Ice-Free Glacier National Park Update

Montana had a very cold, snowy winter last year, and this is what Glacier National Park Looks like today

Glacier National Park Webcams – Glacier National Park (U.S. National Park Service)

Scientists predicted Glacier National Park would be ice-free by 1948.

29 Dec 1923, Page 5 – at

That prediction failed, so they changed the date to 1961.

17 Sep 1936, Page 16 – Arizona Republic at

That prediction failed, so they changed the date to 2002.

05 Mar 1952, Page 1 – The Post-Standard at

Then 2020.

No More Glaciers in Glacier National Park by 2020?

Then 2044.

Climate Change Threatens to Strip the Identity of Glacier National Park – The New York Times

The game never ends, they just keep shifting the goal posts.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Ice-Free Glacier National Park Update

  1. Griff says:


    In 2017, the USGS published a time series analysis of the glacier margins of the named glaciers of Glacier National Park . The areas measured are from 1966, 1998, 2005 and 2015/2016, marking approximately 50 years of change in glacier area. Scientists used aerial photography and satellite imagery to measure the perimeters of the glaciers in late summer when seasonal snow had melted to reveal the extent of the glacial ice. The dataset shows that all glaciers have been reduced in area since 1966 with some glaciers having been reduced by as much as 85% by 2015. The average area reduction over the approximately 50-year period is 39%. Currently, only 26 glaciers are larger than 0.1 square kilometers (25 acres) which is used as a guideline for deciding if bodies of ice are large enough to be considered glaciers.

    • Gator says:

      Exactly what one would expect during an interglacial. But I wonder why the USGS started their timeline in 1966? I guess they love cherries just as much as Ms Griff does. But do they hate poor brown people as much as she does? Only the Shadow knows.

      Ms Griff forgot to comment on the failed predictions, as that would interfere with her genocide.

    • TimA says:

      The gnat returns….referring to your brain capacity.
      See pictures above^^^

    • tonyheller says:

      20,000 years ago the ice covered the peaks. Neanderthal SUVs were devastating.

    • Robertv says:

      “Over the last 10,000 years it has been warmer than today 65% of the time. Our current climate does not in any way show an anomaly in temperature development.”
      Dr. Gernot Patzelt, University of Innsbruck,

    • sunsettommy says:

      From YOUR link Ed,

      “While the glaciers that carved GNP’s majestic peaks were part of a glaciation that ended about 12,000 years ago, the relatively small alpine glaciers that cling to mountainsides today are considered geologically new, having formed about 7,000 thousand years ago. These glaciers grew substantially during the Little Ice Age (LIA) that began around 1400 AD and reached their maximum size at the end of the LIA around 1850 AD. Their maximum sizes can be inferred from the mounds of rock and soil left behind, known as moraines. Aerial photography reveals moraines of over 150 glaciers that existed in Glacier National park at the end of the LIA. In 2015, only 26 active named glaciers remain.

      Early park visitors and scientists noted that glaciers were retreating as early as 1914…. ”

      The retreat started long before CO2 was a factor. Reached its peak in the mid 1800’s then the decline to present values, which would be expected when you realize the LIA ended.

      Stop with the misleading bullcrap, Eddy!

      • Disillusioned says:

        Griff doesn’t know how to read that graph.

        Also, the alarmunist will claim it’s illegitimate because you haven’t substantiated its authenticity with real data and a real source. It’s just a fake graph to Griff (who can’t comprehend what it says, anyway, even if he were to find out it is real).

      • Griff says:

        Except all figures show the retreat has accelerated since 1990 (some very high altitude glaciers excepted)

        • Gator says:

          Wow! Since 1990! What happened to virtually all glaciers during the previous 14,000 years Ms Griff? And why do you hate poor brown people?

        • sunsettommy says:

          Again you are LYING like hell since you just ignore what YOU linked to showing that the melting started when the LIA ended, and that it had been melting long before cars and roads showed up.

