and J. Roa (2004), ASTER digital elevation models in high mountain geomorphology, International Geological Congress, Abstracts = Congres Geologique International, Resumes, 32, Part 2 , 1000- 1001. *Kamp, U., M. Byrne, and T. Bolch (2011), Glacier fluctuations between 1975 and 2008 in the Greater Himalaya Range of Zanskar, southern Ladakh, Journal of Mountain Science, 8 (3), 374- 389, doi:10.1007/s11629-011-2007-9. *Kargel, J. S., M. J. Abrams, M. P. Bishop, A. Bush, G. Hamilton, H. Jiskoot, A. Kaab, H. H. Kieffer, E. M. Lee, F. Paul, F. Rau, B. Raup, J. F. Shroder, D. Soltesz, D. Stainforth, L. Stearns, and R. Wessels (2005), Multispectral imaging contributions to global land ice measurements from space, Remote Sens. Environ., 99 (1-2), 187-219. *Kargel, J. S., G. Leonard, R. E. Crippen, K. B. Delaney, S. G. Evans, and J. Schneider (2010), Satellite monitoring of Pakistan's rockslide-dammed Lake Gojal, EOS Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 91 (43), 394-395, doi:10.1029/2010EO430002. *Kargel, J., R. Furfaro, G. Kaser, G. Leonard, W. Fink, C. Huggel, A. Kääb, B. Raup, J. Reynolds, D. Wolfe, and M. Zapata, 2011, ASTER Imaging and Analysis of Glacier Hazards, Chapter 15 in Land Remote Sensing and Global Environmental Change: NASA's Earth Observing System and the Science of Terra and Aqua , B. Ramachandran, Christopher O. Justice, and M.J. Abrams (Eds.), pp 325-373, Springer, New York. *Kargel, J.S., Alho, P., Buytaert, W., Celleri, R., Cogley, J.G., Dussaillant, A., Zambrano, G., Haeberli, Wl. Harrison, S., Leonard, G., Maxwell, A., Meier, C., Poveda, G., Reid, B., Reynolds, J., Portocarrero Rodriguez, C., Romero, H., Schneider, J., 2012, Glaciers in Patagonia: Controversy and Prospects. Eos Trans . AGU, 93, 212. *Kargel, J.S., J.G. Cogley, G.J. Leonard, U. Haritashya, and A. Byers, 2011, Himalayan glaciers: The big picture is a montage, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci ., 108 (36) 14709-14710, http://www.pnas.org/content/108/36/14709.full *Kargel, J. S., A. P. Ahlstrøm, R. B. Alley, J. L. Bamber, T. J. Benham, J. E. Box, C. Chen, P. Christoffersen, M. Citterio, J. G. Cogley, H. Jiskoot, G. J. Leonard, P. Morin, T. Scambos, T. Sheldon, and I. Willis (2012), Brief Communication: Greenland's shrinking ice cover: ″fast times ″ but not that fast, The Cryosphere , 6, 533-537, 2012, www.the- cryosphere.net/6/533/2012/ doi:10.5194/tc-6-533-2012. Karimi, N., A. Farokhnia, S. Shishangosht, M. Elmi, M. Eftekhari, and H. Ghalkhani (2012), Elevation changes of Alamkouh glacier in Iran since 1955, based on remote sensing data, Int. J. Appl. Earth Obs. Geoinf., 19 , 45-58, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2012.04.009. *Keshri, A. K., A. Shukla, and R. P. Gupta (2009), ASTER ratio indices for supraglacial terrain mapping, Int. J. Remote Sens., 30 (2), 519-524. *Khromova, T. E., M. B. Dyurgerov, and R. G. Barry (2003), Late-twentieth century changes in glacier extent in the Ak- shirak Range, Central Asia, determined from historical data and ASTER imagery, Geophys. Res. Lett., 30 (16), 4, doi:10.1029/2003GL017233. *Khromova, T. E., G. B. Osipova, D. G. Tsvetkov, M. B. Dyurgerov, and R. G. Barry (2006), Changes in glacier extent in the eastern Pamir, Central Asia, determined from historical data and ASTER imagery, Remote Sens. Environ., 102 (1-2), 24-32. *Kieffer, H., J. Kargel, and 40 others, 2000, New Eyes in the Sky Measure Glaciers and Ice Sheets, Eos Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 81 (24), June 13, 2000. *Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), Khod rabot po proyektu GLIMS v Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh (RC 16). Course of operations under GLIMS project in Moscow Regional Data-Processing Centre (RC 16), Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 254-260. *Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), O mezhdunarodnom proyekte "Global'nyy monitoring lednikov iz kosmosa" i Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh. International program "Global monitoring of glaciers from space" and Moscow Regional Data- Processing Center, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 121- 124. *Kotlyakov, V. M., T. E. Khromova, N. M. Zverkova, L. P. Chernova, and G. A. Nosenko (2011), Two new glacier systems in northeastern Eurasia, Doklady Earth Sciences, 437 (1), 374-379, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/S1028334X11030056. *Kotlyakov, V. M., A. M. Dyakova, V. S. Koryakin, V. I. Kravtsova, G. B. Osipova, G. M. Varnakova, V. N. Vinogradov, O. N. Vinogradov, and N. M. Zverkova (2010), Glaciers of the former Soviet Union, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper, P 1386-F, F1-F125. *Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), Khod rabot po proyektu GLIMS v Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh (RC 16). Course of operations under GLIMS project in Moscow Regional Data-Processing Centre (RC 16), Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 254-260. *Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), O mezhdunarodnom proyekte "Global'nyy monitoring lednikov iz kosmosa" i Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh. International program "Global monitoring of glaciers from - 45 -

