Between melting ice and mass tourism

_{Text: Koen Janssen | Photo: Susanne Kühn}

It is not easy to contact Fokje Schaafsma and Susanne Kühn. The two Wageningen researchers are spending months on an icebreaker off Antarctica, hundreds of kilometres from civilisation. The ship doesn’t always have a good internet connection. On top of that, they are on call 24 hours a day, ready to leap into action, for example fishing for krill as soon as there is sufficient space between the massive ice blocks. Their schedule is as unpredictable as the weather.

Schaafsma and Kühn, both marine ecologists at Wageningen Marine Research, are spending this spring in a team of six Wageningen scientists on board the German research vessel Polarstern. They are working with international colleagues on this icebreaker to set up a long-term monitoring programme in the Weddell Sea, one of the seas surrounding Antarctica. The information gathered by the scientists will be used to justify setting up a protected nature area. They are also studying the spread of krill, zooplankton and other creatures in the north-east point where water flows out of the Weddell Sea. This is a point where sea ice and bergs that have broken off nearby glaciers converge. The difficult conditions mean that not much research has been carried out there to date.

‘Life on board is a combination of chaos and structure,’ says Schaafsma when she and Kühn finally get an opportunity to talk. ‘We have about fifty scientists on board from all over the world carrying out various tasks. Some researchers like having the ship stopped at an ice floe as it lets them get off, while other studies require the ship to be travelling at a specific speed.’

‘We have a daily work plan that says what we will be doing when. But the plan keeps having to be changed because of the unpredictable conditions. Sometimes we’re scheduled to do something according to the work plan but it isn’t possible after all, sometimes it’s the opposite – the Fahrtleiter suddenly calls to say we can get to work.’ Only the meals are at fixed times, with hot food prepared for the researchers three times a day.

Schaafsma and Kühn mainly spend their days counting seabirds and marine mammals, and catching and analysing krill, zooplankton, fish and other underwater creatures. The weather conditions and the state of the ice determine whether they can carry out these tasks. For example, they can only count birds in fine weather. Schaafsma: ‘If we aren’t able to do counts or go fishing, there are plenty of other things we can do, such as repairing nets, filtering water and ice, selecting samples, entering data and taking the occasional break.’

‘We often work nights as well,’ adds Kühn. ‘You can fish in the dark too. We had midnight sun from December to February, so we could count birds and marine mammals at night as well then.’ The researchers are keen to seize every opportunity they get, which means they sometimes have to go 24 hours without sleep. ‘You get very good at making the most of your breaks. You sleep very deeply, so even a twenty-minute nap can help. But you do feel a bit like a zombie at times,’ laughs Kühn.

Research on the world’s remotest continent is not only about Antarctica itself, it’s about the whole planet. Like the Arctic, the Antarctic has a big influence on the global climate. The sea ice expanding and melting causes ocean currents that in turn influence the climate around the world. Climate change means less sea ice builds up during the winter months and consequently less ice melts in the summer months. That is accelerating global warming.

Furthermore, Antarctica’s biodiversity is unique. This inhospitable terrain is not home to any terrestrial mammals, reptiles or amphibians, but it does have species that have been able to adapt to the extreme conditions, such as whales, penguins, fulmars and plankton. However, in recent years plants and animals from temperate regions have spread further and further towards the North and South Poles as temperatures rise.

During their expeditions, Schaafsma and Kühn study the importance of sea ice for animals’ lives. ‘We try to determine how small creatures such as krill, zooplankton and fish larvae spread in the water, depending on whether or not there is ice cover. They are the food source for most birds and marine mammals in the area. We want to be able to predict the effects of changes in the sea ice on the spread of animals, both small and large, and on the food web make-up.’

On the ship’s top deck, Kühn and fellow researcher Bram Feij count birds and marine mammals. They occupy two wooden shelters the size of a telephone box. ‘The shelters have a bench, little table and heater to keep your feet warm,’ says Kühn. ‘We use a telescope and count all the animals and birds we see, paying attention to their behaviour. We do that in shifts of six hours, rotating so that we cover 24 hours a day.’ The researchers also carry out counts from a helicopter when the weather permits. That lets them cover a much wider area, including parts the ship cannot reach because of the thick ice. The scientists will be able to use the data that they are collecting to determine the distribution of various species and link that to the environmental conditions and availability of food, for example.

The Wageningen researchers mainly use special fishing nets to count krill, fish and zooplankton, the Surface and Under Ice Trawl (SUIT) and the Rectangular Midwater Trawl (RMT). ‘We use the SUIT to obtain samples in open waters and in the top two metres under the ice,’ explains Schaafsma. ‘It consists of a steel frame that two nets are suspended from. We drag it under the ice to catch the species that live just below the ice.’ The RMT is used for deeper waters, at depths of up to 1,000 metres. Both trawls have nets with meshes of varying sizes, allowing sea creatures in a range of sizes to be caught. The smallest mesh opening is only 0.3 millimetres.

Devices are attached to the SUIT frame that measure parameters such as the temperature, salinity and flow. Other sensors measure the thickness of the ice and the amount of light that penetrates it. These sensor measurements let researchers estimate how much algae there is in the ice. Algae are a potential food source for the creatures living beneath the ice. Trawling for samples at different depths lets the researchers find out which creatures live close to the ice and which prefer the deeper waters.

The catch is analysed in one of the laboratories on board. The same method has been used for years, which means researchers have gradually been able to get a picture of life under the ice. This year, for the first time, the scientists are also measuring the PFAS levels in the creatures they catch. ‘And we are testing for bird flu,’ says Kühn. ‘That didn’t use to be an issue here, but it has taken off in recent years.’ 

