Polar Exploration. Dixie Dansercoer

to remember that nothing worthwhile comes without effort.

      So what has this to do with polar exploration? The early pioneers had many similar heartaches. Organisers of past and present expeditions have had to overcome endless hurdles. Today we have to deal with paperwork and permits that we may feel restrict our freedom, but which are in fact essential – we all depend on someone or something to help us out on the ice.

      The point is that however much we may wish to be ‘free’ in our polar explorations there are restrictions to be taken into account. For example, it is important to check whether we are actually allowed to do what we intend to do. Restrictions usually concern:

       political situations

       protection of the environment

       protection of wildlife

       safety issues.

      None of these should be taken lightly: all polar travel requires the individual to act responsibly, and the word ‘responsibility’ can be interpreted in many ways. Even when there may not be any clear legal restrictions on what you are allowed to do, responsibility goes hand in hand with ethics and respect. It is vital to inform yourself fully of the issues before you go, and to take the planning stage very seriously.

      In the northern regions, explorers’ responsibilities extend to the indigenous peoples – living on a tightrope between their traditional way of life and changes brought about by contact with outsiders

      THE PROFESSIONAL VIEW

      Explorersweb asked Canadian polar veteran Richard Weber for his opinion. Holder of speed records to both poles, and with seven full-length North Pole expeditions behind him, he is among the top 10 modern polar explorers in the world. A low-key guy, often the people he guides get all the headlines. This is taken from what he said.

      In a recent expedition… a North Pole skier was rescued by the military after he had run out of fuel. The story received a good amount of media coverage. These days, with most extreme points already explored, modern adventurers kick up the difficulty by going with less support, faster, longer, higher, or via ‘impossible’ routes.

      Sometimes it gets them in trouble and they become dependent on others to save their necks. It's OK, as bending of boundaries is necessary for human progress. But there is a line between that and reckless projects lacking in sufficient preparation. Not only do they jeopardise rescue possibilities for those who really need them, they also risk the lives of rescuers. Worse, some explorers overdramatise situations simply to gain media attention…

      To trek to the North Pole from Canada is a tough, harsh, challenging journey, probably the hardest trek in the world. I applaud any adventurer who dares to take up this challenge. Adventurers choose to be on the Arctic Ocean. Each adventurer has a responsibility to have the food, fuel and money in place so that they can get off the ice safely using the normal methods (for example a pick-up by Twin Otter aircraft). It is the responsibility of the adventurer to ensure they have adequate supplies, taking into account the fickle nature of the Arctic Ocean. Polar adventurers have no right to run out of food and/or fuel and to call Search & Rescue. The rescuers are trained professionals who risk their lives to save the lives of others. Adventurers have no right to ask these men and women to risk their lives to take them off the Arctic Ocean.

      To run so low on expedition resources that one needs to call the military, at the cost of the Canadian tax-payer, is completely unacceptable… Roald Amundsen once said ‘adventure is bad planning’. A well-planned and executed expedition does not include dramatics.

      When an adventurer turns on an emergency beacon and calls for Search & Rescue, it is no longer a personal decision. It affects the safety of the Search & Rescue personnel, it affects the Canadian tax-payers who foot the bill and it affects other (more responsible) adventurers. This behaviour does and will reflect on the entire polar adventuring community. The Canadian authorities will not accept paying for very many unnecessary Search & Rescues before they put in place restrictions and regulations. In Canadian National Parks, if a person calls for rescue, that rescue is evaluated and… that person may be asked to pay the bill.

      The same procedure should be used for polar adventurers. Anyone who calls for unnecessary Search & Rescue should not be portrayed as a hero on CNN, but as a fool.

      Clearly, it is up to each individual to take responsibility and to put in place all the pieces of the puzzle in order to prevent reckless behaviour on the ice. Polar expeditions are not an exact science, and with Mother Nature being fickle and unpredictable even the most professional explorers are faced with problems that have them puzzled. But everything must be based on appropriate experience and immaculate preparation – and, once out there, sensible decision-making. Even though the complete uncertainty of the polar pioneers has long gone – replaced by the relative security of the modern era – the risk factor is still very much present.

      At the top of the world – but even with modern technology, there are always risks

      Novices often give themselves a false sense of protection by surrounding themselves with hi-tech communications tools such as rescue beacons, satellite telephones, GPS and other apparatus, and then rely on them totally. But it has been proven again and again that the only way to appreciate the polar regions fully is to immerse yourself in all aspects of the terrain, and make sure that you survive without the gimmicks.

      Environmental Impact and Climate Change

      We must all recognise that, as polar explorers – whatever our starting point – it is a long way to the places we have set our sights on, and that all travel imposes an environmental footprint. The very least we can do is take a look at alternative options, or choose different techniques to compensate for our actions.

      To put things in perspective, the impact of the few polar expeditions that wend their way across the frozen (Ant)Arctic each year is close to zero by comparison with the footprint of the scientific bases or the more classic forms of tourism. At a rough estimate, polar expeditions are responsible for 0.001 per cent of the total impact of human activity in these fragile areas. However, it is not really about how much we ‘do wrong’ or who is responsible, but about what we honestly can or should do to minimise our impact. It is up to each expedition to decide how far they want to go in this regard. One option, for example, is to offset the emissions of the aeroplane and other motorised travel leading to your departure point and getting you back home.

      THE RULES OF POLAR COMPETITION

      There is no global organisation monitoring polar travel, nor is there a board of experts working together towards an internationally recognised framework to monitor polar travel; any rules that exist have been defined by private organisations. A more credible set of definitions and parameters is needed for those who want to engage in a more ‘competitive’ kind of polar exploration.

      Cold and harsh environments with constant changes in conditions do not lend themselves to true competition but while the trend to compete exists, some guidelines are required. The following ones are reproduced with permission from Explorersweb (www.thepoles.com).

      Assist

      This is the outside help received by an expedition. The most common form of polar assist is air re-supply.

      Labels

       Unassisted

       Assisted – re-supplies

       Assisted – emergency (this category also applies if one or more members leave an ongoing expedition)

      SUPPORT

      External power aids used for significant speed and load advantage. Typical aids are wind power (kites), animal power (dogs) or engine power (motorised vehicles). Only human-powered expeditions are considered unsupported. Human-powered