space" and Moscow Regional Data- Processing Center, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 121- 124. *Kotlyakov, V. M., G. A. Nosenko, G. B. Osipova, A. S. Khomidov, and D. G. Tsvetkov (2008), Kosmicheskiy monitoring podvizhki lednika Geograficheskogo Obshchestva na Pamire. Satellite monitoring of the Geographical Society's Glacier movements in the Pamirs, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 105 , 145-148. *Kotlyakov, V. M., G. B. Osipova, and D. G. Tsvetkov (2010), Glaciers of the former Soviet Union; ; investigations of the fluctuations of surge-type glaciers in the Pamirs based on observations from space modified, U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper, P 1386-F, F77- F93. Kristensen, L. and D. I. Benn (2012), A surge of the glaciers Skobreen-Paulabreen, Svalbard, observed by time-lapse photographs and remote sensing data, Polar Res., 31 , 11106, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/polar.v31i0.11106. Kunz, M., M. A. King, J. P. Mills, P. E. Miller, A. J. Fox, D. G. Vaughan, and S. H. Marsh (2012), Multi-decadal glacier surface lowering in the Antarctic Peninsula, Geophys. Res. Lett., 39 (19), L19502, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/2012GL052823. Kutuzov, S. S. (2012), Change of glaciers area and volume in the Terskey Alatau Range during second half of the 20th century, Led i Sneg = Ice and Snow, 117 , 5-14. Kutuzov, S. and M. Shahgedanova (2009), Glacier retreat and climatic variability in the eastern Terskey-Alatoo, inner Tien Shan between the middle of the 19th century and beginning of the 21st century, Global Planet. Change, 69 (1-2), 59-70, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2009.07.001. Lamsal, D., T. Sawagaki, and T. Watanabe (2011), Digital terrain modelling using Corona and ALOS PRISM data to investigate the distal part of Imja Glacier, Khumbu Himal, Nepal, Journal of Mountain Science, 8 (3), 390-402, doi:10.1007/s11629-011-2064-0. Lavrent'yev, I. I. (2008), Izmeneniya struktury i dinamiki lednika Frit'of na shpitsbergene za posledniye 70 let po dannym distantsionnykh issledovaniy. Structural change and dynamics of the Fritjof Glacier in Svalbard during the last 70 years from remote sensing data, Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta, Seriya 5: Geografiya, 2008 (6), 45-50. Lenzano, M. G., J. C. Leiva, and L. E. Lenzano (2010), Recent variation of the Las Vacas Glacier Mt. Aconcagua region, Central Andes, Argentina, based on ASTER stereoscopic images, Advances in Geosciences, 22 , 185-189. Li, J. and Y. Sheng (2012), An automated scheme for glacial lake dynamics mapping using Landsat imagery and digital elevation models: a case study in the Himalayas, Int. J. Remote Sens., 33 (16), 5194-5213, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431161.2012.657370. Li, K., H. Li, L. Wang, and W. Gao (2011), On the Relationship between Local Topography and Small Glacier Change under Climatic Warming on Mt. Bogda, Eastern Tian Shan, China, J. Earth Sci., 22 (4), 515-527, doi:10.1007/s12583-011-0204-7. *Liu Qiao, Liu Shiyin, Zhang Yong, Wang Xin, Zhang Yingsong, Guo Wanqin, and Xu Junli (2010), Recent shrinkage and hydrological response of Hailuogou glacier, a monsoon temperate glacier on the east slope of Mount Gongga, China, J. Glaciol., 56 (196), 215-224. Lopez, P., P. Chevallier, V. Favier, B. Pouyaud, F. Ordenes, and J. Oerlemans (2010), A regional view of fluctuations in glacier length in southern South America, Global Planet. Change, 71 (1-2), 85-108, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2009.12.009. *Mathieu, R., T. Chinn, and B. Fitzharris (2009), Detecting the equilibrium-line altitudes of New Zealand glaciers using ASTER satellite images, N. Z. J. Geol. Geophys., 52 (3), 209-222. *Mihalcea, C., B. W. Brock, G. Diolaiuti, C. D'Agata, M. Citterio, M. P. Kirkbride, M. E. J. Cutler, and C. Smiraglia (2008), Using ASTER satellite and ground-based surface temperature measurements to derive supraglacial debris cover and thickness patterns on Miage Glacier (Mont Blanc Massif, Italy), Cold Reg. Sci. Technol., 52 (3), 341-354. Mihalcea, C., C. Mayer, G. Diolaiuti, C. D'Agata, C. Smiraglia, A. Lambrecht, E. Vuillermoz, G. Tartari, and J. (. Jacka (2008), Spatial distribution of debris thickness and melting form remote-sensing and meteorological data, at debris-covered Baltoro Glacier, Karakoram, Pakistan; ; Papers from the cryospheric section of the International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics meeting, Annals of Glaciology, 48 , 49-57, doi:10.3189/172756408784700680. Miller, P. E., M. Kunz, J. P. Mills, M. A. King, T. Murray, T. D. James, and S. H. Marsh (2009), Assessment of Glacier Volume Change Using ASTER-Based Surface Matching of Historical Photography, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 47 (7), 1971-1979, doi:10.1109/TGRS.2009.2012702. Muskett, R. R., C. S. Lingle, J. M. Sauber, A. S. Post, W. V. Tangborn, B. T. Rabus, and K. A. Echelmeyer (2009), Airborne and spaceborne DEM- and laser altimetry-derived surface elevation and volume changes of the Bering Glacier system, Alaska, USA, and Yukon, Canada, 1972-2006, J. Glaciol., 55 (190), 316-326. *Nagai, H., K. Fujita, and T. Nuimura (2010), Formation condition of debris-covered glaciers in the Bhutan Himalaya derived by satellite data, Summaries of JSSI and JSSE Joint Conference on Snow and Ice Research, 2010 , 197- 197, doi:https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jcsir/2010/0/2010_0_197/_article. *Nicholson, L., J. Marin, D. Lopez, A. Rabatel, F. Bown, and A. Rivera (2009), Glacier inventory of the upper Huasco Valley, Norte Chico, Chile; ; glacier characteristics, glacier change and comparison with central Chile, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 111-118. *Nosenko, G. A., T. Y. Khromova, A. Y. Murav'yev, Y. K. Narozhnyy, and M. V. Shakhgedanova (2010), Ispol'zovaniye istoricheskikh dannykh i sovremennykh kosmicheskikh izobrazheniy dlya otsenki izmeneniy razmerov lednikov na Altaye. Application of historical data and modern space images for evaluation of glacier size change in Altai Mountains, Led i Sneg = Ice and Snow, 110 , 19-24. Nuimura, T., K. Fujita, K. Fukui, K. Asahi, R. Aryal, and Y. Ageta (2011), Temporal Changes in Elevation of the Debris- Covered Ablation Area of Khumbu Glacier in the Nepal Himalaya since 1978, Arctic Antarctic and Alpine Research, 43 (2), 246-255, doi:10.1657/1938-4246- 43.2.246. Nuimura, T., K. Fujita, S. Yamaguchi, and R. R. Sharma (2012), Elevation changes of glaciers revealed by multitemporal digital elevation models calibrated by GPS survey in the Khumbu region, Nepal Himalaya, 1992-2008, J. Glaciol., 58 (210), 648-656, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/2012JoG11J061. *Nuth, C. and A. Kaab (2011), Co-registration and bias corrections of satellite elevation data sets for quantifying glacier thickness change, Cryosphere, 5 (1), 271-290, doi:10.5194/tc-5- 271-2011. *Pan, B. T., G. L. Zhang, J. Wang, B. Cao, H. P. Geng, J. Wang, C. Zhang, and Y. P. Ji (2012), Glacier changes from 1966-2009 in the Gongga Mountains, on the south-eastern margin of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau and their - 46 -