          When there is little ice left there is little chilling and albedo effect left to help it stay around longer. In the early part of the Holocene, there was far less ice than now, yet the mountains still stands, the Trees are still there, wildlife are still there, People are still visiting the National Park.

          You are so bad at this, you seem unaware that you are lying and ignorant to people, who have way more science skills than you do.

    • spike55 says:

      Mt Baker, just over the hill.

      Notice anything, or will remain DELIBERATELY IGNORANT, griff

    • gregole says:

      I don’t care about ice Griff. Not on glaciers, not at the poles. Have you ever been out on a glacier? A dead place. All white. A nowhere. Sometimes they melt back, sometimes they grow without bound. That’s bad. But sometimes it happens like in the little ice age when glaciers swallowed entire villages and towns. Horrible for those poor people.

      But while you are here expressing an opinion, can you please let me know when the Arctic will be ice-free? How much CO2 will it take to melt all the Arctic ice? We’re at over 400 ppm CO2, and we had millions of sq km of ice this year at the Arctic ice minimum. The CO2 doesn’t seem up to the job. How much CO2 will it take to melt the Arctic ice?

      • Griff says:

        What happens to glaciers is part of what is happening round your house…

        Are you not capable of googling?

        you can find some science based estimates of ice free arctic dates… 2030s to 2050s being most likely time frame

    • Jim S. says:

      If you want to understand the real history of glacier recession in Glacier National Park, The USGS time series analysis only tells part of the story. And you have to actually look at the data, not just the summary quoted by Griff.
      The data shows the following total surface area of all park glaciers as follows:
      1966: 20,761,361.98 sq.m.
      1998: 15,669,815.67 sq.m.
      2005: 14,857,608.71 sq.m.
      2015: 13,630,605.96 sq.m.
      From this data, I calculated the average annual rate of surface area loss of the Park’s glaciers as follows:
      1966-1998: 0.87% per year
      1998-2005: 0.75% per year
      2005-2015: 0.86% per year
      The rate of surface area loss has remained remarkably constant since 1966, during a period of ever increasing CO2 levels.
      But this is still just part of the story. What happened prior to 1966? There are a number of historic science papers which answer this question. I will focus on two of them.
      1). Recession of glaciers in Glacier National Park, Montana
      by James L. Dyson
      The Journal of Geology, Vol. 49, No. 8 (Nov. – Dec. 1941), pp. 815-824
      This paper studies the recession of not only Grinnell and Sperry glaciers (and several others) in detail, but it also discusses the rapid melting of all of the park’s glaciers during the 1900 to 1940 time period. Some noteworthy findings by Dyson:
      – “Results indicate that since the beginning of the century, some of the principal glaciers have been reduced 40-75 per cent in area and more in volume.”
      – “Not only the few glaciers listed above, but all those in Glacier National Park, have been undergoing pronounced recession in recent years. Several of the smaller ones ….. have entirely disappeared. Other glaciers, principally Harrison, Kintla, and Blackfoot, which were among the area’s most important years ago, have been reduced to pitiable remnants.”
      – “unless a general climatic change occurs within the next ten or fifteen years, it seems quite probable that such thin masses of ice as Jackson and Agassiz glaciers will disappear.” (MY NOTE: both of these glaciers still exist today.)
      Remember, this is being written in 1941. It not only confirms other observations of the early 1900’s rapid recession of Grinnell and Sperry Glaciers, but confirms that this rapid melting was occurring to all of the Park’s glaciers at an alarming rate.

      2). Grinnell and Sperry Glaciers, Glacier National Park, Montana
      A Record of Vanishing Ice, by Arthur Johnson
      Geological Survey Professional Paper: Volume 1180 – January 1, 1980 U.S. Government Printing Office
      This paper is a comprehensive history of the recession of Grinnell and Sperry glaciers from the time of their discoveries in the late 1800’s to the mid 1960’s. One of the most interesting set of measurements presented in this paper is the amount of recession of the Grinnell Glacier terminus throughout the years:
      1927 to 1937: average recession/year = 31.5 feet
      1937 to 1945: average recession/year = 30.4 feet
      1945 to 1950: average recession/year = 12.2 feet
      1950 to 1960: average recession/year = 8.7 feet
      1960 to 1968: average recession/year = 2.4 feet
      These measurements, along with many others on both Grinnell and Sperry Glaciers confirm the very rapid melting of the Park’s glaciers was already occurring in the early 1900’s.