Avian influenza was first detected in Antarctica in 2023. Since then, the virus has caused numerous deaths in sea birds including penguins, and in seals.

In the Dutch Research Council project PolarFlu, scientists from WUR and other scientific institutes are trying to get a better understanding of how bird flu is spreading in the Antarctic.

This is another example of how vulnerable the remote continent of Antarctica is to what happens elsewhere on the planet. Schaafsma and Kühn hope their research will help provide scientific support for the protection of species, habitats and ecosystems. The Weddell Sea, for instance, could be designated a protected marine reserve. Knowledge about marine populations is also needed for fisheries management. ‘For example, it’s important to make sure young fish that haven’t yet had a chance to reproduce aren’t eliminated by overfishing,’ says Schaafsma.

While Schaafsma and Kühn sail round Antarctica studying birds and fish, back in Wageningen Machiel Lamers is focusing on a very different kind of animal: tourists. As professor of Tourism & Environmental Change, he is researching the development, impact and regulation of tourism in Antarctica. He has visited the area – which he describes as a ‘magical place’ – four times.

More and more people want to see that magic with their own eyes. The number of tourists visiting Antarctica has shot up in recent decades. In 1990, around 7,500 tourists travelled to the area, compared with nearly 125,000 in the 2023-2024 season. ‘Planes packed with tourists are flying there and back,’ says Lamers. ‘The bay of King George Island, an island in Antarctica with a landing strip, is full of cruise ships and yachts at times. More and more people in the world have the 15,000 euros you need for trips like that.’

In addition, the growing groups of tourists on Antarctica want more activities. ‘In the past, people were just happy to be there and admire the nature, whereas now they want to do things, such as kayaking, diving, camping, climbing, breaking a world record – you name it. They organize everything from marathons to helicopter flights. Tour operators are also keen to exploit this interest. They arrange themed cruises, such as trips for art lovers, photographers or LGBTQ people. There are even cruises for swingers.’

Lamers once ended up on a luxury cruise ship during one of his expeditions. ‘We arranged to be picked up by a cruise ship, as scientists often do. That’s handy from a logistical point of view because you then don’t need a separate ship sailing just to collect us. And it can give us new insights. I was amazed by what we saw on that ship: dancers, musicians, champagne, luxury buffets!’

Lamers is worried by these developments as the influx of all those tourists is having a major ecological impact. ‘Cruise ships emit massive amounts of greenhouse gases. We’ve calculated that a tourist on a twelve-day cruise to Antarctica is responsible for the same amount of emissions as the average European in a whole year.’ The fuel combustion also releases elemental carbon, as small particles of smoke and soot. The particles precipitate onto the ice, where they absorb more sunlight than the white surroundings, making the snow melt faster. The tourists can also disturb bird colonies during the brooding season.

Environmental regulations

WUR and other science institutes are trying to get a picture of the growing impact of tourism in the area. Lamers heads the international ANTARC-SHIP project, funded by the Dutch Research Council. In this project, researchers are studying how various stakeholders, such as states, scientists and tour operators, can formulate and implement environmental regulations. ‘In the last two expeditions, we looked at how scientists and other staff working at research stations close to busy tourist hubs such as King George Island feel about the growth in tourism. Are they worried about it, or do they in fact see benefits? Also, how do tour operators prepare tourists for their visit to Antarctica in terms of the rules and environmental awareness?’

The conclusions from that study were rather striking, says Lamers. ‘Many scientists and staff were quite relaxed about the tourism; that’s because of their situation, as they are only live there for a short period, perhaps just a few weeks or months. They have a specific objective in mind and they’re just happy to be there. That’s why not everyone feels an urge to call out the growth in tourism.’

Now, Lamers wants to translate the scientific knowledge into policy. That is the aim of the TRANS-ACT project, which started at the beginning of 2026. ‘Our aim with this project is to give policymakers a scientific basis for decisions about regulating tourism. We are doing this by collating and merging recent research results. These policy summaries will then be submitted by the Netherlands in the annual international consultative meeting about Antarctica.’

Antarctica is governed by a group of 29 countries, including the Netherlands, that have signed the Antarctic Treaty and the associated Environment Protocol. The 1959 treaty stipulates that Antarctica can be used for scientific research but not for military activities or mining, for example. Tourism is not mentioned explicitly in the treaty. ‘Decision-making is a slow process because those 29 countries have very different views on some subjects. European countries feel nature conservation is very important, whereas the United States prefers not to have too many rules. Chile and Argentina are somewhere in between, but they also have vested interests in tourism, for example in the transport to and from Antarctica.’

Self-regulation

The sluggish decision-making process means in practice that it is mainly up to the tourist industry itself to set limits on the tourism. ‘Self-regulation is really important, and the tour operators are genuinely taking action to reduce their impact. But they can’t halt the growth in the number of tourists and the range of activities. You really do need rules and regulations for that.’

The countries jointly governing Antarctica are currently working on a regulatory framework for setting limits on the number of tourists, ships or operators. ‘These are very difficult negotiations. There seems to be support for the principle that the user pays – where each tourist has to buy an admission ticket, for example. There are lessons we can learn from other protected areas such as Spitsbergen, the Galápagos Islands and the Great Barrier Reef. But those are governed by single sovereign states and that’s not the case here. That makes it all extra complicated.’

‘In my opinion, tourist activities should serve a higher purpose, for example activities that are educational rather than sporting activities and entertainment. Then the area will benefit too in the long term. If we continue to allow these crazy things and unchecked growth, it will destroy Antarctica’s unique character.’