climatic forcing, Cryosphere, 6 (5), 1087-1101, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/tc-6-1087-2012. Pandey, A. C., S. Ghosh, M. S. Nathawat, and R. K. Tiwari (2012), Area Change and Thickness Variation over Pensilungpa Glacier (J&K) using Remote Sensing, J. Indian Soc. Remote Sens., 40 (2), 245-255, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12524-011-0134-y. *Paul, F., A. Kaab, and W. Haeberli (2007), Recent glacier changes in the Alps observed by satellite: Consequences for future monitoring strategies, Global Planet. Change, 56 (1-2), 111- 122. *Paul, F. (2006), The new Swiss glacier inventory 2000; ; application of remote sensing and GIS, Schriftenreihe Physische Geographie, 52 , 1-194. *Paul, F. and L. M. Andreassen (2009), A new glacier inventory for the Svartisen region, Norway, from Landsat ETM plus data: challenges and change assessment, J. Glaciol., 55 (192), 607-618. *Paul, F., C. Huggel, and A. Kaab (2004), Combining satellite multispectral image data and a digital elevation model for mapping debris-covered glaciers, Remote Sens. Environ., 89 (4), 510-518. *Paul, F., A. Kaeaeb, and J. (. Hagen (2005), Perspectives on the production of a glacier inventory from multispectral satellite data in Arctic Canada; ; Cumberland Peninsula, Baffin Island; ; Papers from the International symposium on Arctic glaciology, Annals of Glaciology, 42 , 59-66. *Paul, F. and F. Svoboda (2009), A new glacier inventory on southern Baffin Island, Canada, from ASTER data; ; II, Data analysis, glacier change and applications, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 22-31. Phillips, T., S. Leyk, H. Rajaram, W. Colgan, W. Abdalati, D. McGrath, and K. Steffen (2011), Modeling - 47 -oulin distribution on Sermeq Avannarleq glacier using ASTER and WorldView imagery and fuzzy set theory, Remote Sensing of Environment, 115 (9), 2292-2301. *Quincey, D. J. and N. F. Glasser (2009), Morphological and ice-dynamical changes on the Tasman Glacier, New Zealand, 1990-2007, Global Planet. Change, 68 (3), 185-197, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2009.05.003. *Quincey, D. J., R. M. Lucas, S. D. Richardson, N. F. Glasser, M. J. Hambrey, and J. M. Reynolds (2005), Optical remote sensing techniques in high-mountain environments: application to glacial hazards, Prog. Phys. Geogr., 29 (4), 475-505. *Quincey, D. J., A. Luckman, and D. Benn (2009), Quantification of Everest region glacier velocities between 1992 and 2002, using satellite radar interferometry and feature tracking, J. Glaciol., 55 (192), 596-606. *Racoviteanu, A. E., W. F. Manley, Y. Arnaud, and M. W. Williams (2007), Evaluating digital elevation models for glaciologic applications: An example from Nevado Coropuna, Peruvian Andes, Global Planet. Change, 59 (1-4), 110-125. *Racoviteanu, A. E., M. W. Williams, and R. G. Barry (2008), Optical remote sensing of glacier characteristics: A review with focus on the Himalaya, Sensors, 8 (5), 3355-3383. *Racoviteanu, A. (2011), Himalayan glaciers: Combining remote sensing, field techniques and indigenous knowledge to understand spatio-temporal patterns of glacier changes and their impact on water resources, PhD dissertation, U of Colorado, 273 pp. *Racoviteanu, A. E., Y. Arnaud, M. W. Williams, and J. Ordonez (2008), Decadal changes in glacier parameters in the Cordillera Blanca, Peru, derived from remote sensing, J. Glaciol., 54 (186), 499-510. *Racoviteanu, A. E., F. Paul, B. Raup, S. J. S. Khalsa, and R. Armstrong (2009), Challenges and recommendations in mapping of glacier parameters from space; ; results of the 2008 Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) workshop, Boulder, Colorado, USA, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 53-69. *Racoviteanu, A. and M. W. Williams (2012), Decision tree and texture analysis for mapping debris-covered glaciers in the Kangchenjunga area, eastern Himalaya, Remote Sensing, 4 (10), 3078-3109, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/rs4103078. *Ranzi, R., G. Grossi, A. Gitti, and S. Taschner (2010), Energy and mass balance of the Madrone Glacier (Adamello, Central Alps), Geografia Fisica e Dinamica Quaternaria (Testo Stampato), 33 (1), 45-60. *Rau, F., F. Mauz, H. de Angelis, R. Jana, J. A. Neto, P. Skvarca, S. Vogt, H. Saurer, and H. Gossmann (2004), Variations of glacier frontal positions on the northern Antarctic Peninsula; ; Papers from the Seventh international symposium on Antarctic glaciology, Annals of Glaciology, 39 , 525-530. *Rau, Frank, Jeffrey S. Kargel, and Bruce H. Raup, 2006. "The GLIMS Glacier Inventory of the Antarctic Peninsula." Earth Observer 18:9-11. *Raup, B., A. Kaab, J. S. Kargel, M. P. Bishop, G. Hamilton, E. Lee, F. Paul, F. Rau, D. Soltesz, S. J. S. Khalsa, M. Beedle, and C. Helm (2007), Remote sensing and GIS technology in the global land ice measurements from space (GLIMS) project, Comput. Geosci., 33 (1), 104-125. *Raup, B., A. Racoviteanu, S. J. S. Khalsa, C. Helm, R. Armstrong, and Y. Arnaud (2007), The GLIMS geospatial glacier database: A new tool for studying glacier change, Global Planet. Change, 56 (1-2), 101-110. *Raup, B. H., H. H. Kieffer, T. M. Hare, and J. S. Kargel (2000), Generation of data acquisition requests for the ASTER satellite instrument for monitoring a globally distributed target: glaciers, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 38 (2 