49

Bulletin of Glaciological Research ,. (,**1) .3ῌ/1
ῌJapanese Society of Snow and Ice

Recent glacier advances at Glaciar Exploradores, Hielo Patagónico Norte, Chile
Masamu ANIYA+, Gonzalo BARCAZA, and Shogo IWASAKI+ Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki -*/ῌ2/1,, Japan, Graduate Student, Graduate School of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Ibaraki -*/ῌ2/1,,
Japan- National Institute of Polar Research, Itabashi, Tokyo +1-ῌ2/+/, Japan(Received September ,3, ,**0; Revised manuscript accepted November ,,, ,**0)

Abstract
With the purpose of establishing the recent glacial chronology of the HPN, moraines at Glaciar
Exploradores were identiﬁed and investigated, thereby collecting samples for +.C dating. In total,
three moraine systems were recognized, the Invernada moraine (TM+), main moraine (TM,) and themodern (secondary) moraines (TM-). TM- was further subdivided into TM-ῌ+ and TM-ῌ, based onvegetation cover, size, morphology, degree of rock weathering, and development of mosses on rocks.
Two samples from TM+, six samples from TM, and seven samples from TM- were dated. Also thenumber of tree rings was counted at TM, and TM-. Based on these data, four possible scenarios were
postulated and examined. The tentative conclusion is that there were two recent glacial advances at
Glaciar Exploradores, one sometime between the +,th and +1th century (forming main moraine, TM,)and the other around the early to mid-+3th century (TM-ῌ+) and after ca. +3.. (TM-ῌ,). We could not
obtain a date that would indicate the age of the Invernada moraine (TM+): however, from the age ofTM,, it was speculated that it could be of the Neoglaciation III (+0**ῌ+-** BP).

+.

Introduction

The Patagonia Iceﬁeld is very important to understand the global pattern of the environmental changes,
because of its nature (temperate glacier), size and location. In order to elucidate the global pattern of Holocene glaciations, Neoglacial advances of Patagonian
glaciers have been studied mostly at the HPS (Hielo
Patagónico Sur; southern Patagonia Iceﬁeld), ﬁrst by
Mercer (+30., +302, +31*, +310, +32,) and later by Aniya(+33/, +330). Mercer identiﬁed three Neoglaciations
around .1**ῌ.,** BP, ,1**ῌ,*** BP, and the Little Ice
Age (LIA), whereas Aniya proposed four glaciations
around -0** BP, ,-** BP, +0**ῌ+.** BP, and the LIA.
Glasser et al. (,**.) called this as Mercer type andAniya type chronology.
On the other hand, at the HPN (Hielo Patagónico
Norte; northern Patagonia Iceﬁeld) studies on recent
glacial chronology are scarce and the glacial chronology of the HPN has not well established yet. The
ﬁrst such study was carried out by Aniya and Naruse(+333) who identiﬁed two glacial advances at Glaciar
Soler, +-** BP and the LIA during the +2th century.
Later Glasser et al. (,**,) suggested another advance
between AD +,**ῌ+-/*. Harrison and Winchester(,***), at Glaciares Colonia and Arco, suggested the
LIA advance during the +2ῌ+3th century from thedendrochronology. Recently, Glasser et al. (,**/), using ASTER and other satellite images, manually interpreted terminal moraines of the HPN outlet glaciersand identiﬁed three advances including the LIA, without assigning ages to the other two earlier advances.
Because of the satellite resolution (ASTER, +/ m; Landsat, -* m), identiﬁcation of terminal moraines was
naturally limited. In their paper, they list the big
moraine of Glaciar Exploradores as of the LIA, without giving any concrete evidence or argument. It
was probably simply judged so because it is locatedimmediately front of the present glacier snout.
Including Glaciar Exploradores, there is a big terminal moraine in front of the present snout at manyoutlet glaciers, and some of them have formed a proglacial lake such as Glaciares León, Fiero, Nef andSte#en, to name but a few. Determining the age ofthis big moraine is an important key for establishing
the recent glacial chronology of the HPN. Aniya ﬁrst
thought it is probably of the age around +0**ῌ+-** BP,from the study at Glaciar Soler (Aniya and Naruse,+333), whereas British groups (i. e., Harrison and Winchester, ,***; Glasser et al., ,**/) think it is of the LIA.
With this background, we carried out landform inves-

50

Bulletin of Glaciological Researchtigation in December ,**-, December ,**. and August,**/, thereby collecting many samples for +.C dating.
Based upon the moraine distribution and the agesof +.C data, we present our interpretation of the recent
glacier advances at Glaciar Exploradores.

width of the ablation area is about ,./ km, and delimited by prominent lateral moraines on both sides witha relief more than /* m, which are associated with themain terminal moraine.

-.
,.

