|
Western Arctic Shelf-Basin Interactions (SBI) Project
|
|
SBI SSC MEETING Jackie Grebmeier opened the meeting with a transparency entitled, SBI Project Office Status Report, reviewing the conception of SBI and the important dates leading up to this meeting. After introductions were made the meeting began with invited speakers. Takatoshi Takizawa shared an overview of the JAMSTEC research efforts in the SBI related region. Transparencies included a map of the mooring work and the website, http://www://w3.jamstec.go.jp:8338. Their primary work is physical oceanography with a secondary emphasis on carbonate chemistry and drift buoy monitoring. The Japanese, over the past three years, have done two cruises per year, using the Laurier and a JAMSTEC vessel. Moorings have been placed at three sites along the shelf-break area at depths of a couple hundred meters. Devises on the moorings include ADCP, CTD and current meters. Jackie Grebmeier asked if biochemical sensors could be added to the moorings, to which Toshi assured her this was possible. The Mirai, JAMSTEC vessel, will be in the Chukchi/Beaufort in 2002-2003 and he encouraged the SBI body to use it; hinting that he is very instrumental at scheduling the vessel. Igor Semiletov discussed his research dealing with major transport of terrestrial material (solid) into the Arctic Ocean. He indicated there was 60 million tons of coastal erosion with elevated PCO2 and low DO at the area of coastal erosion. The Laptev Sea also has very high particulate matter and POC in both surface and bottom waters. Igor Melnikov discussed the role of sea ice and indicated that the data from the cruise 2000 (AK Federov) and SHEBA are very similar. His team found evidence first time seen in the Arctic that algae develop between the snow and ice cover. Sources for "dirty ice" include coastal erosion, permafrost retreat, river sediment transport and maybe resuspension. He would very much like to set up ice camp tents to study the role of sea ice in more depth. He is very anxious to work with the Canadians and US scientists. Mikhael Flint showed a transparency defining the top programs at the Shirshov Institute relating to the SBI program. They are marginal "filters" in the Arctic and land ocean interactions in the Russian Arctic. The marginal filters are the Arctic rivers, delta areas and the continental slope margins. There are three concepts linked to these margins: the physical/geochemical processes, hydrochemical experimentation processes and biological phenomenon. The land ocean interaction program has three topics. There is good funding for this program. · Effects of changes in external forces on tundra conditions in coastal regions · Study the structure and function of biological communities in marine ecosytems · Predictions in Perchora (?) sea coastal changes Flint discussed concepts from overall Russian Arctic Research coinciding with our SBI concepts. He discussed today's political environment in Russia adding that there is no working document linking US-Russia, yet; nor is he terribly hopeful for any change within the Russian Ministries. Fifteen years ago, there was much better cooperation than now. However, today there are no special programs designed for Arctic Research. He mentioned multiple levels of cooperation, including development of small agencies to deal with Arctic issues; but is not sure if this would really meet scientific goals and the paperwork would be more inter-government agreement in Russia to investigate world oceans (esp. Arctic); officials are interested. He had a packet of nine papers by Americans examining proposals for international cooperation for governmental efforts. Igor, commenting on the role of the military, said he could get data from mooring at Harold Canyon, but US scientists could not be on board a Russian vessel. He also said he couldn't collect data deeper than 100m. Mikhael says the opposite that nothing more shallow than 100m could be sampled. Break Eddy Carmack gave the Canadian Overview, Part I presentation. He showed a map of the entire region emphasizing the covered area of the continental shelf north of the McKenzie River just prior to spring break-up or spring "wake-up" when a rough zone of rubble ice leaves a lead or polynya, where brine formation can take place. Polynya zone can also be called a "nutcracker" because of its opening and closing with great force. Submarine canyons in this region are also important in the shelf-basin exchange process. The ice edge is over the shelf-break, but can be very close to the coast one year or extend way out over the break in other years. This is a critical part of variability in this region. Canadian work on the SBI started in the early 1980s. Melling and Lewis published a paper citing shelf drainage for the first time, or water coming off the shelf and entering the halocline in the Arctic Ocean. Carmack started in mid 1980s working in the area with the gas & oil companies. The hope of that industry was that if there was a major spill then there would be S-B interaction and it would go off into the Arctic Ocean and disappear. This leads us to wonder about SBI , sediment/transport processes and onshore/offshore exchange. What was the impact of oil exploration on the ecology on the MacKenzie Shelf? During this 15 year period they produced an atlas. Since 1985, they tried to extend the work in the Beaufort