by Don J. Easterbrook
The headline of the September 8, 2015 Seattle Times states:
‘Disastrous’: Low snow, heat eat away at Northwest glaciers
“Glaciers across the North Cascades could lose 5 to 10 percent of their volume this year, accelerating decades of steady decline. One scientist estimates the region’s glaciers are smaller than they have been in at least 4,000 years.” “The best word for it is disastrous,” said Pelto”
This was a multi-page story with numerous photographs and many predictions that glaciers in the North Cascade Mts. will be gone in 50 years. Having just finished a major analysis of Mt. Baker’s glaciers dating back thousands of years, I thought, what kind of nonsense is this? So I put together some of the data on Mt. Baker glaciers that will soon be published.
Photos and maps from a large collection dating back to 1909 document exactly what Mt. Baker glaciers have done in the past. What these photos and maps clearly show is the Mt. Baker glaciers reached their maximum extent of the past century in 1915 at the end of the 1880 to 1915 cold period. The glaciers then melted back strongly during the 1915 to 1950 warm period. The climate then turned cool again, and Mt. Baker glaciers advanced strongly for 30 years. In 1977, the climate turned warm again and since about 1980, glaciers have been retreating again. However, photos and maps prove that all Mt. Baker glaciers are more extensive today than they were in 1950. Here are a few examples.
Roosevelt and Coleman glaciers
Comparison of the position of the terminus of the Roosevelt glacier on USGS topographic maps of 2014 (blue line) and 1952 (green line) (Fig. 1). Both the Coleman and Roosevelt glaciers are more extensive now than they were in 1952. Figure 2 shows the advance and retreat of the two glaciers measured from vertical air photographs.
Figure 1. Positions of Coleman and Roosevelt termini in 2014 (blue) and 1952 (green) taken directly from USGS topographic maps.
Figure 2. Advance and retreat of the Coleman and Roosevelt glaciers from 1940 to 1990. (Plotted from data in Harper, 1992)
Comparison of photographs of the Roosevelt glacier in 2015 and 1950 confirm that the glacier is more extensive now than in 1950. In the photos below, note that the terminus of the glacier reaches to the edge of dark cliff (left photo) in 2015, but was well upvalley from it in 1950 (right photo). The X on the photos is a point of reference for comparison.
Figure 3. Comparision of photographs of the Roosevelt glacier in 2015 (left) and 1947 (right). Note that the glacier is more extensive now than it was in 1947.
Deming glacier
Comparison of the position of the terminus of the Deming glacier on USGS topographic maps of 2014 (blue line) and 1952 (green line) (Fig. 4) show that the glacier was more extensive in 2014 than it was in 1952. The right side of the figure shows that rates of advance and retreat of the Deming glacier from 1940 to 1990 (plotted from data in Harper, 1992).
Figure 4. Comparison of the position of the Deming glacier terminus in 2015 and 1952 taken directly from USGS topographic maps (left). Graph on the right shows rates of advance and retreat of the glacier from 1940 to 1990.
Photographs of the Deming glacier 2011-2015 confirm that the glacier is more extensive now than it was in 1950-52. In the photos below the X is a point of reference and the yellow diamond is the terminus. The 2011-2015 terminus is far downvalley (see map) from it’s 1950-52 position.
Figure 5. Deming glacier, 1950 (left) and 2011 (right).The yellow X is a point of reference and the diamond shape is the position of the terminus in 1950 and 2011. These photos show that the Deming glacier is more extensive now than it was in 1950 and confirm the positions of the terminus shown in Fig. 4.
Boulder glacier
Comparison of the position of the terminus of the Boulder glacier on USGS topographic maps of 2015 (blue line) and 1952 (green line) (Fig. 6) show that the glacier is more extensive now than it was in 1952.
Figure 6. Comparison of the position of the Boulder glacier terminus in 2014 and 1952 taken directly from USGS topographic maps. The glacier is now more than a kilometer downvalley from its 1952 position.
Figure 7. Photos of the Boulder glacier in 1950 (left) and 2014 (right). The yellow X is a common point of reference and the yellow diamond marks the glacier terminus.
Photographs of the Boulder glacier 2014 confirm that the glacier is more extensive now than it was in 1950-52. The present is far downvalley (see map) from its 1950-52 position.
