Airstrip plan in Antarctica under attack

Press, 9 February 1983, Page 23

Airstrip plan in Antarctica under attack

By

LINDA HARRISON

A French project to build an airstrip in the Antarctic will have a devastating impact on the breeding grounds of birds, according to an international environmental coalition.

The Antarctic and Southern Ocean Coalition (A.5.0.C.) claims that the French Gov-' ernment plans to level five archipelago islands near its Antarctic base at Dumont d’Urville to build an airstrip in support of the country’s research programmes. A.S.O.C. suggests that the project will have a “devastating impact on the breeding grounds of significant numbers of penguins, petrels, skuas, and cape pigeons, which French scientists claim to be studying."

A newsletter" issued by Friends of the Earth International, called “ECO," quotes a French civil service source as estimating that 1600 pairs of Adelic penguins, 6 pairs of skuas, 90 pairs of Cape pigeon, 50 pairs of snow petrels, and 85 pairs of Wilson's storm petrels are breeding in the archipelago area.

A.S.O.C. had a group of international lobbyists in Wellington last month to talk to delegates from the. 14 nations attending an informal Antarctic Treaty meeting on Antarctic mineral exploitation. One of the lobbyists, Mr Alistair Machin, questions whether it is really necessary to destroy breeding grounds of several species in order to make it easier to study them.

“In particular we will try to persuade the French to

abandon such destructive ways of promoting science in Antarctica. Just because it's 'for science' does not give licence to wreck the place," Mr Machin says. A spokeswoman at the French Embassy in Wellington says that two species of penguins in the area would not be affected. "Another species might be affected but is not important because they are numerous,” she adds.

The spokeswoman says that the five island claim was wrong and that the French plan involved only three “very little” islands; about 50 square metres in size.

“Work started on the runway; in the austral summer,” she adds. “The impact on the environment will be negligible and has been studied in great detail.” During the period that the runway would be in use very strict measures would be taken for the protection of wildlife. She says that the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research (S.C.A.R.) knew about the French runway plans and that none of the other countries involved had made any criticisms.

Another, spokesman for A.5.0.C., Mr Roger Wilson, says that several plans had been put up for the runway proposal and that his organisation believes the five island plan had been chosen, but that there had been a “virtual vacuum" of information from the French.

"There is no way that the Antarctic Treaty parties can be allowed to write off wildlife because they are numer-

ous.” Mr Wilson says. “These sorts of activities will become commonplace if exploitation proceeds.” The superintendent of the Antarctic Division of the D.5.1.R., Mr R. B. Thomson, says that the French runway proposal first surfaced at a S.C.A.R. meeting about 12 years ago. Mr Thomson is chairman of the logistics working group and the finance committee of S.C.A.R.

“The plan was one which would be extremely difficult to do in practical terms," Mr Thomson says. “The costs involved and all this sort of thing appeared to most of us to be prohibitive, let alone the practicalities of building."

A preliminary feasibility study had been’ carried out and since then a number of studies of other alternatives had been made, including reducing the length of the runway. A short runway already exists in the area but can only be used by ski equipped aircraft, which is limiting the French research. "As far as I am aware

they have gone back to a study of two or three of the islands,” Mr Thomson says. He was surprised to hear that the French appeared to be going ahead with the three island plan. "Going by the original plan and what that called for, it would be quite a major engineering task."

Mr Thomson assumes that everything that the French are doing is in accordance with the Agreed Measures adopted under the Antarctic Treaty. The Agreed Measures prohibit the killing, wounding, capturing, or molesting of any native mammal or native bird, or any attempt at any such act, as well as the flying of helicopters or other aircraft which would unnecessarily disturb bird or seal concentrations or landing within 200 metres of them, or persistent foot traffic through bird and seal colonies during the breeding season. Mr Thomson has not heard of breaches to the Agreed Measures by any country, but that such a breach would

be “most embarrassing." The nearest neighbours to Dumont d'Urville are about 1000 kilometres away, at the Australian Casey station. The French proposal will not create problems unless there are a very high populations of birds in the area, Mr Thomson says. “And I would imagine the French would be making only three or four flights a year.” The signatories to the Treaty are required to make an annual report detailing all wildlife killed and specimens taken. This information has to include the name of the species, the age, why taken, and where from. "There is no indication of any activity associated with building an airstrip in the exchange of information on the current year's activities," Mr Thomson says. "There are about six people on one island, which is one of the five originally proposed." They appeared to be involved in making an assessment of the earth, such as would be made in a feasibility study to build an airstrip.