Wednesday, August 21, 2019

In 1845 explorers sought the Northwest Passage—then vanished

H.M.S. Terror, one of two ships from the doomed Franklin expedition, was discovered in 2016 off King William Island in the Canadian Arctic.
The small expedition boat seen here sank along with the Terror and rests on the seafloor a short distance from the ship.
image : Thierry Boyer, Parks canada

From National Geographic by Heather Pringle

The failed expedition was one of the grimmest chapters in the history of Arctic exploration.
New analysis may shed light on its mysterious fate.

For centuries the Northwest Passage seemed little more than a mirage.
John Cabot urged his ships into the unknown in 1497 and 1498 to find it, but failed.
Martin Frobisher, Henry Hudson, and James Cook searched icy northern waters for it, in vain.
In May 1845 a celebrated British explorer and naval officer, Sir John Franklin, took up the quest to find a route between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans through Arctic waters.
With orders from the British Admiralty, Franklin and a crew of 133 sailed out from the Thames in two massive naval vessels, H.M.S. Erebus and H.M.S. Terror, each specially equipped for polar service.
It was the beginning of the grimmest disaster in Arctic exploration.

On paper, the expedition seemed to lack for little.
The crew was young, tough, and seasoned.
The ships, sheathed in iron, bristled with the latest Victorian-era technology—from steam engines to heated water and an early daguerreotype camera.
The vessels carried more than three years’ worth of food and drink, as well as two barrel organs and libraries with some 2,900 books.
Two dogs and a monkey kept the men company in their quarters.

But these small floating worlds were no match for the Arctic’s frozen seas.
On Admiralty orders, the expedition sailed to one of the most treacherous, ice-choked corners of the far north.
By September 1846, both vessels were imprisoned in sea ice northwest of King William Island.
They remained so for at least a year and a half of brutal polar cold.


By April 1848, 24 men were dead, including Franklin himself.
The rest had abandoned the ships.
In a terse statement stuffed into a cairn on King William Island, the expedition’s new commander, Francis Crozier, noted that he and others were heading out on foot for the Back River, perhaps to find better hunting, or possibly hoping to reach a fur-trading outpost more than 700 miles away.
It was Crozier’s last known communication with the outside world.
(More than a half century later, in 1906, Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen would be credited as the first to navigate the treacherous Northwest Passage.)

For years after Franklin’s expedition stalled, search parties combed the region’s coastlines, hoping to find survivors and, when all hope was gone, clues to the expedition’s fate.
They found deserted campsites, the bones of dead men, and hundreds of mementos, from fragments of cotton shirts to silver dessert spoons.
Inuit hunters recalled seeing starving crewmen dragging heavy sledges along the ice, and later finding evidence of cannibalism.
The British public was reluctant to believe it, and the final days of the Franklin expedition remained the subject of enduring fascination and mythmaking.

 An underwater archaeologist inspects the hull of HMS Erebus.
(CNW Group/Parks Canada)

Then, in 2014, Erebus was discovered in relatively shallow water south of King William Island, almost exactly where historical Inuit testimony had placed it.
Two years later, Terror was located at the bottom of a large bay after Inuit Canadian Ranger Sammy Kogvik led researchers to the area.
Terror is so well preserved, says Parks Canada archaeologist Ryan Harris, that it resembles a ghost ship: “It just beggars the imagination what might lie inside.”

A second research team, supported by the government of the Canadian territory of Nunavut, is now sifting through other important clues found on land.
Led by Douglas Stenton, an archaeologist at the University of Waterloo in Ontario, these scientists are mapping the sites where Franklin crew members pitched tents, downed rations, and huddled beneath blankets and bearskins.
By studying these locations and analyzing the human remains and artifacts recovered from them, Stenton and his colleagues hope to shed new light on the expedition’s final tragic days.