All of Mt. Baker’s other glaciers show the same thing. They are all more extensive now than they were in 1952 and nothing unusual is happening to them—they have been where they are now many times before. Data similar to that shown here for the Coleman, Roosevelt, Deming, and Boulder glaciers is also available for the Easton, Squak, Talum, Park, Rainbow, and Mazama glaciers.
The Seattle Times states that “Riedel estimates the region’s glaciers are smaller than they have been in at least 4,000 years.” However, the photos and maps of the Sholes glacier, the featured in the Times article, below prove that these claims are totally false˗˗the Sholes glacier has not changed at all in the past 70 years.
Figure 8. The Sholes glacier in 1947 (left) and 2011 (right) are virtually identical.
These photos prove that the Sholes glacier today is identical to what it was in 1947. In addition, comparison of the glacier terminus on USGS topographic maps of 1952 and 2014 (below) show that the Sholes glacier has not changed since 1952.
Figure 9. The blue line is the margin of the Sholes glacier shown on the USGS 2014 topographic map. The green line is the terminus position shown on the 1952 map. These maps prove that the Shole glacier today is identical to what it was in 1952.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Comparison of the position of the terminus of the Roosevelt glacier on USGS topographic maps of 2014 (blue line) and 1952 (green line) (Fig. 1). Both the Coleman and Roosevelt glaciers are more extensive now than they were in 1952.
http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2015/09/clip_image002_thumb7.jpg?w=336&h=245
Last Ice Age started in N. America, possibly much further north east.
300 m expansion in 50 years, may not sound much, but with even small increase in the winter precipitation and small drop in the summer temperatures, the rate of expansion could easily multiply. Perhaps next Ice Age may not be as far of as we would hope. Current interglacial has past its ‘sale by date’.
Just think of the disruption of a glacial advance in the Skagit Valley or even the Puget Sound Metro Area.
Excellent summary with excellent data – well illustrated.
I knew an Australia consulting geologist who’s byline was “Theory is fine, facts are better, experience beats them both.” This summary by Easterbrook proves the last two (facts, experience) trumps journalism and computer models (i.e. the
Thanks–I also like “A picture is worth a thousand words.”
When will the damnable deniers stop confusing the issue with facts?
Well good to see climate change media has given up on cherry picking data and just went straight to making it up. Why not, it’s easier and pays more per word.
You can see why ‘Climate Change’ is bottom of everyone’s list of life-concerns : when the Warmistas start talking about Glaciers in the North Cascades, everyone’s eyes glaze over and they start to snore.
Thanks, Dr. Easterbrook. Very well-documented article.
I have visited a glacier terminus, the best part was getting back to base.
The Leclercqu et al world glacier study found that glacier retreat slowed after 1950. The first half of the 20th century had a faster retreat. So how do these liars and Obama get away with this level of corruption and fraud ?
http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com.au/2014/04/new-paper-finds-worldwide-glacier.html
Olympic National Park “scientist” Bill Baccus says;
“Our glaciers are already struggling”…
Because glaciers are like people, and have feewings.
I noticed you used 2014 data for your comparisons. Is there any info as to where these glacier terminus’s ended up after this summer. Is it possible that they retreated 1km to the 1952 terminus in one season? Maybe Modis could photograph them. Or someone with a helicopter could photograph them now. Just sayin…I remain a skeptic in all ways.
(I remain a fan of you, and I doubt they retreated that much in 1 year)
OXO
Phillip,
Satellite imagery for 2015 doesn’t show any significant difference.
Don
Thanks, I didn’t think there would be much of a difference, but thanks for the reply. Great work and great post – excellent!
This info was submitted to the Seattle Times and they are going to publish it?
That would be surprising!
I noticed a long time ago that comparative photographs of glaciers always leave out the middle part of the 20th century. I know why, and everybody reading this knows why. But almost nobody else does.
Too many people compare the terminal position of a glacier at the end of a cold period with that at the end of warm period–bad idea. That’s why I like 1952 (end of the 1915-1950 warm period) and 2000+ (end of the 1978-2000 warm period).
Great work Don Easterbrook.
This is a big deal – shoddy blatant falsehoods in support of political activism (economic sabotage) printed in high profile MSM, utterly demolished by a real scientist (geologist) Dr Easterbrook. In a functioning democracy this should count for something.
