The State of Hydrographic Knowledge in Antarctica Robert Ward President, IHO

International Hydrographic Organization Intergovernmental technical and consultative organization 85 Member States Global coordination of hydrographic surveying, charting and ocean mapping

IHO - relevance to Antarctica Lead organization for IHO-IOC GEBCO project www.gebco.net regional bathymetric mapping projects International Bathymetric Chart of the Southern Ocean (IBCSO) IHO Hydrographic Commission on Antarctica (HCA) coordinates Antarctic survey and charting priorities IHO Data Centre for Digital Bathymetry (IHO DCDB) Global repository for bathymetric data www.ngdc.noaa.gov/iho

The significance of hydrography (the depth and shape of the seafloor) underpins all human activity in, on or under the sea a map of the seafloor is fundamental … to everything …

The problem ….. No more than 15% of the depth of the seafloor south of 60°S has been measured directly Measured depths often more than 100 miles apart More detailed maps of the Moon and Mars than of the seas and oceans - especially in Antarctic waters

… still to be discovered … Inferred from satellite gravity observations - over 100,000 seamounts > 1000m in height remain unmeasured Speculatively, 25 million seamounts > 100m in height likely - but so far undetected We s s e l , Sandw e l l and Kim; Oceanography Vol.23, No.1; 2010

Plot of depth soundings /2km2 = a depth ~ every 40m = a depth ~ every 200m = a depth ~ every 500m = no depth or depths >2km apart !

~ 500 miles = no depth or depths >2km apart ! = a depth ~ every 500m = a depth ~ every 200m = a depth ~ every 40m

~ 500 miles = no depth or depths >2km apart ! = a depth ~ every 500m = a depth ~ every 200m = a depth ~ every 40m

~ 500 miles = no depth or depths >2km apart ! = a depth ~ every 500m = a depth ~ every 200m = a depth ~ every 40m

~ 500 miles = no depth or depths >2km apart ! = a depth ~ every 500m = a depth ~ every 200m = a depth ~ every 40m ~ 1000 miles

Is this good enough ?

ATCM Resolution 5/2014 : 3. ….. encourage[s] national program vessels and ships of opportunity to collect hydrographic and bathymetric data on all Antarctic voyages, as practicable; to forward any hydrographic and bathymetric data collected to the relevant international chart producer for charting action; …

Everyone can help … The myths and the reality … All ships are capable of collecting coastal depth data at minimal cost and effort Any depth data is better than no depth data All depth data is valuable - even lower quality data Confirming existing depths is as important as measuring new depths

IHO trusted crowd-sourced bathymetry programme Low-tech data logger to access ship’s echo sounder ship’s GNSS logging x,y,z,t Unit cost: ~250€ easy installation, minimal monitoring IHO upload/download portal to IHO global database (IHO DCDB) and GEBCO

measure once, use many times are we seeing all the depth data that has already been collected? How much data is archived but effectively undiscoverable? measure once, use many times

Conclusions All ships should be collecting depth data as a matter of routine All historical depth data should be discoverable minimum requirement - publish the metadata (via IHO DCDB?) Depth data can be made discoverable via IHO DCDB at a resolution that respects research, commercial or security considerations IHO DCDB relationship with: Antarctic Digital Database? Antarctic Master Directory? Quantarctica?

You CAN make a difference !

This is GEBCO 08, the 2008 version of GEBCO for the same area<Click>

This is a view of GEBCO14 after the addition of Olex data This is a view of GEBCO14 after the addition of Olex data. These underwater canyons are now very well defined.

This is GEBCO 08, the 2008 version of GEBCO for the same area<Click>

Robert Ward pres@iho.int www.iho.int

Conclusions All ships should be collecting depth data as a matter of routine All historical depth data should be discoverable minimum requirement - publish the metadata (via IHO DCDB?) Depth data can be made discoverable via IHO DCDB at a resolution that respects research, commercial or security considerations IHO DCDB relationship with: Antarctic Digital Database? Antarctic Master Directory? Quantarctica?