DOCSLIB.ORG

A Call for U.S. Ratification of the Protocol on Antarctic Environmental Protection

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Call for U.S. Ratification of the Protocol on Antarctic Environmental Protection A Call for U.S. Ratification of the Protocol on Antarctic Environmental Protection Jennifer Angelini* Andrew Mansfield** CONTENTS Introduction .................................................... 164 I. Human Impacts on Antarctica ............................ 167 A. Physical Features of Antarctica ..................... 167 B. Exploitation of Antarctic Marine Resources ......... 171 C. Antarctic Science .................................... 173 D. Antarctic Tourism ................................... 178 II. The Antarctic Treaty System .............................. 181 A. The Antarctic Treaty ................................ 182 B. Agreed Measures for the Conservation of Antarctic Flora and Fauna .............. 186 C. Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals. 188 Copyright © 1994 by ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY * J.D. 1994, School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California at Berkeley; B.A. 1991, summa cum laude, Jacksonville University; B.S. 1990, summa cum laude, Jacksonville University. ** J.D. 1994, School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California at Berkeley; B.A. 1991, Trinity University. The authors acknowledge the contributions of Edward Adams, J.D. 1995, School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California at Berkeley; and Craig Hart, J.D. 1994, School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California at Berkeley. This comment is based on and derived from a monograph written by the authors. Jennifer Angelini & Andrew Mansfield, Implementation of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty into United States Law and Practice, BERKELEY STUD. INT'L L. & ORGANIZATION (Berkeley Center for the Study of Law and Society) May 1993. Edward Adams wrote appendix A to the monograph, and Craig Hart wrote appendix B, which form the basis of parts I and II of this comment, respectively. The authors thank David D. Caron, Professor, School of Law (Boalt Hall), University of California at Berkeley, who advised and guided our research and writing; Joan Bondareff, Legal Counsel, House Merchant Marine and Fisheries Committee, who sug- gested that Boalt students undertake a study of proposed implementing legislation; Louis J. Lanzerotti, Chair, and Sarah Connick, Senior Staff Officer, Committee on Antarctic Policy and Science, National Research Council, who invited us to attend the Workshop of the Committee on Antarctica Policy and Science on February 10-13, 1993, in Washington, D.C.; the Ford Foundation, which provided us funds to attend this workshop; and Fabio Angelini and Blythe York, who were patient and supportive throughout this writing endeavor. ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY [Vol. 21:163 D. Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources ............................ 189 E. Convention on the Regulation of Antarctic Mineral Resource Activities .................................. 191 III. The Protocol for Antarctic Environmental Protection ..... 192 A. Regulatory Framework Created by the Protocol .... 195 1. Committee on Environmental Protection ........ 195 2. Inspection Procedures ........................... 198 3. General Duties .................................. 200 4. Environmental Principles of the Protocol ........ 204 5. Dispute Resolution Under the Protocol ......... 205 B. Regulatory Regimes Created by Annexes to the Protocol ............................................. 208 1. Annex I: Environmental Impact Assessment .... 209 2. Annex II: Conservation of Antarctic Flora and Fauna ............................................ 210 3. Annex III: Waste Disposal and Waste M anagem ent ..................................... 212 4. Annex IV: Prevention of Marine Pollution ...... 213 5. Annex V: Area Protection and Management .... 215 C. Evaluation of the Protocol .......................... 216 IV. Effective U.S. Implementation of the Protocol ............ 217 A. Designation of the Lead Agency for Antarctic Environmental Protection ........................... 218 1. NSF Authority Over Antarctic Science .......... 218 2. NOAA Authority Over Antarctic Fisheries ...... 222 3. Relative Merits of the NSF and NOAA ......... 