<html>
<head>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Dear Graham,<br>
Dear colleagues,<br>
<br>
First of all, I highly appreciate the great efforts of the
Randolph group towards an improved understanding of the global
glacier distribution. It came just in time to compensate for the
somehow slowing enthusiasm (and lack of operational manpower) of
the GLIMS community.<br>
<br>
I fully understand that the Randolph group is now looking for ways
to secure the legacy of their efforts beyond IPCC AR5. At the same
time, I would like to stress that in our mainly science-driven
system there is not enough funding for running and regularly (and
redundantly) updating more than one operational glacier inventory
database. (We already went through that exercise when the GLIMS
database operationally replaced the WGI database: then the
solution was to include all new inventories with digital outlines
into the GLIMS database and to only update the WGI when larger
datasets in the WGI-format and without outlines become available.)<br>
<br>
The GLIMS database is able storing multi-temporal datasets with
exact time stamps and full metadata but has not yet global
coverage. The Randolph dataset is designed as a temporal snapshot
in time with global coverage but in many regions lacks of exact
time stamps and comes with limited metadata. <br>
<br>
In my view, the following approach would allow joining both
Randolph and GLIMS efforts:<br>
(1) Freeze the Randolph dataset at the present or a later version
(depending on available funding and manpower of the driving
projects) and continue making it available from the GLIMS website
(hosted at NSIDC).<br>
(2) Bring down the technical and manpower barriers for including
glacier outlines into the GLIMS database (hosted at NSIDC).<br>
(3) Include the high-quality glacier outlines from the Randolph
dataset (after adding time stamps and re-attribution; cf. Paul et
al. 2009) into the GLIMS database.<br>
(4) Actively continue updating the GLIMS database with new glacier
outlines at highest possible quality and metadata level.<br>
(5) Derive a new version of the Randolph dataset (other any other
product) once another important event (e.g. IPCC AR6) comes along
with a specific purpose and with the opportunity for getting
additional funds.<br>
<br>
I wish you a nice GLIMS dinner with fruitful discussions at AGU
and I'm looking forward to a constructive joint solution
implemented next year.<br>
<br>
Best, Michael<br>
<br>
Reference: Paul, F., Barry, R.G., Gogley, J.G., Frey, H.,
Haeberli, W., Ohmura, A., Ommanney, S.C.L., Raup, B., Rivera, A.
and Zemp, M. (2009): Recommendations for the compilation of
glacier inventory data from digital sources. Annals of Glaciology,
50 (53).<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">+ + + +
Michael Zemp
Director WGMS, Dr. sc. nat.
email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:michael.zemp@geo.uzh.ch">michael.zemp@geo.uzh.ch</a>
phone: +41 44 635 51 39
World Glacier Monitoring Service
Department of Geography
University of Zurich
Winterthurerstrasse 190
8057 Zurich
SWITZERLAND
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:wgms@geo.uzh.ch">wgms@geo.uzh.ch</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.wgms.ch">http://www.wgms.ch</a></pre>
On 27.11.2013 19:14, Graham Cogley wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:007301ceeb9c$877a5550$966efff0$@cogeco.ca" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Dear all - I sent an earlier version of the attached document to the authors of
the paper about the Randolph Glacier Inventory, and one or two others, in
September. The idea was to suggest that, with the imminent appearance of the GLIMS
Book and (we hope) acceptance of the RGI paper, now is a good time to reflect on
the future of both datasets, separately and together. GLIMS has evolved
dramatically over its lifetime, and so has the RGI over its much shorter span.
I have not altered the original text about "GLIMS2?", but Bruce has set me
straight on one or two points and he and I have had some discussion about others.
However I have added the wish list from the conclusion of the RGI paper to
indicate the direction in which the RGI authors think it might be heading.
Because I don't know who will be at the GLIMS dinner during AGU (evening of the
Wednesday?), I am sending this to the whole GLIMS list with an invitation for
comment/discussion - not about details but rather about generalities.
Graham.
J. Graham Cogley, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Geography,
Department of Geography, Trent University,
Peterborough, Ontario, CANADA K9J 7B8.
Tel +1 705-748-1011-x7686
Email <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:gcogley@trentu.ca">gcogley@trentu.ca</a>
Web <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.trentu.ca/geography/glaciology">http://www.trentu.ca/geography/glaciology</a>
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
GLIMS mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:GLIMS@nsidc.org">GLIMS@nsidc.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://nsidc.org/mailman/listinfo/glims">https://nsidc.org/mailman/listinfo/glims</a></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>