pt 2), 1105-1112. *Raup, B.H., and J.S. Kargel (2012): Global land ice measurements from space (GLIMS), chapter A-2, in Williams, R.S., Jr., and J.G. Ferrigno (Eds.), Satellite Image Atlas of the Glaciers of the World, Vol. A (Introduction): A-State of the Earth's Cryosphere at the Beginning of the 21st Century: Glaciers, Snow Cover, Floating Ice, and Permafrost and Periglacial Environments ; U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1386-A, A247-A260, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Rees, W. G. (2012), Assessment of ASTER global digital elevation model data for Arctic research, Polar Rec., 48 (244), 31- 39, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0032247411000325. Reznichenko, N. V., T. R. H. Davies, and D. J. Alexander (2011), Effects of rock avalanches on glacier behaviour and moraine formation, Geomorphology, 132 (3-4), 327-338, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2011.05.019. *Rivera, A., T. Benham, G. Casassa, J. Bamber, and J. A. Dowdeswell (2007), Ice elevation and areal changes of glaciers from the Northern Patagonia Icefield, Chile, Global Planet. Change, 59 (1-4), 126-137, doi:10.1016/j.gloplacha.2006.11.037. *Rivera, A., G. Casassa, J. Bamber, and A. Kaeaeb (2005), Ice-elevation changes of Glaciar Chico, southern Patagonia, using ASTER DEMs, aerial photographs and GPS data, J. Glaciol., 51 (172), 105-112. *Sarikaya, M. A., M. P. Bishop, J. F. Shroder, and J. A. Olsenholler (2012), Space-based observations of Eastern Hindu Kush glaciers between 1976 and 2007, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Remote Sens. Lett., 3 (1), 77-84, doi:10.1080/01431161.2010.536181. - 47 -

*Scambos, T. A., E. Berthier, and C. A. Shuman (2011), The triggering of subglacial lake drainage during rapid glacier drawdown: Crane Glacier, Antarctic Peninsula, Ann. Glaciol., 52 (59), 74-82, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/172756411799096204. Scambos, T., H. A. Fricker, C. Liu, J. Bohlander, J. Fastook, A. Sargent, R. Massom, and A. Wu (2009), Ice shelf disintegration by plate bending and hydro-fracture;; satellite observations and model results of the 2008 Wilkins Ice Shelf break-ups, Earth Planet. Sci. Lett., 280 (1-4), 51- 60, doi:10.1016/j.epsl.2008.12.027. Scherler, D., S. Leprince, and M. R. Strecker (2008), Glacier-surface velocities in alpine terrain from optical satellite imagery-Accuracy improvement and quality assessment, Remote Sens. Environ., 112 (10), 3806-3819. Schmidt, S. and M. Nuesser (2009), Fluctuations of Raikot Glacier during the past 70 years: a case study from the Nanga Parbat massif, northern Pakistan, J. Glaciol., 55 (194), 949-959. *Shahgedanova, M., G. Nosenko, I. Bushueva, and M. Ivanov (2012), Changes in area and geodetic mass balance of small glaciers, Polar Urals, Russia, 1950-2008, J. Glaciol., 58 (211), 953-964, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/2012JoG11J233. *Shahgedanova, M., G. Nosenko, T. Khromova, and A. Muraveyev (2010), Glacier shrinkage and climatic change in the Russian Altai from the mid-20th century: An assessment using remote sensing and PRECIS regional climate model, Journal of Geophysical Research- Atmospheres, 115 , D16107, doi:10.1029/2009JD012976. *Shangguang, D., S. Liu, Y. Ding, L. Ding, Y. Shen, S. Zhang, A. Lu, G. Li, D. Cai, and Y. Zhang (2005), Monitoring glacier changes and an inventory of glaciers in Muztag Ata-Kongur Tagh, eastern Pamirs, China, using ASTER data, Journal of Glaciology and Geocryology, 27 (3), 344- 351. *Shroder, J. F., Jr and M. P. Bishop (2010), Glaciers of Pakistan, U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper, P 1386-F, F201-F257. *Shroder, J. F., Jr and M. P. Bishop (2010), Selected glaciers of Afghanistan, U.S.Geological Survey Professional Paper, P 1386-F, F167-F199. *Shukla, A., M. K. Arora, and R. P. Gupta (2010), Synergistic approach for mapping debris- covered glaciers using optical- thermal remote sensing data with inputs from geomorphometric parameters, Remote Sens. Environ., 114 (7), 1378-1387. *Shukla, A., R. P. Gupta, and M. K. Arora (2009), Estimation of debris cover and its temporal variation using optical satellite sensor data: a case study in Chenab basin, Himalaya, J. Glaciol., 55 (191), 444-452. *Shuman, C. A., E. Berthier, and T. A. Scambos (2011), 2001-2009 elevation and mass losses in the Larsen A and B embayments, Antarctic Peninsula, J. Glaciol., 57 (204), 737-754, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/002214311797409811. *Sneed, W. A. and G. S. Hamilton (2007), Evolution of melt pond volume on the surface of the Greenland Ice Sheet, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34 (3), L03501-L03501. *Stearns, L. and G. Hamilton (2005), A new velocity map for Byrd Glacier, East Antarctica, from sequential ASTER satellite imagery, Annals of Glaciology, 41 , 71-76. *Stearns, L. A. and G. S. Hamilton (2007), Rapid volume loss from two East Greenland outlet glaciers quantified using repeat stereo satellite imagery, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34 (5), L05503- L05503. Surazakov, A. (2008), Application of remote sensing and GIS in glacier monitoring: Glacier variability in Central Asia (Tien Shan and Altai) during the last 30--60 years (thesis, U of Idaho), 126 pp. Svoboda, F. and F. Paul (2009), A new glacier inventory on southern Baffin Island, Canada, from ASTER data; ; I, Applied methods, challenges and solutions; ; Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 11-21. *Tennant, C., B. Menounos, B. Ainslie, J. Shea, and P. Jackson (2012), Comparison of modeled and geodetically-derived glacier mass balance for Tiedemann and Klinaklini glaciers, southern Coast Mountains, British Columbia, Canada, Global and Planetary Change, 82-83 (3), 74-85, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2011.11.004. Thomas, J. S. (2009), Volume change of the Tasman Glacier using remote sensing, 