On a cold, blustery day in the Arctic hamlet of Gjoa Haven, Kogvik recalls the joy of seeing Terror appear for the first time on a sonar screen.
Like most Inuit in the region, Kogvik had heard stories about the lost expedition.
He also had one of his own.
While out fishing with a friend along the west coast of King William Island, he had once seen a big wooden pole sticking above the water.
He thought it could be a ship’s mast.
So in September 2016, when Kogvik was working with a team from the Arctic Research Foundation, a Canadian nonprofit, on another scientific project in the immediate area, they decided on the spur of the moment to check out the place.
After hours of searching the seafloor with side-scan sonar, Kogvik and his colleagues found Terror, about 80 feet underwater.
“Every one of us was giving high fives,” he recalls.

 Parks Canada's RV David Thompson and its crew are currently en route to the wreck of HMS Erebus from Cambridge Bay, NU.
(Parks Canada)

Today Parks Canada archaeologists are planning to excavate both Franklin ships, but Erebus is their priority.
Harsh Arctic conditions now threaten the vessel.
Sea ice has scoured the stern and crushed the area where Franklin had his cabin, entombing or scattering its artifacts.

More haunting still are the conditions aboard Terror.
Thick sediment mantles the upper deck, but the ship’s wheel, helm, and bulwarks look eerily intact.
Windows and hatches, mostly unbroken, still seal the contents of the cabins.

Studies and excavations at the two wreck sites are expected to take years, and archaeologists hope to settle a long-standing controversy.
Historians have assumed that most of Franklin’s men died in 1848 on the foolhardy quest to the Back River.
But in the 1980s, David Woodman, a retired mariner and history writer based in Port Coquitlam, British Columbia, analyzed the reports of Inuit witnesses.
According to these accounts, few of Franklin’s men died on the trek.
Instead many returned to the ships after Crozier wrote his note, and managed to sail farther south.
When the two vessels finally sank, the castaways survived on salvaged provisions and occasional hunted game, until the last man died in the early 1850s.

But the accounts given by some 30 Inuit witnesses contained many ambiguities and contradictions, in part because of translation problems.
So the Parks Canada team hopes to recover written records from the shipwrecks, such as logs or personal journals, to help reveal what went wrong with the expedition.

In Britain, families of the dead men were left to wonder about their sons and husbands and how exactly they met their end—questions that linger among many descendants today.
And some relief may be in sight.
Stenton and his team have taken samples from skeletal remains and sent them to Lakehead University in Ontario.
Geneticists there successfully extracted DNA from the remains of 26 crew members.
Now Stenton is gathering DNA samples from living descendants.
By comparing the historical and modern DNA profiles, he and his colleagues hope to identify some of the bodies by name.

Moreover, the Parks Canada team may add to these identifications.
Historical Inuit witnesses reported boarding one of the ships and finding a crewman’s body lying on a floor.
The underwater archaeologists have yet to encounter any human remains, but if skeletons or bones turn up, the team will consider DNA testing.

For the first time in more than a century, hopes are high that the story of the lost expedition will be told.
The optimism is bringing a new sense of opportunity to remote Gjoa Haven, where young Inuit are landing jobs to watch over and protect the Franklin wreck sites from looters.
And officials are drawing up plans to expand the local museum, so it may one day house and display finds from the fabled Franklin ships.

“Tourists are already coming here,” Kogvik says proudly. And enticed by the icy wonders of the Northwest Passage and the famous story of Franklin and his men, “more will be coming next year.”

Links :

Tuesday, August 20, 2019

Scientists bid farewell to the first Icelandic glacier lost to climate change. If more melt, it can be disastrous

Satellite images from September 1986 (left) and Aug. 1
show the shrinking of the Okjökull glacier in west-central Iceland.

From CNN by Harmeet Kaur
Scientists say they are bidding farewell to Okjökull, the first Icelandic glacier lost to climate change, in a funeral of sorts.

 localization with the GeoGarage platform (ICG-HD nautical chart)

Researchers will gather Sunday in Borgarfjörður, Iceland, to memorialize Okjökull, known as Ok for short, after it lost its status as a glacier in 2014.
The inscription, titled "A letter to the future," on the monument paints a bleak picture.
"Ok is the first Icelandic glacier to lose its status as a glacier. In the next 200 years, all our glaciers are expected to follow the same path. This monument is to acknowledge that we know what is happening and know what needs to be done. Only you know if we did it," the plaque reads in English and Icelandic.

The memorial plaque for Iceland's Okjökull glacier contains a dire warning.

