LOGISTICS REPORT
K042: Styles of early glaciation near the margin of the East Antarctic Ice Sheet, South Victoria Land
Antarctica New Zealand 2000/01
1 Aims
This project is a detailed study of ancient glacial deposits termed the Sirius Group, focussed mainly at Allan Hills, but including Mount Feather and Table Mountain, Southern Victoria Land, Antarctica. The Sirius Group is a collection of Neogene deposits that crop out at high elevations (mostly >1500 m) throughout the Transantarctic Mountains (TAM). Allan Hills occupies a low point in the TAM, making the site more susceptible to overriding by the EAIS during minor volume fluctuations, while Mount Feather has the highest elevation deposits of the Sirius Group. Table Mountain is nearby Mount Feather and of similar elevation to Allan Hills, but the deposits there are more varied. The aim of this project is to show whether the Sirius Group was deposited by valley glacier or continental ice sheet, by wet- or dry-based glacial ice, by a single depositional event or several overriding events and to determine paleoflow direction. The expansion of the study this season to include deposits at Mount Feather and Table Mountain significantly widens the scope of the project and will permit a valid regional perspective.
The field season ran from mid-November 2000 to December 22, 2000 and included visits to three field sites: Allan Hills, Mount Feather and Table Mountain. Holme and Hicock's work at Allan Hills consisted of outcrop description and mapping (continued from the 1999/2000 field season), while work at Mount Feather and Table Mountain focussed on outcrop studies. In total, nine outcrops were studied and 24 samples were taken. Collected data include: 330 stone orientations were measured, 51 linear glacial abrasions and 79 planar deformational structures. Bornholdt's work consisted of mapping and sampling the volcanogenic and sedimentary deposits which comprise Mount Watters. Additionally, Holme aided K047a in choosing potential sites for their drilling program at Allan Hills.
2 Planning
-
With the application process;
We have no suggestions for improvements to the application process.
-
With Antarctica New Zealand staff;
We have no suggestions for improvements to Antarctica New Zealand staff.
-
Provision of maps and aerial photographs;
Maps and aerial photographs were obtained before our first season last year and during the winter before our (second) season this year.
-
To the Pre-season Information
We have no suggestions for improvements to the pre-season information.
-
To Medicals, documentation and flights to Antarctica.
Holme and Bornholdt's medical examinations were conducted by a GP at the Victoria University campus. Bornholdt was recovering from a broken clavicle and required subsequent visits to a specialist to monitor the status of his recovery. His recovery progressed very well and he was eventually deemed fit by the specialist and did not suffer any related difficulties during the field season. Hicock's medical exam was conducted by a GP in Ontario, Canada.
3 Cargo
Cargo shipped to ANZ's store for transport to Scott Base consisted of five wooden rock boxes (two with papers inside totalling <10 kg), a cardboard map tube, and a collapsible aluminium pole in a section of ABS plastic piping. These items were given to ANZ at a very late date and we are extremely grateful that the staff in Christchurch expedited their shipment to Scott Base.
4 Personnel
Philip Holme | (PhD student, principal investigator (for P. Barrett) - Victoria University of Wellington) |
Carl Bornholdt | (Honours student, field assistant to Holme - Victoria University of Wellington) |
Dr. Stephen Hicock | (co-supervisor for Holme - University of Western Ontario) |
5 Preparations for the Field
i | Reception, planning for your event and liaison where appropriate; Our reception at Scott Base was fine, as was on-base planning for helo weights, etc. |
ii | Availability and condition of equipment received by your event. Any work required by your party to make the equipment serviceable should be noted; Equipment received by our event was in good working condition. The ground-sheet for one of our Polar tents was an Endura floor, but that was the only mistake. |
iii | Field training and field party equipment 'shakedown' journey (if applicable); Two of our event members did AFT last year and so only required a refresher course, but one of them (Hicock) did not receive this training due to a mix-up. He arrived southbound at Scott Base late in the day and it was decided that he and the other new (returning) arrivals would begin their AFT refresher the next day. At 0700h the next morning however an attempt was made to fly him into the field (Allan Hills) and he missed the AFT refresher session. Poor weather in the McKay Glacier valley forced the helo to abort its mission and to return with Hicock to Scott Base where he then spent several days at Scott Base due to ongoing weather and radio-disruption delays but did not receive the training session. |
iv | Delays at Scott Base, whatever the cause. Holme and Bornholdt were delayed three days at Scott Base before going into the field because of poor weather (snowfall and poor visibility) there. Hicock was delayed several days at Scott Base due to poor weather both at Scott Base and Allan Hills when he arrived later in the season. He was delayed in Christchurch for nine days before arriving at Scott Base due to poor weather and HF radio disruptions (due to solar flare activity). |
6 Field Transport
i | Aircraft Operations Discuss the success or otherwise of all aircraft, helicopter or other operations supporting your event. |
All our helicopter operations were successful. The Helicopters New Zealand pilots, Rob and Jim, were great and we were very happy to be flying with them. We are very grateful to Jim Wilson for making a flight out to Table Mountain to pick us up at the end of the season when weather conditions were quite poor. Had he not done so we would have been forced to stay there for several days over Christmas.