67, doi:http://ir.canterbury.ac.nz/handle/10092/2406. Thompson, D., G. Tootle, G. Kerr, R. Sivanpillai, and L. Pochop (2011), Glacier Variability in the Wind River Range, Wyoming, J. Hydrol. Eng., 16 (10), 798-805, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0000384. Trouye, E., G. Vasile, M. Gay, L. Bombrun, P. Grussenmeyer, T. Landes, J. M. Nicolas, P. Bolon, I. Petillot, A. Julea, L. Valet, J. Chanussot, and M. Koehl (2007), Combining airborne photographs and spaceborne SAR data to monitor temperate glaciers: Potentials and limits, IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens., 45 (4), 905-924. *Wang Xin, Liu Shiyin, Guo Wanqin, Yao Xiaojun, Jiang Zongli, and Han Yongshun (2012), Using Remote Sensing Data to Quantify Changes in Glacial Lakes in the Chinese Himalaya, Mt. Res. Dev., 32 (2), 203-212, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1659/MRD-JOURNAL-D-11-00044.1. Wang Yetang, Hou Shugui, and Liu Yaping (2009), Glacier changes in the Karlik Shan, eastern Tien Shan, during 1971/72- 2001/02, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 39-45. Wang, P., Z. Li, H. Li, M. Cao, W. Wang, and F. Wang (2012), Glacier No. 4 of Sigong River over Mt. Bogda of eastern Tianshan, central Asia: thinning and retreat during the period 1962- 2009, Environmental Earth Sciences, 66 (1), 265-273, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12665- 011-1236-0. Wang, W., X. Yang, and T. Yao (2012), Evaluation of ASTER GDEM and SRTM and their suitability in hydraulic modelling of a glacial lake outburst flood in southeast Tibet, Hydrol. Process., 26 (2), 213-225, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hyp.8127. Wang, W., T. Yao, W. Yang, D. Joswiak, and M. Zhu (2012), Methods for assessing regional glacial lake variation and hazard in the southeastern Tibetan Plateau: a case study from the Boshula mountain range, China, Environmental Earth Sciences, 67 (5), 1441-1450, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12665-012-1589-z. *Wei, H., J. Ma, M. Ma, J. Wang, and X. Li (2004), Study on changes of glaciers and glacial lakes in the Pumqu Basin based on RS and GIS, Journal of Lanzhou University. Natural Science, 20 (2), 97-100. *Wessels, R. L., S. Kargel, and H. H. Kieffer (2002), ASTER measurement of supraglacial lakes in the Mount Everest region of the Himalaya, Annals of Glaciology, 34 , 399-408. Wientjes, I. G. M. and J. Oerlemans (2010), An explanation for the dark region in the western melt zone of the Greenland ice sheet, Cryosphere, 4 (3), 261-268, doi:10.5194/tc-4-261-2010. Ye, Q., T. Yao, S. Kang, F. Chen, and J. Wang (2006), Glacier variations in the Naimona'nyi region, western Himalaya, in the last three decades; ; Papers from the international symposium on High-elevation glaciers and climate records, Annals of Glaciology, 43 , 385-389. - 48 -

Ye, Q., Z. Zhong, S. Kang, A. Stein, Q. Wei, and J. Liu (2009), Monitoring Glacier and Supra- glacier Lakes from Space in Mt. Qomolangma Region of the Himalayas on the Tibetan Plateau in China, Journal of Mountain Science, 6 (3), 211-220, doi:10.1007/s11629-009-1016-4. Ye, Q. H., S. C. Kang, F. Chen, and J. H. Wang (2006), Monitoring glacier variations on Geladandong mountain, central Tibetan Plateau, from 1969 to 2002 using remote-sensing and GIS technologies, J. Glaciol., 52 (179), 537-545. Ye, Q. H., T. D. Yao, F. Chen, S. C. Kang, X. Q. Zhang, and Y. Wang (2008), Response of glacier and lake covariations to climate change in Mapam Yumco basin on Tibetan plateau during 1974-2003, Journal of China University of Geosciences, 19 (2), 135-145. Ye, Q., F. Chen, A. Stein, and Z. Zhong (2009), Use of a multi-temporal grid method to analyze changes in glacier coverage in the Tibetan Plateau, Progress in Natural Science, 19 (7), 861-872, doi:10.1016/j.pnsc.2008.12.002. Yu, J., H. Liu, L. Wang, K. C. Jezek, and J. Heo (2012), Blue ice areas and their topographical properties in the Lambert glacier, Amery Iceshelf system using Landsat ETM plus , ICESat laser altimetry and ASTER GDEM data, Antarct. Sci., 24 (1), 95-110, doi:10.1017/S0954102011000630. *Zhang, Y., K. Fujita, S. Liu, Q. Liu, and T. Nuimura (2011), Distribution of debris thickness and its effect on ice melt at Hailuogou glacier, southeastern Tibetan Plateau, using in situ surveys and ASTER imagery, J. Glaciol., 57 (206), 1147-1157, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.3189/002214311798843331. *Zhang, Y., K. Fujita, S. Liu, Q. Liu, and X. Wang (2010), Multi-decadal ice-velocity and elevation changes of a monsoonal maritime glacier: Hailuogou glacier, China, J. Glaciol., 56 (195), 65-74. *Zollinger, S., I. Machguth, C. Huggel, and A. Kaeaeb (2004), Gletscherseen in der Cordillera Blanca (Peru) und im Khumbu Himalaya (Nepal); ; Ableitung von Parametern zur Abschaetzung des Gefahrenpotentials aus ASTER- Satellitendaten. Glacial lakes in the Cordillera Blanca (Peru) and in the Khumbu Himalaya (Nepal); derivation of parameters for assessing hazard potentials using ASTER satellite data; ; Turbulenzen in der Geomorphologie; ; Jahrestagung der Schweizerischen Geomorphologischen Gesellschaft (SGmG) der SANW. Turbulence in geomorphology; ; annual meeting of the Swiss Society of Geomorphology of the Swiss Academy of Natural Sciences, Mitteilungen der Versuchsanstalt fuer Wasserbau, Hydrologie und Glaziologie der Eidgenoessischen Technischen Hochschule Zuerich, 184 , 215-222.

D-2: Papers that are explicitly indicated as “GLIMS” papers

This bibliography is still incomplete, a work in progress, from 2004 onward (omitting 1999-2003). If, for example, a paper is a GLIMS paper but this point was not explicitly made, it is not included. Furthermore, our search even under “GLIMS” for some reason failed to pull up some papers, some of which were manually added, but the likely number of strict GLIMS papers is probably much underestimated. It also does not include GLIMS book chapters, which are in press. This is the most conservative listing of GLIMS papers.