223 B. Relation of Implementing Legislation to Existing U .S. Regulation ..................................... 226 1. Government Ship Exemption .................... 226 2. Relationship Between NEPA and Annex I ...... 228 C. Legal Effect of the Article 3 Environmental Principles ............................................ 234 D. Exceeding the Norms of the Protocol ............... 236 C onclusion ..................................................... 239 INTRODUCTION An uninhabited continent covered by ice, surrounded by ocean, and located in the southernmost region of the globe, Antarctica is eas- ily lost from public view. Antarctica's remoteness makes it a natural laboratory, where relatively pristine conditions allow important scien- 19941 ANTARCTIC ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION tific research to be conducted.' The extreme Antarctic conditions ap- peal to the adventurer, and the Antarctic tourist industry is rapidly growing. The Antarctic environment, however, is not only harsh, but also fragile-the cold challenges human survival, yet the impression of a footprint in the coastal moss may remain for decades.2 The earli- est Antarctic explorers hunted seals and whales to near extinction. Today, scientists and tourists are increasingly causing waste disposal problems and other detrimental impacts. If a footprint in the Antarctic endures for decades, a discarded battery or fuel drum re- mains much longer. The impacts of human activity are exacerbated by the Antarctic environment's low assimilative capacity. For example, the shortness in foodchains due to the limited number of Antarctic species of flora and fauna means that harm to any member-whether through chemi- cal contaminants, overexploitation, or human disturbances to breed- ing populations-may adversely affect the entire Antarctic ecosystem. The harshness of the Antarctic further diminishes our capacity to ad- dress environmental problems. For instance, the ice and rough sailing conditions in the Antarctic Ocean not only increase the potential for oil tanker accidents, but also hinder oil spill clean up efforts. The Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Madrid Protocol),3 signed at Madrid on October 4, 1991, has the potential to protect the Antarctic environment with some of the most advanced mechanisms yet developed in international environ- mental law. Along with its five annexes, the Madrid Protocol creates a comprehensive regime for assessment of environmental impacts, conservation of flora and fauna, protection of sensitive areas, regula- tion of waste disposal, and prevention of marine pollution in Antarc- 1. In spite of its remoteness, the Antarctic environment suffers from the long-range impacts of industrialized society. DDT, radioactive materials from atomic bomb tests, and other products of the industrial world have appeared in Antarctica in ever increasing quan- tities, and plastic pesticides have become a growing threat to sea birds. Christopher C. Joyner, Protectionof the Antarctic Environment: Rethinking the Problems and Prospects, 19 CORNELL INT'L L.J. 259, 261 (1986); see also PHILIP W. QUIGG, A POLE APART: THE EMERGING ISSUE OF ANTARCICA 65 (1983). Moreover, chlorine compounds have caused a hole in the ozone layer to appear over Antarctica during the winter. Antarctic Environ- mental ProtectionAct: Hearings on H.R. 964 before the Subcomm. on Science of the Senate Comm. on Science, Space and Technology, 103d Cong. 1st Sess. 8 [hereinafter 1993 Hear- ings] (statement of Dr. Frederick Bernthal, Deputy Director, National Science Founda- tion). These problems are addressed by general international regimes not specific to Antarctica. See, e.g., Convention on Long Range Transboundary Air Pollution, Nov. 13, 1979, T.I.A.S. No. 10,541; Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer, Sept. 16, 1987, 26 I.L.M. 1550 (entered into force Jan. 1, 1989) [hereinafter Montreal Protocol]. 2. LEE A. KIMBALL, WORLD RESOURCES INSTITUTE, SOUTHERN EXPOSURE: DECID- ING ANTARCTICA'S FUTURE 1 (1990). 3. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, opened for signa- ture Oct. 4, 1991, 30 I.L.M. 1455 [hereinafter Madrid Protocol]. ECOLOGY LAW QUARTERLY [Vol. 21:163 tica. Twenty-six countries, including the United States, signed the protocol, but only six countries have ratified the instrument to date. 4 The United States maintains the largest population of Antarctic scientists and tourists and has been responsible for some of the worst environmental practices. The obligations and enforcement mecha- nisms that the United States legislates to implement the protocol may thus determine the protocol's efficacy in protecting the Antarctic envi- ronment. The large American presence means that our country has an added responsibility to protect this region. As a dominant political power, the legislative choices the United States makes may influence other countries and encourage them to complete the ratification pro- cess. In light of these realities, the protocol challenges the United States to demonstrate its commitment to environmental protection to the international community. U.S. ratification cannot be completed until implementing legisla- tion has been enacted.5 Competing bills proposed to implement the protocol were introduced in the House of Representatives and the Senate during both the 102nd and 103rd sessions of Congress. The bills differed mainly on whether the National Science
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Antarctic Treaty System And
    The Antarctic Treaty System and Law During the first half of the 20th century a series of territorial claims were made to parts of Antarctica, including New Zealand's claim to the Ross Dependency in 1923. These claims created significant international political tension over Antarctica which was compounded by military activities in the region by several nations during the Second World War. These tensions were eased by the International Geophysical Year (IGY) of 1957-58, the first substantial multi-national programme of scientific research in Antarctica. The IGY was pivotal not only in recognising the scientific value of Antarctica, but also in promoting co- operation among nations active in the region. The outstanding success of the IGY led to a series of negotiations to find a solution to the political disputes surrounding the continent. The outcome to these negotiations was the Antarctic Treaty. The Antarctic Treaty The Antarctic Treaty was signed in Washington on 1 December 1959 by the twelve nations that had been active during the IGY (Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Chile, France, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa, United Kingdom, United States and USSR). It entered into force on 23 June 1961. The Treaty, which applies to all land and ice-shelves south of 60° South latitude, is remarkably short for an international agreement – just 14 articles long. The twelve nations that adopted the Treaty in 1959 recognised that "it is in the interests of all mankind that Antarctica shall continue forever to be used exclusively for peaceful purposes and shall not become the scene or object of international discord".
    [Show full text]
  • 1835. EXECUTIVE. *L POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT
    1835. EXECUTIVE. *l POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT. Persons employed in the General Post Office, with the annual compensation of each. Where Compen­ Names. Offices. Born. sation. Dol. cts. Amos Kendall..., Postmaster General.... Mass. 6000 00 Charles K. Gardner Ass't P. M. Gen. 1st Div. N. Jersey250 0 00 SelahR. Hobbie.. Ass't P. M. Gen. 2d Div. N. York. 2500 00 P. S. Loughborough Chief Clerk Kentucky 1700 00 Robert Johnson. ., Accountant, 3d Division Penn 1400 00 CLERKS. Thomas B. Dyer... Principal Book Keeper Maryland 1400 00 Joseph W. Hand... Solicitor Conn 1400 00 John Suter Principal Pay Clerk. Maryland 1400 00 John McLeod Register's Office Scotland. 1200 00 William G. Eliot.. .Chie f Examiner Mass 1200 00 Michael T. Simpson Sup't Dead Letter OfficePen n 1200 00 David Saunders Chief Register Virginia.. 1200 00 Arthur Nelson Principal Clerk, N. Div.Marylan d 1200 00 Richard Dement Second Book Keeper.. do.. 1200 00 Josiah F.Caldwell.. Register's Office N. Jersey 1200 00 George L. Douglass Principal Clerk, S. Div.Kentucky -1200 00 Nicholas Tastet Bank Accountant Spain. 1200 00 Thomas Arbuckle.. Register's Office Ireland 1100 00 Samuel Fitzhugh.., do Maryland 1000 00 Wm. C,Lipscomb. do : for) Virginia. 1000 00 Thos. B. Addison. f Record Clerk con-> Maryland 1000 00 < routes and v....) Matthias Ross f. tracts, N. Div, N. Jersey1000 00 David Koones Dead Letter Office Maryland 1000 00 Presley Simpson... Examiner's Office Virginia- 1000 00 Grafton D. Hanson. Solicitor's Office.. Maryland 1000 00 Walter D. Addison. Recorder, Div. of Acc'ts do..