Describe the containerisation of cargo, total flight weights, special handling of dangerous cargo, (eg motor toboggan, fuel tanks) and pre-planning meetings.
Our cargo was very standard for a field party and we did not have any hazardous cargo. We were transported exclusively by the HNZ 212 helo 'HNO' and for each flight our weight was 1900 lbs or slightly over. The pilots, Rob and Jim, were aware of our weights and acted accordingly, especially when we had to be dropped off and picked up at Mt. Feather (2500 m.a.s.l).
7 Event Diary
9 Weather
Provide a general overview of your local weather throughout the season and how this aided or hindered your party movements and decisions.
Allan Hills:
The weather at Allan Hills this season was generally very snowy compared to last season. The snow was 'real' precipitation in that it often occurred during fairly low wind conditions and therefore was unlikely to have been blown in from the plateau. When we arrived there on Nov 22 the daily temperature was around −17°C, but warmed up rapidly until it was about −8 to −10°C when we left in early December. Wind conditions were generally moderate (10-15 kts) most of the time but became quite windy on occasion (>20 kts) - wind direction was from the south. We experienced several days of low visibility which prevented helo arrivals - this was different from last year when we had mostly clear, sunny skies.
Mount Feather:
We experienced mainly poor weather conditions at Mt. Feather (ground-level, dense cloud and much blowing snow), but there is a very clear pattern to the weather there. Mornings are often clear or partly cloudy with good visibility, but by 11 am cloud builds up at ground level (2500 m), dropping visibility to 20-50 m and completely preventing any helo activity. This weather is local to Mt. Feather, however, and during brief glimpses through the cloud we could see that adjacent valleys (Ferrar, Taylor) were largely clear. Mt. Feather is so high that it produces its own weather (a summit cloud). We received several heavy snowfalls during our stay there and temperatures hovered around −18 to −20°C. Winds were often <25 kts and blew exclusively from the north/northeast - this is uncommon for Mt. Feather where the winds are often much stronger and southerly.
Table Mountain:
Weather conditions at Table Mtn. were somewhat similar to those at Allan Hills, but less windy and with lower visibility. Temperatures there were around −8 to −12°C and the wind blew from the north <10 kts. We received quite a bit of snowfall and for about half the time the weather deteriorated to conditions somewhat similar to those at Mt. Feather with low visibility due to ground-level cloud and falling snow.
10 Accidents, incidents or hazards
No event members were injured and no hazards were experienced during the season.
11 Field Equipment
i
The field clothing issued to us by ANZ was generally of good quality and it performed well. Exceptions to this were sunglasses, and the ECW jacket and salopettes issued to one of our members (Bornholdt). His ECWs were of lightweight design, both in durability and insulation and were not adequate for the exposed conditions experienced at Allan Hills and Mt. Feather (2500 m). Since this was Bornholdt's first season in Antarctica he did not realise in Christchurch that his gear was substandard. Admittedly, this was Holme's second season and he should have checked Bornholdt's gear to ensure that it was adequate, however, a person should be able to receive gear from ANZ that performs the function for which it is issued, especially critical items like ECWs. Bornholdt was able to compensate by using other thermal gear issued by ANZ, but ECWs are supposed to be Extreme Cold Weather gear which his were clearly not. Additionally, the sunglasses issued to us were so cheap that the plastic frame cracked and broke after three days use - we appreciate that the sunglasses issued by ANZ are supplementary to those brought by individuals but they should be of sufficient quality to endure the simple act of wearing them.