      It is quite clear from these science papers that there was a period of very rapid glacier recession throughout Glacier National Park that began no later than 1900 and lasted until at least the early 1940’s. After studying the data from these various papers, I estimated the average annual rate of surface area loss of the Park’s glaciers during the time of highest melting to be at least 2% per year. This is much higher than the melt rate of the last 50 years, as shown by the USGS data.

      According to Glacier National Park data, there were approximately 150 glaciers in the park in 1850. In 1966, there were 35. Today there are 26.
      The math is pretty simple: 115 glaciers disappeared before 1966. 9 glaciers have disappeared since.
      The “consensus” date of when human caused CO2 reached sufficient levels to affect the global climate is about 1950. There is NO correlation between CO2 levels and the rate of glacier recession/disappearance.
      One last interesting thing. Follow the link provided by Griff to the USGS Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center. They do the projections as to when all the glaciers will disappear from Glacier National Park. In 2009, they said it would be by 2020. Several years later they changed the date to 2030. The Park heavily promoted this date in it’s literature and naturalist programs. That all changed this year. The 2030 date was removed from the park newspaper guide and all naturalist programs. Why? The answer can be found Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center website if you search for it. Find and click on the “Glacier Summary Handout” link. Buried in the opening paragraph is the following statement: …varied model projections suggest that certain studied GNP glaciers will disappear between 2030 to 2080.

      • spike55 says:

        A lot of those glaciers may not even have existed during most of the Holocene.

        Pity no data is available from the MWP. !

  2. Psalmon says:

    Rare picture of glaciologist who has been predicting ice volume at Glacier Park since 1921…

  3. garyh845 says:


    While the glaciers that carved GNP’s majestic peaks were part of a glaciation that ended ~12,000 years ago, current glaciers are considered geologically new, having formed ~7,000 years ago. These glaciers grew substantially during the Little Ice Age (LIA) that began around 1400 A.D. and reached their maximum size at the end of the LIA around A.D. 1850.

    Didn’t Lamb, or someone, lay out the case that most all – to all – of the glaciers in GNP had disappeared below some X latitude during the MWP?

  4. AZ1971 says:

    As a kid, I was in Glacier National Park in 1979 with my family—we stood on the Road To The Sun and threw snowballs at our father just as my oldest brothers did in the 1960’s the last time my parents took a trip there. The glaciers come and go, and are dependent upon precipitation more than anything—just like with the Greenland Ice Cap. If they disappear entirely, it doesn’t diminish the national park one bit because some day they’ll return.

    Why do we think we can set aside a million acres of land in one small part of the planet and believe it’s never going to change, when everything everywhere else on the planet is changing? That’s just ludicrous.

  5. frederik wisse says:

    Isnt the glaciologist Jack Nicholson in one flew over the cuckoonest ?Definitely not as crazy as the IPCC-climate-alarmists !

  6. Brian D says:

    Rather early for this much snow up here in N MN. Chilly start to Fall this year.

  7. Brian D says:

    Cold start to Fall. Temps more like late Oct, along with the snow coming tonight.

  8. Mr GrimNasty says:

    The cold is displaced from the Arctic which is currently running anomalies +3C 2m air temp and +10C surface 80N.

    This is probably the ongoing global cooling in action, just as after the super El Nino when the warmth transferred to the N Pole to radiate off into space.

    • Griff says:

      Yes, cold is displaced from the arctic, just as happened last winter. But there isn’t any global cooling. It is warm up there over the Pole and alaska… I wonder why tony hasn’t published that DMI anomaly chart?

