An Overview of the Antarctic Treaty System and Applicable New Zealand Law

The Antarctic Treaty 1959 has now been in place for 60 years and is regarded by informed commentators as one of the most successful multi-party international treaty systems. This paper provides an opportunity to look back and take stock of previous success, and more importantly, an opportunity to assess the future prospects of the treaty system. New Zealand has played a key role in the Antarctic Treaty system and has had a long involvement with Antarctica since accepting the transfer of sovereignty over the Ross Dependency in 1923. This paper therefore focuses on the effectiveness of the Antarctic Treaty system through a New Zealand lens.

Norway and the ‘winning’ of Australian Antarctica

ABSTRACTEnquiries by Norwegian whalers precipitated the British annexation of the Falkland Island Dependencies and the Ross Dependency. Seeking territory free of British control, Lars Christensen's Norwegian whalers claimed Bouvet Island, which the British believed was theirs. Realisation of the economic value of whaling led Leopold Amery, of the British colonial office to develop Britain's Antarctic domination policy. In pursuit of this policy, the 1926 Imperial Conference formulated a process to claim a sector of Antarctica for Australia. A.G. Price's The Winning of Australian Antarctica describes the role of the Mawson led BANZARE in this process. To gain title to Bouvet Island, the Norwegian Government, dependant on friendly relations with Britain, agreed not to claim territory listed by the Imperial Conference as of ‘special interest’ to Britain. Claims made by whalers who had mapped and named territory in the unlisted area between Kemp and Queen Mary Lands were rejected by the Norwegian prime minister. Following the 1933 Order in Council establishing the Australian Antarctic Territory, Norway raised concerns that the territory included Haakon VII Vidde (polar plateau) and the parts of Dronning (Queen) Maud Land that had been mapped and discovered by Norwegians. Price's contention that Australian Antarctica was ‘won’ is questionable.

Two new species of eelpouts (Teleostei, Zoarcidae) of the genus Seleniolycus from the Ross Dependency, Antarctica

Detailed examination of eelpouts (Zoarcidae) in recently collected material from the Ross Dependency, Antarctica, and held by the Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa, revealed two undescribed species of Seleniolycus Anderson, 1988. They both differ from the type species Seleniolycus laevifasciatus (Torno, Tomo & Marschoff, 1977) from the Scotia Sea, Banzarre Bank and Falkland Rise, by having scales on the posterior part of the body (vs. naked), more numerous anal fin rays (69–73 and 64–66 vs. 53–58), total vertebrae (88–97 and 86–89 vs. 74–80), and suborbital head pores (6 and 6–7 vs. 5). Seleniolycus robertsi sp. nov. and S. pectoralis sp. nov. can readily be separated from each other by pectoral fin length (7.9–9.4 vs. 11.1–11.5% SL) and shape (fin entire vs. lower rays exserted), as well as several meristic and morphometric characters. Seleniolycus robertsi inhabits slightly shallower depths than S. pectoralis (1455–2290 vs. 1948–2594 m). The new species have several more generalised character states than Seleniolycus laevifasciatus, and seem to represent the basal-most branch in the Seleniolycus-Melanostigma lineage. A key to the known species of Seleniolycus is provided.

Settlement and unsettlement in Aotearoa/New Zealand and Antarctica

This paper is concerned with Aotearoa/New Zealand's changing relationship to Antarctica, and the Ross Dependency in particular. Through a consideration of post-colonial theory in the Ross Dependency, it is argued that a productive dialogue about the cultural politics of mainland Aotearoa/New Zealand can be opened up. After some reflections on the post-1945 political and cultural trajectory of the country, attention is given to the place of the Maori and their involvement in the polar continent and Southern Ocean. The adoption of Maori place-names on New Zealand maps of the Ross Dependency is considered further because it helps to illuminate the country's awkward and incomplete post-colonial transformation. Arguably, such an adoption of Maori place-names in Antarctica contributes to a vision of bicultural harmony. However, this is not a view shared by all observers. Developments affecting the crown agency Antarctica New Zealand, alongside recent heritage projects, are scrutinised further in order to consider how Maori–Pakeha relations influence and define contemporary understandings of New Zealand's presence in Antarctica. Finally, the paper briefly contemplates how a trans-Tasman dialogue with Australian scholars might enable further analysis into how geographically proximate settler colonies engage with Antarctica and their associated territorial claims to the continent and surrounding ocean.

Ten myths about the preservation of historic sites in Antarctica and some implications for Mawson's huts at Cape Denison

A review of popular writing on the subject of preservation of historic sites in Antarctica, including buildings, graves, and artefacts, has revealed many misconceptions about the existence and cause of deterioration problems. These myths include the belief that the artefacts inside the Ross Dependency huts are in a near perfect state of preservation and that there is no corrosion in Antarctica because of the dry cold. Further examination, however, shows these views to be incorrect. These and other misconceptions are classified into three groups: (1) misunderstanding or denial of deterioration processes in Antarctic conditions; (2) simplistic assumptions about how historic buildings should be conserved in Antarctica; and (3) inappropriate comparisons between dissimilar sites.There has been considerable debate in Australia and New Zealand about how historic Antarctic buildings should be preserved. Proposed preservation methods have covered a wide range from dismantling and repatriation to a museum, re-cladding with new timber, insertion of vapour barriers inside walls to exclude ice ingress, covering buildings with a dome, and, at the other end of the spectrum of views, minimal intervention. The preservation of artefacts has also been an issue, particularly concerning whether artefacts can be effectively preserved in Antarctica or whether it is necessary to treat and store them at museums outside Antarctica. It is important to encourage consideration of all appropriate means of preservation, but it is particularly important that the causes of deterioration are understood (that is, correct diagnosis) before prescribing treatment.

Mawson's Antarctic huts and tourism: a case for on-site preservation

Several Arctic and Antarctic historic sites have now been extensively excavated and some, such as the Scott and Shackleton huts in the Ross Dependency of Antarctica, have been restored and opened to visitors. The huts of Mawson's Australian Antarctic Expedition 1911–1914, the sole expedition site of the historic age in Australian Antarctic Territory, have become a tourist attraction and the subject of controversy. One view favours bringing the main hut back to Australia for display in a museum, on the grounds that the hut is deteriorating and at present inaccessible to the Australian people: repatriation would preserve the hut and enable it to be viewed by a greater number of visitors. An alternative is to preserve the hut on site by covering it with a dome or re-cladding, replacing the timbers which have been seriously eroded, and retaining the site (but not at present the hut interior) as a tourist feature. The author argues in favour of preservation on site, retaining as much of the original fabric of the huts as possible, and proposes the formation of an informal network to exchange information among other researchers studying polar historic sites.