2013 Citterio, M., and A. P. Ahlstrøm. 2013. Brief communication: “The aerophotogrammetric map of Greenland ice masses.” The Cryosphere 7: 445-449. doi: 10.5194/tc-7-445-2013. Clarke, Garry K. C., et al. 2013. Ice Volume and Subglacial Topography for Western Canadian Glaciers from Mass Balance Fields, Thinning Rates, and a Bed Stress Model. Journal of Climate 26(12): 4282-4303. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00513.1. Grabowski, David M., Eva Enkelmann, and Todd A. Ehlers. 2013. Spatial extent of rapid denudation in the glaciated St. Elias syntaxis region, SE Alaska. Journal of Geophysical Research - Earth Surface 118(3): 1921-1938. doi: 10.1002/jgrf.20136. Grossi, Giovanna, Paolo Caronna, and Roberto Ranzi. 2013. Hydrologic vulnerability to climate change of the Mandrone glacier (Adamello-Presanella group, Italian Alps). Advances in Water Resources 55: 190-203. doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.11.014. Hagg, Wilfried, et al. 2013. Glacier and runoff changes in the Rukhk catchment, upper Amu-Darya basin until 2050. Global and Planetary Change 110, pt. A: 62-73. doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2013.05.005. Lee, Hyongki, et al. 2013. Elevation changes of Bering Glacier System, Alaska, from 1992 to 2010, observed by satellite radar altimetry. Remote Sensing of Environment 132: 40-48. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2013.01.007. Li, Lu, et al. 2013. Comparison of satellite-based and re-analysed precipitation as input to glacio-hydrological modelling for Beas River basin, northern India . IAHS Publication 360: 45-52. Loriauz, Thomas and Gino Casassa. 2013. Evolution of glacial lakes from the Northern Patagonia Icefield and terrestrial water storage in a sea-level rise context. Global and Planetary Change 102: 33-40. doi: 10.1016/j.gloplacha.2012.12.012. Martini, Mateo A., Jorge A. Strelin, and Ricardo A. Astini. 2013. Inventario y caracterización morfoclimática de los glaciares de roca en la Cordillera Oriental argentina (entre 22º y 25º S). Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Geológicas 30(3): 569-581. Muto, Minami, and Masato Furuya. 2013. Surface velocities and ice-front positions of eight major glaciers in the Southern Patagonian Ice Field, South America, from 2002 to 2011. Remote Sensing of Environment 139: 50-59. doi:10.1016/j.rse.2013.07.034. Nakano, Kazunari, et al. 2013. A monitoring system for mountain glaciers and ice caps using 30 meter resolution satellite data. Hydrological Research Letters 7(3): 73-78. doi: 10.3178/hrl.7.73. Nie, Yong, Qiao Liu, and Shiyin Liu. 2013. Glacial Lake Expansion in the Central Himalayas by Landsat Images, 1990–2010. PLoS ONE 8(12): Art. #e83973. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083973. Pelto, M., et al. 2013. Rising ELA and expanding proglacial lakes indicate impending rapid retreat of Brady Glacier, Alaska. Hydrological Processes 27(21): 3075-3082. doi: 10.1002/hyp.9913. Shea, J. M., et al. 2013. An approach to derive regional snow lines and glacier mass change from MODIS imagery, western North America. The Cryosphere 7(2): 667-680. doi:10.5194/tc-7-667-2013.

- 49 -

Shi, Xiaogang, et al. 2013. Relationships between recent pan-arctic snow cover and hydroclimate trends. Journal of Climate 26(6): 2048–2064. doi: 10.1175/JCLI-D-12-00044.1. Thorsteinsson, Thorsteinn, Tómas Jóhannesson, and Árni Snorrason. 2013. Glaciers and ice caps: Vulnerable water resources in a warming climate . Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 5(6): 590-598. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2013.11.003. Williams, Mark W. 2013. The Status of Glaciers in the Hindu Kush–Himalayan Region. Mountain Research and Development 33(1): 114-115. doi: 10.1659/mrd.mm113. 2012 Anesio, Alexandre M. and Johanna Laybourn-Parry. 2012. Glaciers and ice sheets as a biome. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 27 (4) : 219–225. doi: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.09.012. Davies, B. J., et al. 2012. Variable glacier response to atmospheric warming, northern Antarctic Peninsula, 1988–2009. The Cryosphere 6: 1031-1048. doi:10.5194/tc-6-1031-2012. Engel, Z. , M. Sobr, and S. A. Yerokhin. 2012. Changes of Petrov Glacier and its proglacial lake in the Akshiirak massif, central Tien Shen, since 1977. Journal of Glaciology 58(208): 388-398. doi: 10.3189/2012JoG11J085. Frey, Holger and Frank Paul. 2012. On the suitability of the SRTM DEM and ASTER GDEM for the compilation of topographic parameters in glacier inventories. International Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation 18: 480-490. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2011.09.020. Godard, V., et al. 2012. Impact of glacial erosion on 10Be concentrations in fluvial sediments of the Marsyandi catchment, central Nepal . Journal of Geophysical Research - Earth Surface 117(3). doi: 10.1029/2011JF002230. Kaab, Andreas, et al. 2012. Contrasting patterns of early twenty-first century of glacier mass change in the Himalayas. Nature 488: 495–498. doi: 10.1038/nature11324. Laghari, A. N., D. Vanham, and W. Rauch. 2012. The Indus basin in the framework of current and future water resources management. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences 16: 1063-1083. doi: 10.5194/hess-16-1063-2012. Lehmkuhl, F. 2012. Holocene glaciers in the Mongolian Altai: an example from the Turgen-Kharkhiraa Mountains. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 52(1): 12-20. doi: 10.1016/j.jseaes.2011.11.027. Lupker, M. , et al. 2012. Be-derived Himalayan denudation rates and sediment budgets in the Ganga basin. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 333-334: 146-156. doi: 10.1016/j.epsl.2012.04.020. Malenovsky, Z. , et al. 2012. Sentinels for science: potential of Sentinel-1, -2, and -3 missions for scientific observations of oceans, cryosphere, and land. Remote Sensing of Environment 120: 91-101. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.026. Mosier,Thomas M., Kendra V. Sharp, and David F. Hill. 2012. Development of a Water Runoff Model for Pakistan: A tool for Identifying and Assessing Micro-hydro Sites. 2012 IEEE Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 166-171. Pelto, M., et al. 2012. Rising ELA and Expanding Proglacial Lakes Lead to Initiation of Rapid Retreat of Brady Glacier, Alaska. 