      (Wrangel Island had 4 days consecutively at start of month beating record October temp in records which started in 1926)

      • spike55 says:

        COLD in Canada though

        Seem griff doesn’t understand WEATHER

        Must be cherry-picking time for mindless trolls, hey griff.

        Are you STILL in total DENIAL of the LIA being the COLDEST period in 10,000 or so years, little troll.

        We are all still waiting for actual scientific evidence of warming by atmospheric CO2.

        You do know what “scientific” means, don’t you chicken-little?

        • Griff says:

          What is that RED bit in your picture?

          Looks like a very warm Alaska and Bering Sea to me?

          • sunsettommy says:

            Awww that bothers you so much!

            Go spew your B.S. elsewhere since that is WEATHER. I notice you continually ignore the cold maps, cold weather and the INCREASING Snow and Ice in recent years.

            Heck at the peak of the Glaciation period part of Alaska didn’t have any glaciers on it at all.

          • spike55 says:

            What is the BIGGER blue bit griff,

            Are you INCAPABLE of comprehending basic WEATHER events??

            Cherry-picking is rife in you tedious little life, isn’t it you poor pitiful small-minded TROLL

  9. Cam says:

    In case you hadn’t heard this story from the Canadian Arctic – After barge cancelled due to ice, three Arctic communities left without year’s worth of supplies

    • Griff says:

      I did note in the version of the story I read that the authorities had persistently delayed/cancelled deliveries… and I note that normally supply drops would not be scheduled for a date well after the average minimum date. This is not a story about ‘more ice stops delivery’

      • spike55 says:

        You should read factual versions instead of version that intentionally LIE to conceal the reason being too much sea ice.

        No wonder you are such a DISHONESTY little troll,

        .. always reading fake LYING news.

        • Disillusioned says:

          Very dishonest. Very misleading. Griff has a stake in this debate. Don’t know what it is, but it is something to lose. He spends way too much time trying to convince others of the LIE that the world’s ice packs are melting and heading toward the anti-science, global government-sponsored, man-made, CO2-caused fictional tipping point.

    • Griff says:

      yes, if you model an unrealistically large number of wind turbines over larger areas than ever they will be installed in. Do read the whole article: the authors admit this isn’t going to happen.

      It is unlikely in the extreme that only onshore wind is used even in a scenario aiming at 100% renewable electricity…

    • spike55 says:

      Yep, not enough subsidies, and no way USA will ever aim for 100% renewables. Only a TINY fraction now, in places with high electricity prices.

      Only leftist FOOLS will go down that route.

      Wind turdines cause WARMING

      CO2 DOES NOT. !!

      Comprendi ??

  10. Psalmon says:

    Looks like the communities along the NW Passage are suffering…

    From the Guardian no less…

    They will soon forget.

    • Griff says:

      key information here is:
      The stranded shipment was scheduled to be one of the last of the summer – but Holland said the territorial government, which recently took over the barge service, kept delaying the shipment.

      “I just don’t understand why couldn’t bring barge in earlier in the season. They did it for other communities in the western Arctic – why not us? We want answers.”

      • spike55 says:

        Unsafe to try to get through

        Too much sea ice.

        No ice-breaker handy.

      • spike55 says:

        Even this late in the season, the Canadian Arctic sea ice is nearly 1.5 times the average extent for this date

        Getting in from the other end just as difficult, with the Beaufort sea also well above average extent, and that extent being made up of very thick sea ice.

      • Disillusioned says:

        Griff, what part of the word “extreme” do you not understand?

    • Disillusioned says:

      Griff, you conveniently forgot to include this inconvenient quote: “The ice has been described by officials as “extreme” and even the Canadian coast guard’s largest icebreaker in the region – the Louis St Laurent – was unable to help break open a channel for the barges.”

  11. BestElba says:

    I have noticed you don’t monetize, don’t waste your traffic, you can earn extra cash every month
    with new monetization method. This is the best adsense
    alternative for any type of website (they approve all sites),
    for more details simply search in gooogle: murgrabia’s tools

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.