Thursday, August 31, 2017

Netherlands NLHO updated in the GeoGarage platform

20 nautical raster charts updates (+22 insets)
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Stranded on Norwegian island, rowers end their Arctic mission


Polar Row crew members, from front, Fiann Paul, Alex Gregory and Carlo Facchino
departing from Longyearbyen in Norway’s Svalbard archipelago.
Credit The Polar Row

From NYTimes by Megan Specia

An international team of rowers ended a record-breaking expedition through the Arctic Ocean on Monday after becoming stranded on a remote Norwegian island partway through their month-and-a-half-long journey.

They had set out to break several world records while using the mission to raise money for a school in the Himalayas.
They achieved 11 of 12 expected world records, related to distance traveled and location in the Arctic, before having to call off their mission.


courtesy of DailyMail
Beginning in July 2017, a crew of international rowers carries the coveted Explorer's Club flag on a pioneering two-stage Arctic expedition.
The stage of the expedition departs Tromsø (Norway) for Longyearbyen (Svalbard), and tried to be officially recognized as the first ever South to North row in the Arctic, reaching the northernmost latitude achieved by a rowing crew.
 general NHS chart in the GeoGarage platform
The exploratory Polar Row then continued as the crew depart Svalbard to cross 2000km of icy Arctic waters to reach Iceland.
The crew had no sails and no motor to aid them in their quest, and was buffeted by strong and unpredictable Arctic winds (in stark contrast to completely wind dependent lower latitudes' ocean rowing routes). 

Now, it could be at least another week before the crew of six adventurers, whose expedition was called the Polar Row, is evacuated from the island where they sought refuge on Aug. 19, according to social media posts from its members.

The rowers — from Britain, Iceland, India, Norway and the United States — took to sea from the northern coast of Norway on July 20 and headed north to an island on the Svalbard archipelago.
They then continued to the Arctic ice shelf — the first rowing crew recorded as making it that far north — before turning south toward Iceland.

But with the skies cloudy for days at a time, the boat’s solar-powered batteries drained, and its electrical equipment shut off.
That left the rowers without navigational aids and forced them to rely on manual steering, according to a post on the Polar Row Facebook page that recounted the decision to head for shore.


 Jan Mayen in the GeoGarage platform (NHS chart)

 Jan Mayen Island: Detailed Topographic Map from 1878

As conditions aboard the 30-foot boat deteriorated, the rowers abandoned their intended course and headed for Jan Mayen island instead.
That small volcanic island is about halfway between Norway and Greenland.

“I’ve never been so wet and cold for so long,” Alex Gregory, a British rower and two-time Olympic gold medalist, wrote in an Instagram post on Aug. 17, two days before the crew reached land.
“It’s seeping into my bones, there is absolutely no escape from it.”

On Monday, nine days after reaching Jan Mayen, the crew officially ended its journey.


Arriving at the Arctic ice shelf.
Credit The Polar Row

“A successful expedition is also one where everyone goes home safe and in good health to their family and friends,” one of the rowers, Carlo Facchino, wrote on the Polar Row Facebook page.
“With that, our expedition now comes to an end having achieved the ultimate in success.”

Jan Mayen is not permanently inhabited, but is staffed by around 18 members of the Norwegian Armed Forces and the Norwegian Meteorological Institute who have a base there and welcomed the crew into their facilities.

As crew members wait to be evacuated, they have been detailing their journey in social media posts.
“The hospitality has been unbelievable — they’ve saved our lives,” Mr. Gregory said in a video posted to his Twitter account.
The clip shows a desolate beach strewn with driftwood and whale bones.
Private airplanes are not permitted to land on the island, so the rowers are waiting to see when they might be able to return home.
“There is news that a boat may be coming past next week that may have space on board for us,” Mr. Gregory wrote in a post on Saturday.
“Hopefully they will be willing to allow us to jump aboard and begin the journey home.”

The expedition’s captain, Fiann Paul, initially tried to have a fresh crew brought to the island to continue the journey, he said in an email.
Flight restrictions on Jan Mayen made that impossible, but Mr. Paul vowed to attempt the Arctic journey again.
“We will row again,” he said, “maybe an even bigger route than this one.”

Links :
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Wednesday, August 30, 2017

From East to West: scientists solve birds' ability to navigate longitude

Migrating birds navigate thousands of miles each year
Photo : Jens Meyer

From The Conversation by Richard Holland

Birds have an impressive ability to navigate.
They can fly long distances, to places that they may never have visited before, sometimes returning home after months away.