Sea to include the Canadian Archipelago, a big continental shelf with some large islands. There is well established cooperation with Tom Weingartner, Knut Aagaard, Jackie Grebmeier and JAMSTEC. He gave an overview of the work done along the entire region from Victoria to Amundsen Gulf. One of the main rationales for doing work in the Archipelago is to examine the fresh water flow from the Arctic into the N. Atlantic - this great conveyor belt/twinching idea. Additionally, we are trying to understand how other components fresh water, ice, nutrients, etc. are ecological backdrops affecting the trophic dynamics of the Canadian Archipelago. Humphry Meling is currently doing mooring work on the Beaufort Shelf monitoring ocean flow and ice. Fiona Maclaughlin started two years ago studying sediment fluxes and geochemical fluxes in the Amundsen Gulf. There are four components to mosaic forming the Beaufort Region within the Canadian research. The continuation of work being done under the SBI umbrella addresses the main hypothesis of SBI. ASPI (Arctic Science Planning Commission) will strengthen the federal government's ability to do work in the Arctic. CASES (Canadian Arctic Shelf Exchange Studies) studies the ecological ties to the physical environment. How does atmospheric ice and ocean forcing interact with the trophic dynamics of the shelf and the various components of the shelf, the land, fast ice, open polynya, and ice edge and how do they respond to global warming scenarios. CASES works to understand ecosystem components which are set up to fall into 8 subcategories dealing with: physical forcing that the specific consequences of ice and snow cover on biological links; correspondingly, what are the questions of light, nutrients and primary and export production in the ice-free regions. There is also a microbial community and the heterotrophy, pelagic foodweb structures, functions of contaminates as they move through the foodweb, organic/inorganic fluxes, benthic processes, carbon cycling and long-term variability questions. It is an insert program (university driven) and has a wintering program covering a twelve month period. Its optimism is based on SHEBA's success. There will be moorings and on-ice camps. The fourth program is with a very close relationship with JAMSTEC. Theme 2000 is a program whereby the Mirai and Canadian vessels run a section across the shelf-break with helo support for land operations and special interest with methane exchange, atmosphere to the bottom including the water column. Marty Bergmann presented the Canadian Overview, Part II: He is the newly appointed coordinator of Canadian Arctic Research. Issues of interest including climate change, oil & gas issues, issues related to land claim settlements and a series of new legislation including the Oceans Act and Species at Risk Act have provided focus within the government to look North. Efforts are underway for a high-level government committee to deal with federal departments, agencies, university and college groups and Northern communities to design holistic policies dealing with issues in the North. There is a strong consensus to examine these issues and work with international communities. The Canadian Coast Guard and the link with DFO has been slow to mature but is coming together better now. There is a commitment for the Laurier to depart Victoria each July and return sometime in September. (A 60-day agreement was struck with the Northern communities). The intent is that only science will be done during this "tour of duty", instead of coupling science with coast guard related jobs. This goes into effect next July. Another ship, a shallow inshore vessel is scheduled to do three weeks of work near coast/shore of the MacKenzie next year. The Assitant Deputy Minister of Science took it upon himself to protect a vessel, the Sir John Franklin, which was deemed redundant as far as performing coast guard duties, and freed it up to do science. This is the sister ship of the one used in the SHEBA project (1200 series). Marty said that the senior managers on board now are more willing to work with the international science communities than in the past making the opportunity real. We can have long term ranges now, as opposed to year to year. CASES is doing research work east of the demarcation line while the Laurier/DFO will work west of the line (SBI Link). Dieter Piepenburg shared current/future programs in Germany (in context with SBI). · Russian-Germany Cooperation · Laptev Sea System 2000 – well funded; started officially in 1995 · Sea ice studies · Hydrographical work (Arctic & Antarctic Research in St. Petersburg) · Biology studies · Paleoclimate studies · Main emphasis is on land-ocean interaction and terrestrial work · Kara Sea Project (nature of continental shelf run-off) · European Efforts · Arctic Ocean Grand Challenge-Ecology (AOGE-ECO) · Failed to get European $$$ · Focus on North Barents Sea – strong Norweigian-German link · Long-Term Benthic Deep-Sea Station · Off Svalbard (79N, 4E), established in 1999 (process emphasis) · "Arctic Deep-Sea Project" · looking at environmental conditions Jim Moore (UCAR, Joint Office of Science Support) presentation outlined below: · Implement comprehensive data management strategy – The Legacy of SBI – · Questionnaire, policy, plan (data formats & documentation guidelines) · Interim archive and/or Web links of