69th Eastern Snow Conference. Raup, B.H., and J.S. Kargel (2012): Global land ice measurements from space (GLIMS), chapter A-2, in Williams, R.S., Jr., and J.G. Ferrigno (Eds.), Satellite Image Atlas of the Glaciers of the World, Vol. A (Introduction): A-State of the Earth's Cryosphere at the Beginning of the 21st Century: Glaciers, Snow Cover, Floating Ice, and Permafrost and Periglacial Environments ; U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1386-A, A247-A260, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Rietbroek, R., et al. 2012. Resolving sea level contributions by identifying fingerprints in time-variable gravity and altimetry. Journal of Geodynamics 59-60: 72-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jog.2011.06.007. Ruan, Zhixing, et al. 2012. Monitoring glacier surface velocity in West Kunlun Mountain using offset tracking methods based on ALOS/PALSAR images. 2012 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 4438-4441. Schaner, Neil, et al. 2012. The contribution of glacier melt to streamflow. Environmental Research Letters 7(3): Art. #034029. Siegfried, Tobias, et al. 2012. Will climate change exacerbate water stress in Central Asia? Climatic Change 112(3-4): 881-899. doi: 10.1007/s10584-011-0253-z. Streletskiy, D. A., N. I. Shiklomanov, and F. E. Nelson. 2012. Permafrost, Infrastructure, and Climate Change: a GIS-Based Landscape Approach to Geotechnical Modeling. Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 44(3): 368-388. doi: 10.1657/1938-4246- 44.3.368. Varis, O., M. Kummu, and A. Salmivaara. 2012. Ten major rivers in monsoon Asia-Pacific: an assessment of vulnerability. Applied Geography 32(2): 441-454. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.05.003. Voytenko, D., et al. 2012. Monitoring a glacier in southeastern Iceland with the portable Terrestrial Radar Interferometer. 2012 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IGARSS), 3230-3232. Willis, Michael J. 2012. Ice loss rates at the Northern Patagonian Icefield derived using a decade of satellite remote sensing. Geophysical Research Letters 117: 184-198. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2011.09.017. Zhang, S., et al. 2012. A modified monthly degree-day model for evaluating glacier runoff changes in China. Part 2. Applications. Hydrological Processes 26 (11): 1697-1706. doi: 10.1002/hyp.8291. 2011 Ballagh, Lisa M., et al. 2011. Representing scientific data sets in KML: Methods and challenges. Computers & Geosciences 37(1): 57-64. 10.1016/j.cageo.2010.05.004. Kargel, J.S., J.G. Cogley, G.J. Leonard, U. Haritashya, and A. Byers, 2011, Himalayan glaciers: The big picture is a montage, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci ., 108 (36) 14709-14710, http://www.pnas.org/content/108/36/14709.full Kargel, J., R. Furfaro, G. Kaser, G. Leonard, W. Fink, C. Huggel, A. Kääb, B. Raup, J. Reynolds, D. Wolfe, and M. Zapata, 2011, ASTER Imaging and Analysis of Glacier Hazards, Chapter 15 in Land Remote Sensing and Global Environmental Change: NASA's Earth Observing System and the Science of Terra and Aqua , B. Ramachandran, Christopher O. Justice, and M.J. Abrams (Eds.), pp 325-373, Springer, New York. Kirchner, N., et al. 2011. Paleoglaciological reconstructions for the Tibetan Plateau during the last glacial cycle: evaluating numerical ice sheet simulations driven by GCM-ensembles. Quaternary Science Reviews 30(1-2): 248-267. Li, Xin, et al. 2011. Toward an improved data stewardship and service for environmental and ecological science data in West China. International Journal of Digital Earth 4(4): 347-359. doi: 10.1080/17538947.2011.558123. Panday, P. K., et al. 2011. Supraglacial lake classification in the Everest region of Nepal Himalaya. IN: Geospatial techniques for managing environmental resources edited by Jay Krishna Thakur. Dordrecht ; New York : Springer, 86-99. Panza, Giuliano F. and Antonella Peresan. 2011. Climatic Modulation of Seismicity in the Alpine-Himalayn Mountain Range. Terra Nova 23(1): 19-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-3121.2010.00976.x. - 50 -

Syvitski, James P. M. and Albert Kettner. 2011. Sediment flux and the Anthropocene. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, A-Mathematical… . 369(1938): 957-975. doi: 10.1098/rsta.2010.0329. Toutin, Thierry. 2011. Digital elevation model generation over glacierized region. IN: Encyclopedia of snow, ice and glaciers edited by Vijay P. Singh, Pratap Singh, Umesh Kumar Haritashya. Dordrecht ; London : Springer, 202-213. Wu, Lizong and Xin Li. 2011. Data quality evaluation for database of the first Chinese glacier inventory. 2011 International Conference on Remote Sensing, Environment and Transportation Engineering (RSETE), 2067-2070. 2010 Berthier, E., et al. 2010. Contribution of Alaskan glaciers to sea-level rise derived from satellite imagery. Nature Geoscience 3(2): 92- 95. doi: 10.1038/ngeo737. Bolch, T., et al. 2010. A glacier inventory for the western Nyainqentanglha Range and the Nam Co Basin, Tibet, and glacier changes 1976–2009. The Cryosphere 4(3): 419-433. Bolch, Tobias, Brian Menounos, and Roger Wheate. 2010. Landsat-based inventory of glaciers in western Canada, 1985–2005. Remote Sensing of Environment 114: 127-137. Cogley, J. Graham. 2010. A More complete version of the World Glacier Inventory. Annals of Glaciology 50(53): 32-38. Hagg, W., et al. 2010. A sensitivity study for water availability in the Northern Caucasus based on climate projections. Global and Planetary Change 73(3-4): 161-171. Heyman, Jakob. 2010. Palaeoglaciology of the northeastern Tibetan Plateau. Ph. D. dissertation, Stockholm University. Kääb, Andreas. 2010. The Role of remote sensing in worldwide glacier monitoring. Remote Sensing of Glaciers : 285-296. Nicholson, L., et al. 2010. Glacier inventory of the upper Huasco valley, Norte Chico, Chile: glacier characteristics, glacier change and comparison with central Chile. Annals of Glaciology 50(53): 111-118. Ohmura, Atsumu. 2010. Completing the World Glacier Inventory. Annals of Glaciology 50(53): 144-148. Paul, F., et al. 2010. Recommendations for the compilation of glacier inventory data from digital sources. Annals of Glaciology 50(53): 119-126. doi: 10.3189/172756410790595778. Racoviteanu, Adina E., et al. 2010. Challenges and recommendations in mapping of glacier parameters from space: results of the 2008 Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) workshop, Boulder, Colorado, USA. Annals of Glaciology 50(53): 53-69. Shukla, A., M. K. Arora, and R. P. Gupta. 2010. Synergistic approach for mapping debris-covered glaciers using optical-thermal remote sensing data with inputs from geomorphometric parameters. Remote Sensing of Environment 114(7): 1378-1387. doi: 10.1016/j.rse.2010.01.015. 