    [Show full text]
  • Antarctic Treaty Handbook: Tourism
    TOURISM AND OTHER NON-GOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Introductory note Commercial tourism Until 1966 virtually all expeditions to the Antarctic had been organized by governments or had some measure of governmental backing. In that year there appeared in Antarctica for the first time a commercially organized, ship-borne tourist expedition. In subsequent years commercial tourism increased, using ships and aircraft. The area most frequently visited by sea was the Antarctic Peninsula. Regular airborne tourism began in 1977 and developed using long range passenger aircraft flying from Australia and New Zealand. Almost all of these flights overflew parts of Antarctica and returned home without landing. Airborne tourism diminished considerably following the tragic crash on Mount Erebus, Ross Island, on 28 November 1979 with the loss of 257 lives. Non-governmental non-tourist expeditions Such expeditions also began to appear in the Antarctic in 1966. The preparedness of such expeditions has varied; the consequent requests for assistance from governmental expeditions have sometimes caused disruption to scientific programs. A major aim of the consideration engendered by these expeditions within the Treaty fora has been to encourage such private expeditions to be adequately prepared and fully self-sufficient. Antarctic Treaty Recommendations XXI: Resolution 3 (1997) Standard Form for Advance Notification and Post-Visit Reporting on Tourism and Non-Governmental Activities in Antarctica The Representatives, Recalling Resolution 3 (1995) which agreed that there would be an advantage in standardized reporting of information on tourism and non-governmental activity in Antarctica; Noting that Attachment A to Recommendation 1 (1994) outlines the requirements for Advance Notice of tourism and non-governmental activities, and that Resolution 3 (1995) outlines requirements for post-activity reports; Recalling that Parties agreed at ATCM XX to trial a standard form for Advance Notification and Post-Visit Reporting during the 1996/97 Antarctic season.
    [Show full text]
  • Representations of Antarctic Exploration by Lesser Known Heroic Era Photographers
    Filtering ‘ways of seeing’ through their lenses: representations of Antarctic exploration by lesser known Heroic Era photographers. Patricia Margaret Millar B.A. (1972), B.Ed. (Hons) (1999), Ph.D. (Ed.) (2005), B.Ant.Stud. (Hons) (2009) Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the Degree of Master of Science – Social Sciences. University of Tasmania 2013 This thesis contains no material which has been accepted for a degree or diploma by the University or any other institution, except by way of background information and duly acknowledged in the thesis, and to the best of my knowledge and belief no material previously published or written by another person except where due acknowledgement is made in the text of the thesis. ………………………………….. ………………….. Patricia Margaret Millar Date This thesis may be made available for loan and limited copying in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968. ………………………………….. ………………….. Patricia Margaret Millar Date ii Abstract Photographers made a major contribution to the recording of the Heroic Era of Antarctic exploration. By far the best known photographers were the professionals, Herbert Ponting and Frank Hurley, hired to photograph British and Australasian expeditions. But a great number of photographs were also taken on Belgian, German, Swedish, French, Norwegian and Japanese expeditions. These were taken by amateurs, sometimes designated official photographers, often scientists recording their research. Apart from a few Pole-reaching images from the Norwegian expedition, these lesser known expedition photographers and their work seldom feature in the scholarly literature on the Heroic Era, but they, too, have their importance. They played a vital role in the growing understanding and advancement of Antarctic science; they provided visual evidence of their nation’s determination to penetrate the polar unknown; and they played a formative role in public perceptions of Antarctic geopolitics.
