Antarctic discipline

Press, 10 February 1986, Page 12

Antarctic discipline

Sir,—The pride I felt at being involved with the D.S.I.R. programme when I wintered over at Scott Base in 1970 has been gravely dented. The article, “Antarctic discipline” (“The Press,” January 30), is the final straw. All we hear lately is bleating from the D.S.I.R. about private expeditions. They seem to forget all expeditions are private until given Government blessing. Come on Mr Thomson, let us have some fair play. You have enjoyed more expeditions than most in Antarctica. You know the challenge that exists. What happened to all the good will you told us about in 1969? New Zealand falls too far short on the spirit of the Antarctic Treaty. Is New Zealand so hard up that a few dollars to be helpful and courteous must be refused? My sympathy goes to Scott Base personnel. I suspect that this will be a bad season for some members of the team. — Yours, etc., ROGER K. LUSBY. January 31, . 1986.

[Mr Bob Thomson, director of the Antarctic Division, D.5.1.R., replies: “Considerable changes have occurred in the Antarctic since Mr Lusby wintered over in 1970, especially with the development of tourism and private expeditions. New Zealand, together with other Antarctic Treaty nations operating in the Antarctic, has had to adopt a set of rules to restrict visits to its bases because any unannounced visit can be disruptive to base routine. Furthermore, any service we provide to visitors is that much less we can give to supporting our research activities, which after all is the only reason why we maintain our bases in Antarctica. The international pcgcy which New Zealand has

agreed to must be seen to be applied to all private expeditions and tourist groups as equally and fairly as possible. If we had an ‘open house’ policy I can assure Mr Lusby we would soon attract all sorts of adventurers, expeditioners and commercial activities, resulting in chaos. I refer Mr Lusby to the editorial in ‘The Press’ of February 6 which quotes from international policies and provides accurate information on the development and application of the rules applicable to private expeditions. The claims made in the article reported in ‘The Press’ of January 30 are gross distortions of fact and only demonstrate complete ignorance of the events that actually took place. Finally, and as recently reported in many papers around the country, I am ‘all for adventure by private Antarctic expeditions, but I urge them to plan realistically.' By that I mean they should be entirely self-sufficient and if they wish to visit Antarctic bases at any time they may do so but they must observe the procedures. If Mr Lusby desires verification of any facts on these issues he is most welcome to visit or phone me.”]