Phase I datasets · Passed out a policy handout · Link to web page to JOSS · Question: How to archive the modeling? · Arctic Climate Project Jackie Grebmeier led a discussion to determine where the SBI PI Meeting for Phase II would be in winter 2001 (11:40 – 12:00) · February 2001, possibly the 3rd week · Wieslaw Maslowski offered to host the meeting in Monterey, CA · Dennis Conlon suggested that the PIs give action statements · "For me to get my job done, I need...." · Mike Ledbetter wants PIs to ask the question, "What have you learned from Phase I that will guide Phase II?" (make this a requirement); It can't be simply a series of science talks · Jackie Gregmeier: need a post Phase II successful PI meeting; so Phase I people aren't the only ones guiding future · Terry Whitledge: "How does Phase I project pertain to goals/the field program for Phase II? Compilations put on web site · Jim Moore: Meeting should be open to ALL potential Phase II grantees · May need to consider a different city possibly joining with Feb. ASLO meeting Executive Session (1:30 – 5:00) Mikhael Flint gave a more in depth political definition of what's going on in Russia: · Suggest that the 8 American Arctic programs should be put in some order for the Minister of Science and Technology in Russia to work with · The proper way of choosing/interfacing study areas on the Russian side · Which institutes are to be cooperating efforts? Russian Academy of Sciences, NOAA, NSF, etc. · Mike Ledbetter asked Flint about ASOF awareness; He wasn't familiar with ASOF. Suggest moorings in the Bering Strait ride on ASOF's budget instead of SBI Mike Ledbetter gave a talk about his concern with the projected timeline for the Phase II portion of SBI. He suggested that maybe the Russian cooperation could come in via ASOF – ocean fluxes worldwide. Then, offered idea that maybe the mooring portion in the Bering Strait be done via this international program as opposed to SBI. His general comments: · SBI = shelf-basin interactions – do not have map with studies going along the coast (someone else's program) · $$$ concerns core vs. process core programs; only have $17.5 million · Good section on goals, but speak more to, "What are the problems?" and "Where should we go?" This will determine who will propose what kind of process study to answer the problem · Core measurements seem to prescribe what the process measurements need to be if those measurements are going to be utilized. · That will drive the program...needs tightening up · Too huge an area – need to be narrowed down · Concerned about data format/management issues; these details need to be in AO · Better defining the program will force definition of problems · Set up a different timetable – says we are doing too much – not enough time · Questioned seabird mammal core sets; asked about NOAA collaboration (Sue Moore) · Suggests off-setting core & process measurements, instead of doing together · Phase I ends in Oct. 2001; ONR talking about recycling Bering Strait moorings; and making a few more additions? · Phase II proposal due before Phase I ends (current schedule) · The Phase I results aren't fully utilized before getting into Phase II · Mike suggested award core project first (including mooring), then delay process cruises Eddy Carmack asked about the one year gap between end of Phase I and the process studies' funding which won't get started until 2003? Ledbetter said there is no guarantee for continuous funding in any program. Terry Whitledge asked if core measurements start in 2002 for 4 years, wouldn't there be a year of processing w/o core measurements? Dennis Conlon: · operations of mooring array is more doable in 2002 than 2001 (ONR) · philosophical problems of doing mooring arrays for Phase II without full Phase I data · ONR wants to know what is going on at the shelf-break; will keep moorings in Bering Strait Ledbetter suggests that the physics part of the program should be supplying a service to geochemists; planned is biogeochemistry and physics ASOF and SEARCH is coming and looks for supporting parts of SBI out of different pots of $$$; this is an advantage of waiting a year for the process measurements Pat Wheeler spoke about types of models in the SBI related regions, citing WHOI people and Wieslaw's work. Chemical tracers work is being done by Kelly Falkner. Biological work being done by Glenn ?. Eddy Carmack asked about physical oceanography and referred to Paul Wassmann's letter stating the need for biophysical coupled models. The SSC had a discussion on this topic. One needs a quantitative hypothesis to get coupling results. A cautionary note was brought up that models may lead us astray if we rely on them too much; let's go back to the time-line and scale of interest. Break Additional discussions after break: Sue Moore indicated that SEARCH (Jamie Morrison) and John Calder's (NOAA) schedule lags behind SBI by 2-3 yrs. Suggests SBI goals are communicated to SEARCH people as there is some overlap. http://aro.oar.noaa.gov/. Terry Whitledge sent logistics plan to NSF for a 3-2-3-2 time on Healy starting in 2002, which will change depending on timing decisions for SBI II. Dennis Conlon asked what processes with what instruments are going to be done? Good statement for AO. Pat Wheeler said that ice, algal and water column goals may not be met with "blue box". Lots of open discussion until closing time. |