    [Show full text]
  • Joint Conference of the History EG and Humanities and Social Sciences
    Joint conference of the History EG and Humanities and Social Sciences EG "Antarctic Wilderness: Perspectives from History, the Humanities and the Social Sciences" Colorado State University, Fort Collins (USA), 20 - 23 May 2015 A joint conference of the History Expert Group and the Humanities and Social Sciences Expert Group on "Antarctic Wilderness: Perspectives from History, the Humanities and the Social Sciences" was held at Colorado State University in Fort Collins (USA) on 20-23 May 2015. On Wednesday (20 May) we started with an excursion to the Rocky Mountain National Park close to Estes. A hike of two hours took us along a former golf course that had been remodelled as a natural plain, and served as a fitting site for a discussion with park staff on “comparative wilderness” given the different connotations of that term in isolated Antarctica and comparatively accessible Colorado. After our return to Fort Collins we met a group of members of APECS (Association of Polar Early Career Scientists), with whom we had a tour through the New Belgium Brewery. The evening concluded with a screening of the film “Nightfall on Gaia” by the anthropologist Juan Francisco Salazar (Australia), which provides an insight into current social interactions on King George Island and connections to the natural and political complexities of the sixth continent. The conference itself was opened by on Thursday (21 May) by Diana Wall, head of the School of Global Environmental Sustainability at the Colorado State University (CSU). Andres Zarankin (Brazil) opened the first session on narratives and counter narratives from Antarctica with his talk on sealers, marginality, and official narratives in Antarctic history.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Weddell Sea Expedition
    Initial Environmental Evaluation SA Agulhas II in sea ice. Image: Johan Viljoen 1 Submitted to the Polar Regions Department, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, as part of an application for a permit / approval under the UK Antarctic Act 1994. Submitted by: Mr. Oliver Plunket Director Maritime Archaeology Consultants Switzerland AG c/o: Maritime Archaeology Consultants Switzerland AG Baarerstrasse 8, Zug, 6300, Switzerland Final version submitted: September 2018 IEE Prepared by: Dr. Neil Gilbert Director Constantia Consulting Ltd. Christchurch New Zealand 2 Table of contents Table of contents ________________________________________________________________ 3 List of Figures ___________________________________________________________________ 6 List of Tables ___________________________________________________________________ 8 Non-Technical Summary __________________________________________________________ 9 1. Introduction _________________________________________________________________ 18 2. Environmental Impact Assessment Process ________________________________________ 20 2.1 International Requirements ________________________________________________________ 20 2.2 National Requirements ____________________________________________________________ 21 2.3 Applicable ATCM Measures and Resolutions __________________________________________ 22 2.3.1 Non-governmental activities and general operations in Antarctica _______________________________ 22 2.3.2 Scientific research in Antarctica __________________________________________________________
    [Show full text]
  • Sir John Franklin and the Arctic
    SIR JOHN FRANKLIN AND THE ARCTIC REGIONS: SHOWING THE PROGRESS OF BRITISH ENTERPRISE FOR THE DISCOVERY OF THE NORTH WEST PASSAGE DURING THE NINE~EENTH CENTURY: WITH MORE DETAILED NOTICES OF THE RECENT EXPEDITIONS IN SEARCH OF THE MISSING VESSELS UNDER CAPT. SIR JOHN FRANKLIN WINTER QUARTERS IN THE A.ROTIO REGIONS. SIR JOHN FRANKLIN AND THE ARCTIC REGIONS: SHOWING FOR THE DISCOVERY OF THE NORTH-WEST PASSAGE DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY: WITH MORE DETAILED NOTICES OF THE RECENT EXPEDITIONS IN SEARCH OF THE MISSING VESSELS UNDER CAPT. SIR JOHN FRANKLIN. BY P. L. SIMMONDS, HONORARY AND CORRESPONDING JIIEl\lBER OF THE LITERARY AND HISTORICAL SOCIETIES OF QUEBEC, NEW YORK, LOUISIANA, ETC, AND MANY YEARS EDITOR OF THE COLONIAL MAGAZINE, ETC, ETC, " :Miserable they Who here entangled in the gathering ice, Take their last look of the descending sun While full of death and fierce with tenfold frost, The long long night, incumbent o•er their heads, Falls horrible." Cowl'ER, LONDON: GEORGE ROUTLEDGE & CO., SOHO SQUARE. MDCCCLI. TO CAPT. SIR W. E. PARRY, R.N., LL.D., F.R.S., &c. CAPT. SIR JAMES C. ROSS, R.N., D.C.L., F.R.S. CAPT. SIR GEORGE BACK, R.N., F.R.S. DR. SIR J. RICHARDSON, R.N., C.B., F.R.S. AND THE OTHER BRAVE ARCTIC NAVIGATORS AND TRAVELLERS WHOSE ARDUOUS EXPLORING SERVICES ARE HEREIN RECORDED, T H I S V O L U M E I S, IN ADMIRATION OF THEIR GALLANTRY, HF.ROIC ENDURANCE, A.ND PERSEVERANCE OVER OBSTACLES OF NO ORDINARY CHARACTER, RESPECTFULLY DEDICATED, BY THEIR VERY OBEDIENT HUMBLE SERVANT, THE AUTHOR.