Dr Easterbrook,
This comment applies to your upcoming publication of these data, and is not intended to mean that you should change the post above.
Don’t mean to be pedantic, but where you have side-by-side photos, I would recommend a consistent presentation of them. Chronological would make sense (i.e. old on left, new on right). You have a mix above (i.e. Fig 3 is new on left and old on right, while Fig 5, 7, 8 are opposite). Additionally, it would be great if the orientation of the topo’s could be the same orientation as the pictures.
I guess it’s the technical editor in me from one of my degree studies from the, now liberal bastion, UW in Seattle.
Good stuff. Keep fighting the good fight.
Bruce
[Fake email address. ~mod.]
Did Pelto say these glaciers retreating was disastrous, or did he not?
If he is aware that these are cyclic changes, then what is the basis for this needlessly alarmist statement?
And how is a retreating glacier a disaster, even if it is not a cyclical phenomenon?
“And how is a retreating glacier a disaster, even if it is not a cyclical phenomenon?”
1) The glaciers melt water feeds streams that are important migration/breeding grounds for salmon and other fish 2) the water is used for agricultural purposes
http://www.bellinghamherald.com/news/local/article32632344.html
Try to keep up Chris.
Try to add a useful comment, Menicholas, rather than just snark.
@Magma
Much of the criticism lies with the media report in the Seattle Times Alarmist way of reporting… Letting things go unsaid, saying things not true, confusing statements maybe / robustly / possibly attributed to others / half truths and half lies, etc. That Pelto would let himself be used in this manner by a dishonest press shows that he is no saint in this matter.
Dahlquist
Interesting note, The Seattle times has also reported that Mount Saint Helens has a new glacier.
http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/environment/nws-restless-volcano-also-holds-the-worlds-newest-glacier/
What happened to the old ones?
They blew away.
I just spewed pepsi on my monitor, dang it! Stop that!!!!
🙂
This comment is a little late, but it is interesting that Sandi Doughton wrote both recent Cascade glacier articles for the Times. The Mt. St. Helens story appeared in print on Sunday, July 5, and the front page headline above the fold was, “FIRE AND ICE.” Robert Felix at iceagenow did a post on the Times article, and disagrees with much of it. (I’m sure he enjoyed the print edition headline.)
http://www.iceagenow.info/2015/07/glacier-on-mount-st-helens-is-growing/#more-16680
I had not realized just how low elevation levels North Cascade termini were at. Some are in the upper 3000s of feet. That’s just a hop, skip and a jump from lowland areas populated by millions. We’re only a few short clicks in time past the Great Melt. It would take very little to bring the ice back down into the midst of our core areas of upper West Coast population and agriculture.
Is the terminus a valid proxy for mass balance?
Don E., Thanks for adding some facts and depth to the discussion. It’s the kind of thing that we ought to see much more of in American media. I’d just pose one further thought: Since the above public Comments on your note still reflect some rebuttals to your facts, why shouldn’t Citizens who believe in policy based on facts (rather than the Progressive’s mantra that “the end justifies any means”) – – provide rebuttals like yours, but also add in: “I’m a believer in facts and in the American People, so let’s seek a televised forum, where we can have a factual debate”. Each side will be given 30 minutes to present their facts; then each side gets 30 minutes to show why their facts are correct and the opponents are flawed. The discussion will also have a balanced Panel of 3 members, each with expertise on the subject and they each get 10 minutes for their appraisal. Takes 2.5 hours you say? Yes. But the issue of “Warming Alarmism” is a costly one. Citizens need to invest some time to be sure we’re not frittering away hard-earned money on foolish sloganeering. Good companies don’t spend their funds without a sound cost-benefit analysis. Government rarely provides such an assessment. That’s why Government is BROKEN (i.e., fractured) and Americans have an $18T debt that is slowing causing us all to soon be BROKE (i.e. impoverished) as well.
Don E., Thx for your publication of some solid data. It is refreshing to see arguments posed in a factual way, rather than often relying on the Progressive philosophy that “the ends justify the means”. I’d offer one further thought. As per some of the comments above, there are those who assert other data exist to justify the “glacier disappearance” – – even if some of that data is just relevant to a short slice in time or space.