Though there has been a lot of research in this area, scientists are still trying to understand exactly how they manage to find their intended destinations.

 Researchers track migrations of individual birds around the globe using satellite and GPS technology.
This video, along with the video "Bird migrations in Movebank: Americas" shows the recorded movements of 1,654 individual birds that were tracked between 1992 and 2012.

Much of the research has focused on homing pigeons, which are famous for their ability to return to their lofts after long distance displacements.
Evidence suggests that pigeons use a combination of olfactory cues to locate their position, and then the sun as a compass to head in the right direction.

We call this “map and compass navigation”, as it mirrors human orienteering strategies: we locate our position on a map, then use a compass to head in the right direction.

But pigeons navigate over relatively short distances, in the region of tens to hundreds of kilometres. Migratory birds, on the other hand, face a much bigger challenge.
Every year, billions of small songbirds travel thousands of kilometres between their breeding areas in Europe and winter refuges in Africa.

This journey is one of the most dangerous things the birds will do, and if they cannot pinpoint the right habitat, they will not survive. We know from displacement experiments that these birds can also correct their path from places they have never been to, sometimes from across continents, such as in a study on white crowned sparrows in the US.

Over these vast distances, the cues that pigeons use may not work for migrating birds, and so scientists think they may require a more global mapping mechanism.
Navigation and location

To locate our position, we humans calculate latitude and longitude, that is our position on the north-south and east-west axes of the earth.
Human navigators have been able to calculate latitude from the height of the sun at midday for millennia, but it took us much longer to work out how to calculate longitude.

Eventually it was solved by having a highly accurate clock that could be used to tell the difference between local sunrise time and Greenwich meantime.
Initially, scientists thought birds might use a similar mechanism, but so far no evidence suggests that shifting a migratory bird’s body clock effects its navigation ability.

There is another possibility, however, which has been proposed for some time, but never tested – until now.
The earth’s magnetic pole and the geographical north pole (true north) are not in the same place.
This means that when using a magnetic compass, there is some angular difference between magnetic and true north, which varies depending on where you are on the earth.
In Europe, this difference, known as declination, is consistent on an east west axis, and so can possibly be a clue to longitude.


This episode explores animals' ability to perceive magnetism or “magnetoreception."
We know from behavioral evidence that many organisms, from bacteria, to lobsters, to pigeons sense and respond to magnetic fields but we are just starting to learn how this works.

To find out whether declination is used by migrating birds, we tested the orientation of migratory reed warblers.
Migrating birds that are kept in a cage will show increased activity, and they tend to hop in the direction they migrate.
We used this technique to measure their orientation after we had changed the declination of the magnetic field by eight degrees.

First, the birds were tested at the Courish spit in Russia, but the changed declination – in combination with unchanged magnetic intensity – indicated a location near Aberdeen in Scotland.
All other cues were available and still told them they were in Russia.

If the birds were simply responding to the change in declination – like a magnetic compass would – they would have only shifted eight degrees.
But we saw a dramatic reorientation: instead of facing their normal south-west, they turned to face south-east.

This was not consistent with a magnetic compass response, but was consistent with the birds thinking they had been displaced to Scotland, and correcting to return to their normal path.
That is to say they were hopping towards the start of their migratory path as if they were near Aberdeen, not in Russia.

This means that it seems that declination is a cue to longitudinal position in these birds.

There are still some questions that need answering, however.
We still don’t know for certain how birds detect the magnetic field, for example.
And while declination varies consistently in Europe and the US, if you go east, it does not give such a clear picture of where the bird is, with many values potentially indicating more than one location.

There is definitely still more to learn about how birds navigate, but our findings could open up a whole new world of research.

Links :
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Tuesday, August 29, 2017

Grounding: Electronic Chart System for training only

The sticker informed the bridge crew that the equipment could not be used for navigation because the
chart system used ARCS.
During the investigation, it was not possible to establish why the chart was to be used only for training and not during the everyday navigation of the ship.
VICTORIA met the mandatory requirement to carry nautical charts and nautical publications in order to plan and display the ship’s route for the intended voyage and to plot and monitor positions throughout the voyage.
However, from a SOLAS regulatory standpoint, that requirement did not prevent supplementary use
of an ECS with ARCS to navigate the ship.
Apart from the formal intended use of the ECS, there is the question of the ECS’ actual use in the everyday navigation of the ship.

