the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
Glacier inventories reveal an acceleration of Heard Island glacier loss over recent decades
Abstract. Glacier inventories provide baseline data for understanding and evaluating past, current, and future changes in glacier extent in response to climate changes. We present a multi-year, manually mapped glacier inventory for sub-Antarctic Heard Island, a remote glacier-covered volcano in the southern Indian Ocean. Glacier outlines are presented for 1947, 1988, and 2019, derived from large-scale topographical maps (1:50,000), cloud-free medium-resolution SPOT, and high-resolution Pléiades satellite orthoimages. ASTER and Pléiades digital surface elevation models for 2000 and 2019 were also used to determine topographic parameters for individual glaciers. Heard Island glacier area reduced from 289.4±6.1 km2 in 1947 to 260.3±6.3 km2 in 1988, further decreasing to 225.7±4.2 km2 in 2019. The rate of annual glacier area loss between the two observation periods (1947–1988 and 1988–2019) almost doubled from −0.25 % yr−1 to −0.43 % yr−1. Glaciers on the eastern slopes of Heard Island experienced much higher retreat rates than glaciers elsewhere on the island. The maximum retreat observed between 1947 and 2019 was ~5.8 km for the east-facing Stephenson Glacier, where collapse of the terminus led to the formation of a large lagoon during recent decades. Surface debris cover on Heard Island glaciers increased from 7.0±6 % (18.1 km2) in 1988 to 12.8±5.5 % (29.0 km2) in 2019. We also observed an upward shift (4.2 m yr−1) in the maximum elevation of debris cover from 285±20 m a.s.l. (above sea level) to 605±20 m a.s.l., during this time. Direct climate observations from Heard Island are scarce, but reanalysis climate data show that the decline in glaciers is associated with a rising temperature of 0.7 °C Many questions about the behaviour of Heard Island glaciers remain unanswered. Our inventory dataset will be freely available in the GLIMS glacier database to facilitate further analysis and modelling of Heard Island glaciers.
- Preprint
(1792 KB) - Metadata XML
- BibTeX
- EndNote
Status: final response (author comments only)
-
RC1: 'Comment on egusphere-2024-3811', Frank Paul, 09 Feb 2025
Dear Authors
Please find my review in the attachment. I have one lager issue and many smaller ones that you can hopefully consider in a revised version. I also attach screenshots of the Landsat images I have used for my evaluation.
Kind regards, Frank Paul
-
RC2: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #2, 20 Mar 2025
Review Report: Glacier inventories reveal an acceleration of Heard Island glacier loss over recent decades
The study by Tielidze et al. presents a comprehensive analysis of glacier changes on Heard Island over multiple decades, utilizing historical topographical maps and satellite imagery. The study effectively highlights trends in glacier retreat, debris cover evolution, and climate influences. However, certain aspects require further clarification and refinement to strengthen the conclusions drawn.
My major concern is about Stephenson Glacier. Figure 7: The digitised boundaries showing retreat and advancement using three lines for 2005-08-09 needs to be confirmed with more data. For me, the area depicted by 2009 and 2008 is resultant of calving of icebergs. Can you recheck this with more data? The authors mention a rapid lagoon formation, but how does this compare with similar cases elsewhere? Could lake expansion and calving instability be primary retreat drivers rather than just air temperature increases? Stephenson Glacier has lost debris cover over time, which contradicts the general trend. Why is this the case? Does this suggest significant ice thinning or enhanced calving?
Line 25-27: The increase in debris cover from 7% to 12.8% is mentioned, but its implications for glacier mass balance should be briefly noted.
Line 30-31: The phrase "many questions about the behaviour of Heard Island glaciers remain unanswered" is too vague. Specify which key uncertainties remain.
Line 239: Manual mapping is stated to be “more suitable” than automated methods. However, this should be qualified—manual delineation is more appropriate for small regions with significant debris cover, but automated methods may be effective for clean ice surfaces.
Line 269: The uncertainty assessment should clarify whether multiple independent digitizations were conducted for validation.
Line 251: Terminus measurements are described, but the frequency of available images (e.g., annual vs. decadal) should be stated explicitly.
Fig. 3: The authors highlight higher retreat rates on the eastern side of Heard Island. Would it be possible to overlay temperature or precipitation data to visually reinforce this finding?
Line 403: The impact of decreasing surface albedo is mentioned, but cloud cover over Heard Island is persistent. Would reduced albedo have the same effect under high cloud conditions?
Line 426: The discussion of human-induced warming should be carefully phrased. While anthropogenic climate change is a major factor, direct human interference on Heard Island is minimal.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3811-RC2 - AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Levan Tielidze, 14 Apr 2025
- AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Levan Tielidze, 14 Apr 2025
-
RC2: 'Review', Anonymous Referee #2, 20 Mar 2025
Viewed
HTML | XML | Total | BibTeX | EndNote | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
276 | 105 | 13 | 394 | 10 | 9 |
- HTML: 276
- PDF: 105
- XML: 13
- Total: 394
- BibTeX: 10
- EndNote: 9
Viewed (geographical distribution)
Country | # | Views | % |
---|
Total: | 0 |
HTML: | 0 |
PDF: | 0 |
XML: | 0 |
- 1