    [Show full text]
  • The Antarctic Treaty
    The Antarctic Treaty Measures adopted at the Thirty-ninth Consultative Meeting held at Santiago, Chile 23 May – 1 June 2016 Presented to Parliament by the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs by Command of Her Majesty November 2017 Cm 9542 © Crown copyright 2017 This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3 Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Treaty Section, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, King Charles Street, London, SW1A 2AH ISBN 978-1-5286-0126-9 CCS1117441642 11/17 Printed on paper containing 75% recycled fibre content minimum Printed in the UK by the APS Group on behalf of the Controller of Her Majestyʼs Stationery Office MEASURES ADOPTED AT THE THIRTY-NINTH ANTARCTIC TREATY CONSULTATIVE MEETING Santiago, Chile 23 May – 1 June 2016 The Measures1 adopted at the Thirty-ninth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting are reproduced below from the Final Report of the Meeting. In accordance with Article IX, paragraph 4, of the Antarctic Treaty, the Measures adopted at Consultative Meetings become effective upon approval by all Contracting Parties whose representatives were entitled to participate in the meeting at which they were adopted (i.e. all the Consultative Parties). The full text of the Final Report of the Meeting, including the Decisions and Resolutions adopted at that Meeting and colour copies of the maps found in this command paper, is available on the website of the Antarctic Treaty Secretariat at www.ats.aq/documents.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidance for Visitors to the Antarctic
    Guidance for Visitors to the Antarctic Activities in the Antarctic are governed by the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 and associated agreements, referred to collectively as the Antarctic Treaty system. The Treaty established Antarctica as a zone of peace and science. In 1991, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties adopted the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty, which designates the Antarctic as a natural reserve. The Protocol sets out environmental principles, procedures and obligations for the comprehensive protection of the Antarctic environment, and its dependent and associated ecosystems. The Consultative Parties have agreed that, pending its entry into force, as far as possible and in accordance with their legal system, the provisions of the Protocol should be applied as appropriate. The Environmental Protocol applies to tourism and non-governmental activities as well as governmental activities in the Antarctic Treaty Area. It is intended to ensure that these activities do not have adverse impacts on the Antarctic environment, or on its scientific and aesthetic values. This Guidance for Visitors to the Antarctic is intended to ensure that all visitors are aware of, and are therefore able to comply with, the Treaty and the Protocol. Visitors are, of course, bound by national laws and regulations applicable to activities in the Antarctic. A) PROTECT ANTARCTIC WILDLIFE Taking or harmful interference with Antarctic wildlife is prohibited except in accordance with a permit issued by a national authority. 1) Do not use aircraft, vessels, small boats, or other means of transport in ways that disturb wildlife, either at sea or on land. 2) Do not feed, touch, or handle birds or seals, or approach or photograph them in ways that cause them to alter their behavior.