From Maritime Executive

On February 10 this year, the Portuguese-flagged container ship Victoria went aground at the entrance to the deepwater channel Lillegrund, Denmark.
Though the bridge crew were aware of the shallow waters ahead, they were caught by surprise when the grounding occurred as their attention was focused on the turn into the channel.

 Deepwater channel at Lillegrund with the GeoGarage platform (DGA chart)
The grounding of VICTORIA on 10 February 2017 occurred as a result of a combination of factors  which led the bridge crew to navigate by the buoys and not the sea charts and the ECS
Thereby the bridge crew did not recognise the presence of the shallow waters ahead
The planned approach to the deepwater channel at Lillegrund was instrumental in bringing the bridge crew in a situation where the priority was, first and foremost, to navigate visually by means of the buoys rather than the paper charts and the ECS

The grounding resulted in serious damage to the ship’s hull and several fuel oil tanks and ballast tanks were ruptured resulting in a minor pollution of the environment.
The Danish Maritime Accident Investigation Board (DMAIB) initiated an investigation of the accident and found that the bridge team's priority was, first and foremost, to navigate visually by means of the buoys rather than the paper charts and the electronic chart system (ECS).

The position of the isolated danger mark did not warn the crew about the immediate danger of the shallow waters ahead because it was positioned in such a way that it did not direct the ship away from the shallow water area.

 Photo of ECS screen showing the deepwater channel at Lillegrund.
The position of the isolated danger mark did not warn the crew about the immediate danger of the shallow waters ahead because it was positioned on the shallow water area and thereby did not direct
the ship east to avoid the areaTherefore, when the grounding occurred, the crew were caught by surprise and initially did not comprehend what had happened.
Source: Victoria/DMAIB

During the investigation, it was not possible to establish the intended purpose of the ECS.
According to the bridge crew, it was not common to use the ECS when navigating because it was not approved and there was a sticker on the monitor highlighting that it was “ARCS CHARTS FOR TRAINING ONLY.” 
During the investigation, the bridge crew continuously referred to the sticker when asked about the use of the ECS.
However, there were some indications that the ECS was to some extent used in daily navigation: It was normally turned on and the ship’s route was loaded into the system, and the ECS was positioned in front of the officer of the watch providing a continuous overview of the ship’s position.

An investigation of the paper charts showed that the fixed positions were only sporadically marked in the paper chart, which indicated that the navigational officers primarily used other means of determining the position of the ship, including the ECS.
The investigators concluded that the accident illustrates that navigating a ship is a complex interaction between different tasks, e.g. using a passage plan that someone else has made, collision avoidance, fixing the position of the ship, maneuvering, interacting with other crew members, talking to the VTS and getting the ship to its destination on time, etc.
As the bridge crew cannot be equally focused on each task simultaneously, a prioritization of tasks will take place.
That prioritization is necessary for the bridge crew to make effective task-specific decisions, but can also lead to other information not being recognized.

The marine accident report is available here.
Posted by at No comments:
Labels:

Nations will start talks to protect fish of the high seas

Critically important fisheries face widespread population declines while fishing pressures continue to increase.
Together we must take action towards managing fishing sustainably.

From NYTimes by Somini Sengupta

More than half of the world’s oceans belong to no one, which often makes their riches ripe for plunder.

Now, countries around the world have taken the first step to protect the precious resources of the high seas.
In late July, after two years of talks, diplomats at the United Nations recommended starting treaty negotiations to create marine protected areas in waters beyond national jurisdiction — and in turn, begin the high-stakes diplomatic jostling over how much to protect and how to enforce rules.
“The high seas are the biggest reserve of biodiversity on the planet,” Peter Thomson, the ambassador of Fiji and current president of the United Nations General Assembly, said in an interview after the negotiations.
“We can’t continue in an ungoverned way if we are concerned about protecting biodiversity and protecting marine life.”
Without a new international system to regulate all human activity on the high seas, those international waters remain “a pirate zone,” Mr. Thomson said.