From the ice sheet in Greenland to the towering glaciers in West Antarctica, Earth's enormous masses of ice are melting fast. And though sea levels have risen and fallen throughout history, scientists say it's never happened at a rate this fast.
If glaciers continue to melt at the current rapid rate, it will pose a number of hazards for the planet, geologists say.

Here are some of the potential hazards:

It can displace people 

The Greenland ice sheet near Sermeq Avangnardleq glacier.

By 2100, up to 2 billion people -- or about a fifth of the world's population -- could be displaced from their homes and forced to move inland because of rising ocean levels, according to a 2017 study.
Bangladesh is particularly at risk.
About 15 million people in the country could become climate refugees if sea levels rise 1 meter, or about 3 feet. And more than 10% of the country would be underwater.
Some of the people who are displaced might not have anywhere to go.
They're not protected by international laws, so industrialized countries aren't legally obligated to grant them asylum.

It can put some islands underwater


The Marshall Islands is one of the island nations at risk of disappearing because of climate change.
If sea levels continue to rise at a rapid rate, some remote island nations would be at risk of disappearing, including Tuvalu, the Maldives and the Marshall Islands.

It can diminish drinking water

The Imja glacial lake in the Himalaya.

Millions of people depend on glaciers for drinking water, particularly in the Hindu Kush Himalayan region and the Andes Mountains.
In dry climates near mountains, glaciers collect precipitation and freshwater and store it as ice during colder months. When summer comes along, the ice melts and runs off into rivers and streams, providing drinking water.
A world without glaciers would threaten that water supply and potentially have devastating effects, Jason Briner, a geologist at the University of Buffalo, told CNN.

It can threaten our food supply

The Géant Glacier in eastern France.

Melting glaciers also threaten the food supply.
Rising sea levels contribute to warmer global temperatures, changing what kinds of crops farmers can grow. Some climates will become too hot for what farmers are growing now.
Other climates will see more flooding, more snow or more moisture in the air, also limiting what can be grown.
As a result, food will become scarcer, grocery prices will spike and crops will lose their nutritional value, as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted in a report earlier this year.

It can cause a health crisis


The Santa Ines glacier in southern Chile.

As sea levels rise, coastal communities are more susceptible to flooding.
One particularly gross consequence of that flooding is the impact on sewage treatment plants, which are often built at low elevations close to the oceans.
Floods can cause massive amounts of untreated sewage to flow into rivers, streams, streets and even homes.
That pollutes sources of water, harms wildlife and helps spread diseases.
"A lot of times when people think about sea level rise, they think about inundation of land," Andrea Dutton, geology professor at the University of Florida, told CNN.

"They think that 'If my house isn't in the area that's flooded, I don't need to worry about it,' which is a complete misconception."

It can disrupt the global economy

The Rhône Glacier in Switzerland.

More than 90 percent of the world's trade is carried by sea, according to the United Nations.
So, there's a good chance that most of the things you buy have passed through at least two ports: one during export and one during import.
Ports are critical to the global economy, providing jobs in industries like shipbuilding, fishing, seafood processing and marine transportation.

Rising sea levels could damage the infrastructure of many ports and disrupt all kinds of processes, creating a ripple effect throughout the economy.
"[Melting glaciers] will affect people's access to food, water and energy, which are fundamental, critical things that we need to survive," Dutton said.

It can change life as we know it

Eqi Glacier in Greenland.

The large ice sheets in the Arctic and Antarctic are part of Earth's energy balance, Briner said.
Those massive white surfaces work to reflect rays from the sun back into the environment, keeping temperatures mild.
As more and more glaciers melt, energy from the sun will instead be absorbed into the ocean.
As the oceans get warmer, global temperatures become hotter and cause even more glaciers to melt.
That creates a cycle that amplifies the climate crisis, Briner said.
Links :

    Monday, August 19, 2019

    Brazil (DHN) layer update in the GeoGarage platform

    186 nautical raster charts updated & 81 new charts added in the GeoGarage platform

    Brexit fishing map: The vast body of UK waters at risk from EU fishing - even after Brexit

    Brexit fishing map: The future of UK waters depends on whether it would allow foreign vessels to access its EEZ
    (Image: Express)

    From Express by Kate Whitfield

    The Conservative Party committed in its 2017 manifesto to leaving the Common Fisheries Policy after Brexit, saying the UK “will be fully responsible for the access and management of its waters”.
    But there are widespread doubts about whether this is actually possible.

