Comments by Dr J Reynolds

[rajivm...@gmail.com]

Dear Colleagues,
I have read with interest the comments of Dr Reynolds. Unfortunately,
I do not agree with these. In fact, the inventory studies are one
first step to act as a basis for future studies. It is not the end of
the study/process. I have strong reservations to view "potential
dangerous" as "dangerous" glacial lakes or the likes (ground truthing
may not be desired at this stage keeping in view the quantum of work
and can be performed in a future detailed study on a localised glacier/
lake) as rightly pointed out by Dr Basanta Shrestha of ICIMOD. The
authors Pradeep Mool and Samajwal Bajracharya have done a research
effort which has formed a basis for several future studies in the HKH
region and needs appreciation, instead of just criticism. I must point
out that these inventory stidies are well thought out and executed in
most precise manner (to the maximum possible extent). Not only that
the inventory work has been done in Nepal and Bhutan, but lot of work
has been done in India, Pakistan and China by the same authors in
association with local scientists. These glaciers and glacial lake
inventories in different countries have formed a strong basis for
future studies on climate change triggered by global warming. I fully
agree with the comments of Dr Basanta Shrestha of ICIMOD. However, I
would suggest that more detailed studies should be taken up on the
basis of these inventories.

- Rajiv

[tony...@gmail.com]

Dear Esteemed colleagues
Being a newbie to the research topic being discussed, i would like to
submit a couple of words regarding the research work being debated
here!
First of all, we should appreciate the extent and scale of work, its
easier to concentrate on a small study area and then get very precise
results, but when you are talking of the inventories of the entire
country / whole HKH region, the work should be evaluated in a
different perspective!
instead of critism an existing work, i think a better way is to submit
a parallel one whose geographical extent of the work should match the
entire HKH region, then its a level playing field!
secondly, there is one very important aspect that governs the nature /
scope of work in this part of the world, there are so many rules which
govern the availability of topographic maps, field photographs and
finance is a major hurdle in implementing a project with complete
field verifications, so all those factors should also be taken into
account, though they are not pure technical reasons!

Further studies should be concentrated across selected regions where
the threat of outburst is high!!
instead of debating who is right and what is wrong, i think a better
road for future is to plan some detailed studies in future, with
lessons learnt from the past!

In our region of india, the studies of these scale have just
started !! thanks to ICIMOD for it!! let's not divert the scientific
minds in who is wrong and what is right!! after all its never easy to
work with a big team and a study area spread across the entire hindu-
kush himalaya.
Let me assure that, being a member of the study team for himachal
pradesh, the work was done in the most professional way to the best of
our abilities and the available resources!!
thanks!
-vaibhav