Lofty ambitions, though, are likely to collide with hard-knuckled diplomatic bargaining.
Some countries resist the creation of a new governing body to regulate the high seas, arguing that existing regional organizations and rules are sufficient.
The commercial interests are powerful.
Russian and Norwegian vessels go to the high seas for krill fishing; Japanese and Chinese vessels go there for tuna. India and China are exploring the seabed in international waters for valuable minerals.
Many countries are loath to adopt new rules that would constrain them.

And so, the negotiations need to answer critical questions.
How will marine protected areas be chosen?
How much of the ocean will be set aside as sanctuaries?
Will extraction of all marine resources be prohibited from those reserves — as so-called no-take areas — or will some human activity be allowed?
Not least, how will the new reserve protections be enforced?

Russia, for instance, objected to using the phrase “long term” conservation efforts in the document that came out of the latest negotiations in July, instead preferring time-bound measures.
The Maldives, speaking for island nations, argued that new treaty negotiations were urgent to protect biodiversity.

Several countries, especially those that have made deals with their marine neighbors about what is allowed in their shared international waters, want regional fishing management bodies to take the lead in determining marine protected areas on the high seas.
Others say a patchwork of regional bodies, usually dominated by powerful countries, is insufficient, because they tend to agree only on the least restrictive standards.
(The United States Mission to the United Nations declined to comment.)

The new treaty negotiations could begin as early as 2018.
The General Assembly, made up of 193 countries, will ultimately make the decision.

A hint of the tough diplomacy that lies ahead came last year over the creation of the world’s largest marine protected area in the international waters of the Ross Sea.
Countries that belong to the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, a regional organization, agreed by consensus to designate a 600,000-square-mile area as a no-fishing zone.
It took months of pressure on Moscow, including an intervention by John F. Kerry, then the United States secretary of state.

The discussions around marine protected areas on the high seas may also offer the planet a way to guard against some of the effects of global warming.
There is growing scientific evidence that creating large, undisturbed sanctuaries can help marine ecosystems and coastal populations cope with climate change effects, like sea-level rise, more intense storms, shifts in the distribution of species and ocean acidification.

Not least, creating protected areas can also allow vulnerable species to spawn and migrate, including to areas where fishing is allowed.

For over 4000 years fishermen have been catching tuna during their migration through the Mediterranean. During the antiquity they were hailed as the "manna of the oceans".
We take a look at the long journey of the tuna to its mating grounds and witness their struggles including massive amounts of hunters and the strong presence of fishing boats.
 
Fishing on the high seas, often with generous government subsidies, is a multibillion-dollar industry, particularly for high-value fish like the Chilean sea bass and bluefin tuna served in luxury restaurants around the world.
Ending fishing in some vulnerable parts of the high seas is more likely to affect large, well-financed trawlers.
It is less likely to affect fishermen who do not have the resources to venture into the high seas, said Carl Gustaf Lundin, director of the global marine program at the International Union for Conservation of Nature.
In fact, Mr. Lundin said, marine reserves could help to restore dwindling fish stocks.
High-seas fishing is not nearly as productive as it used to be.
“It’s not worth the effort,” he said.
“We’ve knocked out most of the catches.”

Currently, a small but growing portion of the ocean is set aside as reserves.
Most of them have been designated by individual countries — the latest is off the coast of the Cook Islands, called Marae Moana — or as in the case of the Ross Sea, by groups of countries.
A treaty, if and when it goes into effect, would scale up those efforts: Advocates want 30 percent of the high seas to be set aside, while the United Nations development goals, which the nations of the world have already agreed to, propose to protect at least 10 percent of international waters


Current Marine Protected Areas
by The New York TimesSource: World Database on Protected Areas

Why is such a treaty necessary?
At the moment, a variety of regional agreements and international laws govern what is permitted in international waters.
The countries of the North Atlantic must agree, by consensus, on what is allowed in the high seas in their region, for instance, while the International Seabed Authority regulates what is allowed on the seabed in international waters, but not much more.

That patchwork, conservationists argue, has left the high seas open to pillage.
Enforcement is weak.
Elizabeth Wilson, a project director at the Pew Charitable Trusts, wrote in a recent paper that they “lack the coordination to protect and conserve their immense but fragile biodiversity.”
Pew offers a list of fragile high-seas ecosystems that should be protected.
At the top of the list is the Sargasso Sea in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, which is under increasing pressure from fishing trawlers, Ms. Wilson writes, and home to 100 species of invertebrates, 280 species of fish and 23 types of birds.

Links :

Posted by at No comments:
Labels:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)