ii
Our event was issued two polar tents which performed well throughout the season. Our kitchen gear was generally in good shape, except for one of the primus stoves and the sieve. We had constant difficulty with the stove as it appeared to have a partial blockage in the fuel path. The sieve we received was quite battered - half of the steel mesh was torn out from the surrounding steel ring.
iii
The 20 person-day ration box system provides adequate nutrition for persons doing physical outdoor at elevation on the edge of the polar plateau. We were pleased to note this year that the bumper bars were fresh and palatable. The Scott Base diet was excellent and we enjoyed the meals there very much - compared to our flat food in New Zealand, every meal there was a treat. The Christmas Feast was a wonderful experience that will live on in our memories.
12 Radio Communications
i | Report on the suitability and effectiveness of the radio equipment issued to you at Scott Base. Comment on battery power, condition of aerials and utilisation of solar panels. |
It is generally not possible to contact Scott Base from Allan Hills using VHF radios, so HF communications are used. The Codan radio assembly we were issued performed well in the field, but the radio was built into a heavy wooden box which added considerably to its weight and bulk. We appreciate that the radio is an expensive and critical piece of field equipment which has to survive many field seasons and therefore has to be protected, but the box makes it almost too cumbersome. The solar panels were sufficient for charging the batteries.
For communications amongst ourselves in the field while at Allan Hills, and with Scott Base while at Mt. Feather and Table Mtn., we were issued the new Motorola handheld VHF radios. These are great little radios but possess a shortcoming in that they cannot currently be connected to high-gain aerials. While at Allan Hills we were extremely fortunate that Alex Pyne, a member of the K047A event who were with us there, brought one of the old Tait handhelds and a high gain aerial (see point 'ii' below).
ii | Report on reception/transmission conditions and suitability of radio sked timing. Note particularly any periods during your field trip, or regions you visited, where radio reception was especially bad or unexpectedly good. Comment on conditions where repeater stations were used. |
During 'normal' operating conditions at Allan Hills we are able to contact Scott Base without difficulty using HF, however, this summer was a period of intense solar flare activity which severely disrupted our HF communications. We were fully briefed on this by the Operations Manager (Peter Geary) when we first arrived at Scott Base and were advised that we would likely experience extended periods when we could not contact Scott Base. He showed us the contingency plan he had developed which involved using non-standard channels, including the American aviation channel (8998 kHz), if we were out of contact with Scott Base for 48 hours or had an emergency. As the season progressed we experienced many times when we could not contact Scott Base (or any other station) using HF despite following the contingency plan - the disruptions tended to completely block communications rather than simply degrading the signal until it was weak and broken. The longest period without communications was more than 48 hours and we grew anxious to contact Scott Base so two members took a Tait handheld VHF radio and high-gain aerial and climbed a high ridge (thereafter informally dubbed 'Radio Ridge') (see Figure 2). After many attempts, they were able to get through to Scott Base by hitting the Erebus Repeater. The skill of the Comms Op (Katie) was greatly appreciated because the signal was so weak and broken that we would not have understood her without her constantly repeating simple and clear messages.
At Mt. Feather we communicated with Scott Base using VHF and the Mt. Erebus Repeater. We did not experience any communications difficulties. We were also able to communicate with K047A at Table Mtn. using handheld Ch. 6 simplex line-of-sight.
At Table Mtn. we communicated with Scott Base using VHF and the Dry Valleys Repeater. We did not experience any communications difficulties.
.jpg)
Figure 2. Location map of fieldsite at Allan Hills.
iii | Comment on Scott Base's general efficiency during radio skeds in providing details of forthcoming field movements (eg helicopters), weather forecasts, resupply, or news service. |
We generally did not have a problem with the performance of the Comms Ops, but felt that the operators in the second group were inferior to those in the first group. Katie (an operator from the first group) stood out as the best by far of both groups. Operators in the second group (in particular the two males) were often vague with information we had requested and ignorant of flight operations despite repeated requests for schedules. We became used to the precise and unambiguous manner of the better operators and found these two males to be less effective. Additionally, there were times when one of these two operators was working when we were unable to contact Scott Base at all despite continued attempts for more than 30 minutes. We realise that the operator can become very busy at their post, but a brief acknowledgement of our call and request to have us wait can be done in an instant.
iv | Remember that you are strongly encouraged to keep a detailed radio log while in the field, in particular if you are a deep field party. The log is to be given to the Operations Manager when returning your radio at Scott Base. Such a log can become a vital and lifesaving source of information in the event of a Search & Rescue operation and can become an important LEGAL document. |
13 Scott Base and Arrival Heights Laboratory Facilities
i. | Hatherton Geoscience Laboratory; |
ii. | Q-Hut Laboratory benches; |
iii. | Scott Base Wet Lab; |
iv. | Arrival Heights Laboratory; |
v. | Summer Lab |
Describe any additional equipment your event needed to take to Scott Base to complement the laboratory equipment in these facilities. Comment on what equipment you think should be available at Scott Base laboratories.