    Under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), European fishing fleets are given equal access to all EU waters and fishing grounds up to 12 nautical miles from EU member’s coasts.
    The question is whether the UK, after Brexit, will have an arrangement allowing EU boats to fish in its water.
    Currently, the answer to this question is unknown, along with the exact nature of any Brexit arrangements, or whether the UK will leave without any deal at all.

    The Government has suggested the resulting status of its fishing waters after Brexit will depend on what kind of agreements the UK makes with the EU and whether it would allow foreign vessels to access its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).

    Outside the EU, an EEZ extends 200 nautical miles (370km) off a country’s coastline, giving the state the authority to exploit and control the fish resources within this zone.

    The (roundly rejected) Brexit deal negotiated by former Prime Minister Theresa May was vague on fishing policy, only saying that “the Union and the United Kingdom shall use their best endeavours to conclude and ratify” an agreement in future.

    It’s worth noting that while the EU wants to make sure its fishing fleet has access to UK waters, the UK industry also wants access to the European market - the UK has been allocated €243.1m in subsidies between 2014 and 2020 under the CFP, which will end after Brexit.

    However, others argue that as the UK has a relatively large fishing zone compared to many of its continental European neighbours, EU fishermen benefit more from access to UK waters.
    In the June 2017 Queen’s Speech, the Government announced a Fisheries Bill with the purpose of “enabling the UK to control access to its waters and set UK fishing quotas once it has left the EU.”

    But now, a Government memo recently leaked to the BBC has revealed how much uncertainty there is about the UK’s capacity to patrol its waters and control access.
    The memo, from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), says there are just 12 ships “to monitor a space three times the size of the surface area of the UK”.


    Under the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP), European fishing fleets are given equal access to all EU waters and fishing grounds up to 12 nautical miles from EU member’s coasts.
    The question is whether the UK, after Brexit, will have an arrangement allowing EU boats to fish in its water.
    Currently, the answer to this question is unknown, along with the exact nature of any Brexit arrangements, or whether the UK will leave without any deal at all.
    Brexit fishing map: The UK has a relatively large fishing zone compared to many of its continental European neighbours
    (Image: Express)

    Defra’s internal memo referred to a number of media stories which planned to look at the preparation being made to deter EU fishermen from UK waters in the case of a no deal Brexit, and also whether the UK will enforce the exclusion of foreign vessels.

     There will be just 12 ships to monitor space three times the size of the UK used by trawlers

    The note reads: “While our public position on this wider issue is already clear and widely communicated, in that post-Brexit we will be an independent coastal state with control of our waters, both policy and MoD have indicated we are not on an overly strong footing to get ahead of the potential claims that could arise from this story.
    “At this stage, there is a lot of uncertainty about the sufficiency of enforcement in a no-deal because we have 12 vessels that need to monitor a space three times the size of the surface area of the UK.”

    Admiral Lord West, a Labour peer and former First Sea Lord, said the email appeared to show the UK has “insufficient assets to patrol and look after our exclusive economic zone for fisheries, and also our territorial seas”.
    He added: “This is something a number of us have been saying for some time now, but it has always been denied by Defra and the Government.”

    However, Barrie Deas, the CEO of the National Federation of Fisherman’s Organisations (NFFO), said any EU vessel would be “foolish” to fish in UK waters - even without a deal in place.
    He told the BBC: “Under international law, the UK would automatically become an independent coastal state with the rights and responsibilities of that status and there is an obligation under the UN Law of the Sea for countries that share stocks to co-operate.
    “So I think there will be a fisheries agreement post-Brexit between the UK and the EU, but on a different basis from the Common Fisheries Policy.”

    Links :



    Sunday, August 18, 2019

    The swimmer

    This short film tells the story of Walter Strohmeyer who for almost all of his 90 years has been swimming in the waters off Long Island.
    An honest and at times heartfelt story about the power of ritual.