How about this: we the public ought to have a televised forum to inform the People of the facts and put up for public assessment a better version of what the truth really is. Good companies generally use structured cost-benefit analyses to help decide the validity of a course of action. Government seldom does this. So let’s allocate public TV time for monthly debates on major issues, structured like this: (i) each side gets 30 minutes to present data-driven arguments. (ii) then each side gets 30 minutes to comment on the validity of the other side’s data. (iii) then an objective, panel of 3 experts each get 10 minutes to summarize their appraisal.
But, you say that’s 2.5 hours of time! Yes. But “Warming Alarmism” costs our Nation a lot of $$. Citizens have a right to know if the government is frittering away their hard-earned money on philosophical sloganeering. Moreover, if both sides have valid data pointing to a different approach – – that opens a pathway to a strengthened, integrated solution. Not such a bad thing.
https://larouchepac.com/global-water
At Paradise about 1965, the Park Service had displays of the Mt. Rainier glacial retreats through the 20th century(photos and maps). I remember worrying about the disappearing glaciers then as a 10 year-old.
Thanks for the excellent article Dr. Easterbrook, Go Viks!
I hiked to Heliotrope Ridge (next to and southwest of Coleman Glacier and at the left edge of Figure 1) on August 16, 2015, and took quite a few photographs of Coleman Glacier and Roosevelt Glacier from that vantage point. The terminus of Roosevelt Glacier was about where it is shown in Figure 3, except that the ice extends over the precipice and to the base of it at the northeast edge of the glacier and nearly to the top of it on the southwest, but is farther up-slope in the middle of the glacier.
Looking for another photograph of the glacier, I opened Google Earth. The photo of the glacier there was taken on July 14, 2013, and appears to show the glacier extending farther down the slope on the west edge and not as far on the east. I would guess that there might have been some very small amount of recession of Roosevelt Glacier, taken as a whole, in those two years. Both my photos and the one on Google Earth suggest that the terminus depicted in Figure 1 is incorrect. It seems to me to be unlikely that the glacier would have extended over that precipice, which is at least a hundred feet tall, during the intervening year. A glance at the contours in Figure 1 will reveal the presence of that precipice, and it is shown clearly in Figure 3.
My photos and those in Figure 3 both suggest that the terminus of Roosevelt Glacier has not moved much at all.
It’s difficult to determine the length of Coleman glacier from Heliotrope Ridge, but the Google Earth photos suggest that Figure 1 depicts the extent of Coleman Glacier correctly.
Today, I was up in Glacier, WA, photographing Coho salmon on their way upstream in Gallup Creek (misspelled “Gallop” on Google Earth) to spawn. They’ve been in that part of the creek for at least a week, and their numbers appear to be about average. There were lots of fish, and several spawned-out carcasses in a short stretch of the creek. It was pretty stinky there. The creek has about normal flow for this time of year. The “drought” does not appear to have affected streamflow or, apparently, the Coho returning to spawn.
It rained, off and on.
I can’t help it: snow pack and glacier are essentially indistinguishable. They are both ice (duh!), and the glaciers are formed by compaction / compression of snow (and maybe hail). All the mountains in the Cascades will lose “whiteness” in the summertime, but will recover it in spades during the wintertime. Mt. Baker may be slightly exceptional, and Dr. Easterbrook might want to comment. Its position in the North Cascades brings it into the flow of exceptionally bitter winter winds (“north-easters”) that come down out of the arctic Canadian Rockies along the Fraser River canyon. I know this because I grew up in Bellingham.
Oh, yes. Did this nitwit, Pelto, ever consider that Mt. Baker is a VOLCANO, and that it has been active over the past 4,000 years? One might suppose that VOLCANIC ACTIVITY might have an influence on the size and duration of local glaciers. Just sayin’…
where did the 1947 satellite photos come from? Roswell NM?
Great work. I hope this material is seen by all who read the original article and the author shamed into hiding. He should be severely chastised.
This reminds me of times in the 1970s when environmentalists trying to kill the nuclear power industry came up with outrageous claims about dangers from nuclear radiation. (Some of the same people back then have joined the global warming scare movement today.) It took 100 hours of true science to rebut one hour of baloney.
James H. Rust, professor of nuclear engineering