None of our event members used the laboratory facilities.
14 Refuge and Research Huts
i. | Overall condition; |
ii. | Scale and condition of provisions; |
iii. | Suitability of location; |
iv. | Unnecessary equipment or rubbish/debris in the area; |
None of our event members used any United States or New Zealand field facilities.
15 Environmental Impact
i. | From your event diary, please summarise for each site visit made:
|
Site 1: location Trudge Valley, Allan Hills (approx. 76°42′18″ S, 159°47′24″ E); occupied 19/11/00 - 08/12/00; total days 20; maximum personnel 3; total person-days 60; activities geological mapping, outcrop description, rock sampling and assisting K047A event with drilling (see Figure 2).
Site 2: location Mount Feather (approx. 76° 42′ 00″ S, 160° 24′ 00″ E); occupied 09/12/00-15/12/00; total days 7; maximum personnel 3; total person-days 21; activities outcrop description, rock sampling (see Figure 3).
Site 3: location Table Mountain (approx. 77° 58′ 00″ S, 161° 58′ 00″ E); occupied 16/12/00 - 22/12/00; total days 6; maximum personnel 3; total person-days 18; activities outcrop description, rock sampling, permafrost polygon measuring (see Figure 4).
ii. | For any protected areas visited (including historic huts), provide details of:
|
No protected areas were visited by event members.
iii. | Detail any interference with terrestrial, freshwater or marine plants or animals or animal parts (e.g. shells, bones, feathers etc.) For each site and/or species sampled or disturbed, provide:
|
Event members did not interfere with any wildlife.
.jpg)
Figure 3. Map showing fieldsite at Mt. Feather.
.jpg)
Figure 4. Map showing fieldsite at Table Mtn.
iv. | Detail any collection of geological material (including meteorites, ventifacts, fossils or sub-fossils) or soil. For each sample (or group of samples) taken describe the location, specimen type and quantity in kg. |
Location | #of samples | Type | Total mass (kg) |
---|---|---|---|
Allan Hills (AH): small outcrop on western Trudge Valley (TV) | 1 | rock | 0.6 |
AH: small outcrop on eastern side of the Triangle | 1 | rock | 0.8 |
AH: south flank of eastern TV | 12 | rock | 6 |
AH: north flank of eastern TV | 4 | rock | 2 |
AH: large outcrop on west side of the Triangle | 2 | rock | 2 |
AH: large outcrop on east side of the Triangle | 2 | rock | 2 |
AH: mid part of TV high in the north flank | 1 | rock | 0.8 |
AH: high on the north flank of TV | 1 | rock | 0.5 |
Mount Feather (MF): large outcrop at southwestern corner of Sirius Group plateau | 2 | rock | 1.5 |
MF: large outcrop on east corner of Sirius Group platform | 2 | rock | 2 |
MF: large outcrop on north corner of Sirius Group platform | 2 | rock | 2 |
Table Mountain (TM): low outcrop about 150 m east of camp | 2 | rock | 2 |
TM: medium size outcrop about 400 m southeast of camp | 2 | rock | 2 |
TM: small outcrop about 400 m south of camp | 2 | rock | 2 |
TM: small outcrop about 400 m south of camp | 2 | rock | 2 |
TM: medium size outcrop about 400 m east of camp | 3 | rock | 0.5 |
v. | For each chemical (including radionucleides) taken to Antarctica, provide details of the chemical form and quantity and locations of use. Include details of use of fuel, paints, solvents etc in the field. If unused chemicals were not returned to New Zealand, provide details of location and quantities of material released or stored. |
No chemicals were taken by event members to Antarctica.
vi. | Detail any use of explosives in Antarctica, including: |
No explosives were used by event members in Antarctica.