    [Show full text]
  • US-NZ Partnership in Antarctica
    US-NZ Partnership in Antarctica New Zealand Embassy 10 Apr 2015 Mr. Peter Beggs Dr. Kelly Kenison Falkner Chief Executive Director, Polar Programs & USAP Antarctica New Zealand National Science Foundation Mt. Victoria Wellington, NZ Rear Admiral Richard Evelyn Byrd, Jr. Antarctic Treaty System US & NZ are among 12 original signatories of Treaty • Treaty signed 1959, entered into force 1961, reaffirmed for 50 more years 2011 United Kingdom • All territorial claims held in Norway abeyance Argentina • Reserved for peaceful uses • Commitment to Chile environmental protection and Australia scientific research • 50 Member Nations; 29 are consultative parties with an France “Active Science Program” New • Consensus based Treaty Zealand measures implemented through domestic law Antarctica New Zealand The New Zealand Antarctic Institute Act: To develop, maintain and execute New Zealand activities in Antarctica, in particular the Ross Dependency To enhance the quality of New Zealand scientific research To cooperate with other (Antarctic) organisations within and outside New Zealand • Permanent presence at Scott Base • Logistics support • National Antarctic Program co- operation • Science coordination • Environmental management • Support to Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Antarctic Treaty matters • Outreach and education Scope of USAP Logistics System Christchurch – Antarctica Historic Context The sea port of Christchurch, Lyttelton was the final stop over for early Antarctic Expeditions The British National Antarctic Expedition ship, the Discovery,
    [Show full text]
  • 2003-2004 Science Planning Summary
    2003-2004 USAP Field Season Table of Contents Project Indexes Project Websites Station Schedules Technical Events Environmental and Health & Safety Initiatives 2003-2004 USAP Field Season Table of Contents Project Indexes Project Websites Station Schedules Technical Events Environmental and Health & Safety Initiatives 2003-2004 USAP Field Season Project Indexes Project websites List of projects by principal investigator List of projects by USAP program List of projects by institution List of projects by station List of projects by event number digits List of deploying team members Teachers Experiencing Antarctica Scouting In Antarctica Technical Events Media Visitors 2003-2004 USAP Field Season USAP Station Schedules Click on the station name below to retrieve a list of projects supported by that station. Austral Summer Season Austral Estimated Population Openings Winter Season Station Operational Science Opening Summer Winter 20 August 01 September 890 (weekly 23 February 187 McMurdo 2003 2003 average) 2004 (winter total) (WinFly*) (mainbody) 2,900 (total) 232 (weekly South 24 October 30 October 15 February 72 average) Pole 2003 2003 2004 (winter total) 650 (total) 27- 34-44 (weekly 17 October 40 Palmer September- 8 April 2004 average) 2003 (winter total) 2003 75 (total) Year-round operations RV/IB NBP RV LMG Research 39 science & 32 science & staff Vessels Vessel schedules on the Internet: staff 25 crew http://www.polar.org/science/marine. 25 crew Field Camps Air Support * A limited number of science projects deploy at WinFly. 2003-2004 USAP Field Season Technical Events Every field season, the USAP sponsors a variety of technical events that are not scientific research projects but support one or more science projects.
    [Show full text]
  • Antarctic Research As a Precedent for Diplomacy Exercised Through International Scientific Cooperation: Applying Collaborative Systems in Non-Jurisdictional Spaces
    Antarctic research as a precedent for diplomacy exercised through international scientific cooperation: applying collaborative systems in non-jurisdictional spaces Mia Vanderwilt, B.S. Science, Technology and International Affairs, Environment & Energy Senior Thesis Accompaniment Acknowledgements This paper accompanies a senior thesis manuscript on the effect of heightened soil moisture and salinity on soil microbial communities within an Antarctic water track. Field work for this thesis was conducted as a part of the 2018 Tawani Expedition to Lake Untersee, Antarctica, a hyperarid Mars-analog environment. This supplementary paper will examine how multinational Antarctic research exemplifies the potential of scientific cooperation to mediate diplomacy in non- jurisdictional areas. Specifically, this paper will briefly examine how multilateral Antarctic treaties prioritizing collaborative research have facilitated scientific diplomacy, minimized geopolitical conflict and mitigated threats of militarization. This paper will be submitted along with the manuscript for honors to the Science, Technology, and International Affairs program within the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. Introduction A significant percentage of the Earth’s surface is non-jurisdictional, falling outside traditional bounds of national sovereignty. The vast majority of this area lies within polar regions and the high oceans beyond the reach of national exclusive economic zones. Successes and failures in the governance of these spaces in the absence of sovereign authorities provide valuable lessons for the avoidance of further militarization and destructive resource extraction in continued polar, ocean and space exploration. Antarctica serves as an ideal case study for how initial militarization and territorial contests were successfully diffused through the enactment of an international treaty formally prioritizing international scientific research.
    [Show full text]