Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-fx4k7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-14T22:42:02.900Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Mass balance of glaciers in the Queen Elizabeth Islands, Nunavut, Canada

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 September 2017

Roy M. Koerner*
Affiliation:
Geological Survey of Canada, 601 Booth Street, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0E8, Canada E-mail: rkoerner@nrcan.gc.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mass-balance measurements began in the Canadian High Arctic in 1959. This paper considers the >40 years of measurements made since then, principally on two stagnant ice caps (on Meighen and Melville Islands), parts of two ice caps (the northeast section of Agassiz Ice Cap on northern Ellesmere Island and the northwest part of Devon Ice Cap on Devon Island) and two glaciers (White and Baby Glaciers, Axel Heiberg Island). The results show continuing negative balances. All the glaciers and ice caps except Meighen Ice Cap show weak but significant trends with time towards increasingly negative balances. Meighen Ice Cap may owe its lack of a trend to a cooling feedback from the increasingly open Arctic Ocean nearby (Johannessen and others, 1995). Feedback from this ocean has been shown to be the main cause of this ice cap’s growth and persistence at such a low elevation of <300 ma.s.l. (Alt, 1979). There may be a similar feedback in the lower elevations on Sverdrup Glacier which drains the northwest sector of Devon Ice Cap. The ablation rates there have not increased to the same extent as they have at higher elevations on the same glacier. Although evidence from the meteorological stations in the area shows that the eastern Arctic has either been cooling or has shown no change on an annual basis between 1950 and 1998, the same records show that the summers are showing a slight warming (Zhang and others, 2000). The summer warming, although slight (<1.0˚C over 48 years), is the cause of the weak trend to increasingly negative balances. This is because the mass-balance variability is dominated by the year-to-year variations in the summer balance; there is a very low variability, and no trend over time even within sections of the time series, of the winter balance of the various ice caps and glaciers. Repeat laser altimetry of ice caps by NASA for the period 1995–2000 over most of the ice caps in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (Abdalati and others, 2004) has shown that the ablation zones are thinning while the accumulation zones show either a slight thickening or very little elevation change. Laser altimetry is revealing similar patterns of change in Greenland (Krabill and others, 2000) and Svalbard (Bamber and others, 2004). The thickening of the accumulation zones in the Canadian case may be due to higher accumulation rates, not just between the two years of laser measurements, but over a period substantially longer than the >40 years of ground-based measurements.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Glaciological Society 2005 
Figure 0

Fig. 1. Glaciers and ice caps in the circum-Arctic discussed in the text: 1. Storglaciären, Sweden; 2. Engabreen, Norway; 3. austre Brøggerbreen, Svalbard; 4. Agassiz Ice Cap, northern Ellesmere Island, Canada; 5. Meighen Ice Cap, Canada; 6. White and Baby Glaciers, Axel Heiberg Island, Canada; 7. Devon Ice Cap, Canada; 8. Melville South Ice Cap, Canada; 9. Gulkana Glacier, Alaska, USA; 10. Wolverine Glacier, Alaska, USA. The uppermost number by each location is the r value for the relationship between summer and net balance; the lower value is that between winter and net balance. ‘B’ is Barnes Ice Cap, and ‘P’ is Penny Ice Cap.

Figure 1

Fig. 2. Winter, summer and net balance for glaciers in the Queen Elizabeth Islands. Winter and summer balance is not available for White (dashed line) and Baby Glaciers (solid line). In the other glaciers the upper line is winter balance, the middle is net balance and the lower is summer balance. The values for ‘Drambuie Glacier’ are two-dimensional, i.e. area is not included. They do not extend to the top of the accumulation area. The final values are therefore not comparable in magnitude to those for the other four glaciers where area is considered and the entire elevation interval is sampled; the values are included for comparing trends among the glaciers.

Figure 2

Table 1. Period measured, cumulative mass balance, and regression values between various balance parameters on the ice caps in the Canadian High Arctic considered in the text

Figure 3

Fig. 3. Changing snow surface height during the 2001 melt season, Devon Ice Cap (1800 m a.s.l.). The intervals shaded grey represent periods of melting when the surface was lowered by melt. The open brackets at the top denote periods of melt.

Figure 4

Fig. 4. The difference in net balance (mm w.e.) between the 1961– 94 and 1995–2000 periods.

Figure 5

Fig. 5. Results of linear regression analysis of glacier net balance vs time by 100m elevation intervals, on the northwest side of Devon Ice Cap, 1961–2003. Slope is the b coefficient in the linear relationship and represents the negative balance change per year over the period.

Figure 6

Fig. 6. Percentage melt from the combined ice-core records from Agassiz Ice Cap (1780 m a.s.l.) and Devon Ice Cap (1750 m a.s.l.). The horizontal line (10% melt) represents the approximate value for a zero net balance on the northwest sector of Devon Ice Cap. Above that line, there would have been a generally negative balance, and below it a positive balance.