vii. | Detail importation to Antarctica of any animals, plants (including any seeds), micro-organisms or soil, including any inadvertent introductions. Note the name and quantity of the species or substance(s), all the locations they were taken to, and whether they have been returned to New Zealand. |
No animals, plants etc. were imported to or removed from Antarctica by event members.
viii. | List any equipment, markers, stakes or cairns installed in the field during your visit. If any remain in the field, provide details of the location, size and number of items. Note any plans for their retrieval, including the date they will be removed. |
No equipment, markers, stakes or cairns were installed by event members in the field.
ix. | Provide details of any other environmental impacts of your activities including disturbance by trampling, sampling, use of vehicles (including aircraft), camp operations (including waste disposal), installation of equipment and buildings and/or cumulative impacts. |
Daily activity by event members required tramping across the rock and snow surfaces of the fieldsites but no vehicles were used. Samples collected by Holme and Bornholdt were small and not of unique or single occurrence items. Any pits dug for sampling were small and filled back in.
Note any incidents which occurred or were observed (e.g. fuel spills, wildlife disturbance, inappropriate vehicle or aircraft use) and what reports or records have been made. If unreported, detail the date, time, location and nature of incident, and any action taken.
The only incident that occurred which impacted the landscape was when the HNZ helo 'HNO' picked up an underslung cargo box of K047A. The box was heavy and the pilot experienced difficulty lifting it so he was forced to drag the box beneath the helo to a point where the ground dropped off slightly and he could pick up the necessary momentum to lift off. The dragging of the box produced an irregular path in the lag surface of the ground which we were not able to return completely to its original condition.
x. | If the activities described above differ from the Preliminary Environmental Evaluation (PEE) completed for this event (and any approved changes), or from the Environmental Authorisation issued to it, explain how and why they differed. |
The incident with the HNZ helo is reported here because the K047A event members had been returned to Marble Point before the incident happened and therefore could not report on it. It is associated with their event not K042 and if necessary should be discussed with them.
16 Historic Sites
Detail any visit to a designated 'historic site' in the Ross Dependency and include any general observations about the condition of the site, in particular, note any damage.
No event members visited any historic sites in the Ross Dependency.
17 Management of Science in the Ross Dependency
Comment on the forward planning of your Antarctic science programme, especially relating to your field of research. Comment on Antarctica New Zealand's ability to cater for your type of work both at Scott Base and in the field.
The future plan is for the Dutch contingent to return to Table Mountain and Allan Hills for the 2001-2002 field season and sample. We were fully satisfied with the support we received from Antarctica New Zealand both at Scott Base and in the field. Again, we benefited greatly from the willingness of the Scott Base staff to help us far beyond the scope of their specific jobs. We feel it is important for Antarctica New Zealand to fully appreciate this when assessing the success of the New Zealand Antarctic program.
Comment on the involvement of any overseas scientists or students in your event, including the benefits and contribution gained by their participation in your programme.
This event exists because of international cooperation, initially between Swiss and New Zealand researchers, and then later between Holland and New Zealand. With the introduction of Hicock as Holme's Canadian co-supervisor, the international scope of the program was broadened further. This cooperation has brought different and complementary expertise together, greatly enhancing the depth and scope of the science conducted as part of the K042 Event.
Finally, identify any areas where management is required to protect areas of outstanding scientific, environmental, aesthetic or wilderness values. Note that you are able to propose any such area for protection under the Environmental Protocol.
No event members wish to identify any areas where management is required to protect areas of outstanding value.
18 Antarctic Geographic Place Names
The New Zealand Geographic Board has a responsibility to allocate suitable place names to important features in the Ross Dependency.
You are able to recommend names for features encountered in your travels, particularly as these may become important for describing your science in formal journals. New Zealand Geographic Board application guidelines and forms for use in naming features in the Antarctic can be obtained from the Antarctica New Zealand Library. The current policy is that "Antarctic names be descriptive or cover Antarctic activity and history or reflect New Zealand's culture and society".
State the exact location or feature or peak, valley or glacier, and the origin of the name. Attach photographs clearly showing the feature. Link the photograph to a sketch map or photocopy of an existing map sheet. Keep each new name on a separate application form.
Antarctica New Zealand will ensure all applications are in the prescribed format and forward to the New Zealand Geographic Board.
No event members wish to name any part of Antarctica.