Environmental monitoring and management proposals for the Fildes Region, King George Island, Antarctica

Abstract

The Antarctic terrestrial environment is under increasing pressure from human activities. The Fildes Region is characterized by high biodiversity, but is also a major logistic centre for the northern Antarctic Peninsula. Different interests, from scientific research, nature conservation, protection of geological and historical values, station operations, transport logistics and tourism, regularly overlap in space and time. This has led to increasing conflict among the multiple uses of the region and breaches of the legal requirements for environmental protection that apply in the area. The aim of this study was to assess the impacts of human activities in the Fildes Region by monitoring the distribution of bird and seal breeding sites and recording human activities and their associated environmental impacts. Data from an initial monitoring period 2003–06 were compared with data from 2008–10. We observed similar or increased levels of air, land and ship traffic, but fewer violations of overflight limits near Antarctic Specially Protected Area No. 150 Ardley Island. Open waste dumping and oil contamination are still major environmental impacts. Scientific and outdoor leisure activities undertaken by station personnel are more frequent than tourist activities and are likely to have a commensurate level of environmental impact. Despite the initial success of some existing management measures, it is essential that scientific and environmental values continue to be safeguarded, otherwise environmental impacts will increase and the habitat will be further degraded. We argue that the Fildes Region should be considered for designation as an Antarctic Specially Managed Area, a measure that has proven effective for environmental management of vulnerable areas of the Antarctic

Demonstration of “substantial research activity” to acquire consultative status under the Antarctic Treaty

“…Station construction and operation generally results in substantial environmental impacts that are greater than ''minor and transitory'' in nature (see Annex I to the Protocol; Poland et al 2003;Tin et al 2009;Kennicutt et al 2010;Tin et al 2014). Consequently, in areas such as the northern Antarctic Peninsula and its offshore islands, where approximately 50% of research stations are already located, there may be intense competition between humans and indigenous fauna and flora for remaining ice-free ground (Chwedorzewska & Korczak 2010;Hughes et al 2011;Braun et al 2012). Recorded impacts include disturbance or displacement of wildlife, destruction of habitat, environmental pollution and introduction of non-native species (Tin et al 2009;Hughes, Pertierra et al 2015;Coetzee & Chown 2016).…”

“…Recorded impacts include disturbance or displacement of wildlife, destruction of habitat, environmental pollution and introduction of non-native species (Tin et al 2009;Hughes, Pertierra et al 2015;Coetzee & Chown 2016). Impacts can be amplified where stations operated by several Parties are co-located (Braun et al 2012). Construction of multiple stations in relatively accessible locations, such as the South Shetland Islands, in order to demonstrate substantial research activity and justify consultative status, is likely to have substantial impacts on the environmental, scientific, wilderness and aesthetic values of Antarctica*all of which Parties aspire to protect under the Protocol.…”

Human Impacts on Soils

“…Ground disturbance or "terrestrial impact visual assessments" are also carried out at all landings on ice-free areas using the visual site assessment method of Campbell et al (1993 The Fildes Peninsula region, on the south-western part of King George Island, South Shetland Islands, on the Antarctic Peninsula, has six permanent Antarctic stations. It is a special case in Antarctica where different interests, from scientific research, station operations, transport logistics, and tourism, regularly overlap in space and time (Braun et al 2012). Conflicts of interest between multiple users sometimes occur, as well as breaches in the environmental obligations outlined in the Madrid Protocol.…”

“…Conflicts of interest between multiple users sometimes occur, as well as breaches in the environmental obligations outlined in the Madrid Protocol. There have been recent cases where the level of EIA undertaken by some national programmes has not always been appropriate for the likely level of impact, and in one instance an IEE indicating "minor and transitory" impacts was prepared for the expansion of a station, but the work resulted in destruction of beach ridges (Braun et al 2012).…”

“…However, the tourists strictly follow the ASI site guidelines, and the local environmental impact of tourism was considered to be lower than the impact of national programme personnel (Braun et al 2012). A potential solution for increasing coordinated environmental management and reducing the conflict of interests between national programmes is the designation of the Fildes Peninsula region as an Antarctic Specially Managed Area (ASMA).…”