2009 Arendt, Anthony A., Scott B. Luthcke, and Regine Hock. 2009. Glacier changes in Alaska: can mass-balance models explain GRACE mascon trends? Annals of Glaciology 50(50): 148-154. Baraer, M., et al. 2009. Characterizing contributions of glacier melt and groundwater during the dry season in a poorly gauged catchment of the Cordillera Blanca (Peru). Advances in Geosciences 22: 41-49. Berthier, E., et al. 2009. Ice wastage on the Kerguelen Islands (49° S, 69° E) between 1963 and 2006. Journal of Geophysical Research – Earth Surface 114(F03): Art. #F03005. MacDonald, Stuart. 2009. Libraries in a converging world of open data, e-research, and Web 2.0. Online 32(2): http://ie- repository.jisc.ac.uk/227/1/Online_mar08.pdf. Paul, F., et al. 2009. GlobGlacier: a new ESA project to map the world’s glaciers and ice caps from space. EARSeL eProceedings 8(1): 41968. Racoviteanu, A. E., F. Paul, B. Raup, S. J. S. Khalsa, and R. Armstrong (2009), Challenges and recommendations in mapping of glacier parameters from space;; results of the 2008 Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) workshop, Boulder, Colorado, USA, Annals of Glaciology, 50 (53), 53-69. Shahgedanova, M., et al. 2009. Climate Change, Glacier Retreat, and Water Availability in the Caucasus Region. IN: Threats to Global Water Security edited by J A A Jones; Trahel G Vardanian; Christina Hakopian. Dordrecht ; London : Springer, 131-143. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2344-5_15. Shahgedanova, M., et al. 2009. An Assessment of the Recent Past and Future Climate Change, Glacier Retreat, and Runoff in the Caucasus Region Using Dynamical and Statistical Downscaling and HBV-ETH Hydrological Model. IN: Regional Aspects of Climate-Terrestrial-Hydrologic Interactions in Non-boreal Eastern Europe edited by Pavel Ya Groisman; Sergiy V. Ivanov. Dordrecht ; London : Springer, 63-72. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2283-7_8. 2008 Akgun, Bora, et al. 2008. Climate Prediction through Statistical Methods. Beedle, M. J., et al. 2008. Improving estimation of glacier volume change: a GLIMS case study of Bering Glacier System, Alaska. The Cryosphere 2: 33-51. Kotlyakov, V. M., G. A. Nosenko, G. B. Osipova, A. S. Khomidov, and D. G. Tsvetkov (2008), Kosmicheskiy monitoring podvizhki lednika Geograficheskogo Obshchestva na Pamire. Satellite monitoring of the Geographical Society's Glacier movements in the Pamirs, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 105 , 145-148. Pino, Ivano. 2008. Monitoring Ice Velocity Field in Victoria Land (Antarctica) Using Cross-Correlation Techniques on Satellite Images. Ph. D. dissertation, Università di Bologna. Racoviteanu, Adina , et al. 2008. Decadal changes in glacier parameters in the Cordillera Blanca, Peru, derived from remote sensing. Journal of Glaciology 54(186): 499-510. 2007 Hoelzle, M., et al. 2007. The application of glacier inventory data for estimating past climate change effects on mountain glaciers: A comparison between the European Alps and the Southern Alps of New Zealand. Global and Planetary Change 56(1-2): 69- 82. Khromova, T. , et al. 2007. First Results of GLIMS Database Population for Former Soviet Union Glacier Regions. American Geophysical Union Report #C51B-0286. Molnia, Bruce.2007. Late nineteenth to early twenty-first century behavior of Alaskan glaciers as indicators of changing regional climate. Global and Planetary Change 56: 23-56. Raup, Bruce. 2007. The GLIMS geospatial glacier database: A new tool for studying glacier change. Global and Planetary Change 56(1- 2): 101-110. - 51 -

Raup, Bruce. 2007. Remote sensing and GIS technology in the Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) Project. Computers and Geosciences 33(1): 104-125. 2006 Kaeaeb, A. (2006), The Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS) project, in Glacier science and environmental change , edited by P. G. Knight, United Kingdom (GBR), Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, United Kingdom (GBR). Schicker, Irene. 2006. Changes in Area of Stubai Glaciers analysed by means of Satellite Data for the GLIMS Project. Ph. D. dissertation, Leopold-Franzens-Universität. 2005 Kargel, Jeffrey S. 2005. Multispectral imaging contributions to global land ice measurements from space. Remote Sensing of Environment 99(1-2): 187-219. Rau, Frank 2005. Illustrated GLIMS Glacier Classification Manual, Glacier Classification Guidance for the GLIMS Glacier Inventory. Institut für Physische Geographie. (GTN-H) Report of the 2nd GTN-H Coordination Panel Meeting Koblenz (Germany), 4-5 July 2005. 2005. 2004 Bishop, M.P., Barry, R.G., Bush, A.B.G., Copeland, L., Dwyer, J.L., Fountain, A.G., Haeberli, W., Hall, D.K., Kääb, A., Kargel, J.S., Molnia, B.F., Olsenholler, J.A., Paul, F., Raup, B.H., Shroder, J.F., Trabant, D.C., Wessels, R., 2004, Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS): Remote sensing and GIS investigations of the Earth's cryosphere. Geocarto International , 19 (2), 57-85. Khalsa, Siri Jodha Singh. 2004. Space-Based mapping of glacier changes using ASTER and GIS tools. IEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing 42(10): 2177-2183. 2003 Glazovskiy, A. F., V. M. Kotlyakov, and G. A. Nosenko (2003), Pervyy opyt obrabotki kosmicheskikh snimkov lednikovykh rayonov Rossii v ramkakh proyekta GLIMS. First experience of space image reduction for glaciated Russian regions within framework of GLIMS Project, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 94 , 194-202. 2001 Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), Khod rabot po proyektu GLIMS v Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh (RC 16). Course of operations under GLIMS project in Moscow Regional Data-Processing Centre (RC 16), Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 254-260. Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), O mezhdunarodnom proyekte "Global'nyy monitoring lednikov iz kosmosa" i Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh. International program "Global monitoring of glaciers from space" and Moscow Regional Data- Processing Center, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 121-124. Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), Khod rabot po proyektu GLIMS v Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh (RC 16). Course of operations under GLIMS project in Moscow Regional Data-Processing Centre (RC 16), Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 254-260. Kotlyakov, V. M. and G. A. Nosenko (2001), O mezhdunarodnom proyekte "Global'nyy monitoring lednikov iz kosmosa" i Moskovskom regional'nom tsentre obrabotki dannykh. International program "Global monitoring of glaciers from space" and Moscow Regional Data- Processing Center, Materialy Glyatsiologicheskikh Issledovaniy, 91 , 121-124. 2000 Kieffer, H., J. Kargel, B. Raup, and 39 others, 2000, New Eyes in the Sky Measure Glaciers and Ice Sheets, Eos Transactions, American Geophysical Union, 81 (24), June 13, 2000.

- 52 -