Distribution of terminal moraines

Study area

Glaciar Exploradores is located at .0ῌ-*ῌS and1-ῌ+*ῌW, on the north side of Monte San Valentin, thehighest mountain in Patagonia (-3+* m) and is fed
principally with snow accumulating on the mountainslope and snow/ice avalanches (Fig. +). It is not directly connected with the iceﬁeld to the south. The
glacier has three main sources (Fig. ,), however, twoof which are now not contributing to the glacier bodyin the ablation area, due to prolonged recession (A & C
of Fig. ,). The area is ca. +,+ km,, with a length of ca.
,* km and the accumulation area ratio (AAR) of *.00
(Aniya, +322). The AAR is the ratio of the accumulation area to the total glacier drainage area, describing
one of the important drainage characteristics, andmany glaciers have a typical value of around *.0. It
has the largest relief in Patagonia with the highest
being -3+* m and the lowest being around +2* m. The

Fig. +. Landsat image of HPN (March ++, ,**+) and thelocation of Glaciar Exploradores.

The moraine systems located just in front of thepresent snout can be largely divided into two, according to the relative location to each other, morphology,
vegetation, and degree of soil development. In addition, about - km down the river from these moraine
systems, there is an old terminal moraine abut on themountain slope on the right bank of Río Exploradores.
Since the local people call this site “Invernada”, wedenote this moraine “Invernada moraine”. Therefore,

Fig. ,. Vertical aerial photograph of Glaciar Exploradores (March ++, +331 by SAF, Chile). The glacierhas three sources for the lower part of the glacier,the central part (B) being the largest and main
body : branch used to join on the east (C) has
detached before +31., while the branch joining on
the west that is completely covered with debris
has diminished supply of ice for a long time (A). It
is now covered with thick debris on which sometrees are growing.

Aniya et al.

51

Fig. .. Ground photograph of Invernada moraine(August -, ,**/, by Aniya), looked from the southon the road under construction along Río Exploradores. Note: although it was the middle of winter, the snow cover on the mountain slope wasvery limited, indicating moderate climate aroundhere even in winter.

Fig. -. Terminal moraines and sampling sites fordating materials at Glaciar Exploradores ῌaerial
photo by SAF, Chile, March ++, +331).

in total, there are three main terminal moraine systems in the area down the snout (Fig. -).
Invernada moraine (TM+)
This moraine was ﬁrst spotted from the road in
December ,**., when we tried to walk to the neighborglacier Grosse, and subsequently checked on the +331
vertical aerial photographs. In August ,**/, we visited this site and conﬁrmed indeed as a terminal moraine (Fig. .). This is a huge moraine consisting of asingle ridge, with a relief from the valley ﬂoor exceeding ,/* m, length more than +*** m, and the width at
the base about 3** m. The whole hill is covered with
dense, large vegetation. There is a gently inclined
terrace to the northwest of this moraine, which wasformed by huge landslide deposits. Since the ridge ofthe moraine is separated from the mountain slope, thiscannot be a depositional landform produced by hugelandslide. Actually, the formation and existence of
this moraine seems to owe this terrace, which may
have blocked the glacier snout. We call the glacieradvance that formed this moraine “Invernada Advance”.
The moraine consists of huge blocks of granites,
particularly near the top. Here boulders of morethan / m long are piled up, and without soil develop-.+ment and dense vegetation cover, it would have been
impossible to walk about. From depressions near the
top, we collected two samples of organic matters for+.
C dating.
Although the moraine is located by the mountainslope, we have judged this moraine a terminal one,from its position on the valley ﬂoor and the directionof the main ridge (though not completely transverseto the valley direction). To our enigma, however, we
could not recognize any corresponding lateral moraines on either side of the valley, from the ﬁeld
observation of hill slope topography and/or vegetation change on slope, or even from stereoscopic interpretation of the +331 aerial photographs at about+: 1****. At present with so much debris supply, thedevelopment of lateral moraines is very good. Therefore, it seems di$cult to think that lateral moraines
were not formed when the Invernada Moraine wasdeposited. If formed, what would have completely
destroyed the lateral moraines of the Invernada advance. One possibility is a glacial lake outburst ﬂood
(GLOF). If a GLOF of such magnitude had occurred,
the Invernada Moraine should have been a#ected;
however, due to dense vegetation cover such evidence
could not possibly be recognized.
Main terminal moraine (TM,)
Because this terminal moraine system is mostprominent and important in this area and therefore isa subject of age estimation of this project, we call it“main moraine” (Fig. /). This moraine encircles thepresent snout almost completely with one active outlet stream on the eastern edge and three old, dried-out
outlets that break the continuation of the moraine
ridge. There are distinctive lateral moraines on either side of the glacier, which are associated with themain moraine. On the +3.. Trimetrogon aerial photograph, at least three active outlets were recognized(Fig. 0). Since then, the central ones were dried out,
and on the +31. aerial photographs two active outlet
-.,

52

Bulletin of Glaciological Research

Fig. /. The main terminal moraine of Glaciar Exploradores (July ,0, ,**., by Aniya), looked from the northeast, withperfect reﬂection in Lago Bayo. The mirror-like lake surface indicates that there was absolutely no wind, which was
not unusual during winter. The peak at the top left is Monte San Valentin (-3+* m), the highest mountain in
Patagonia. Since the elevation of Lago Bayo is about +2* m, the relief in this photograph is more than -1** m.

Fig. 0. Trimetrogon aerial photograph of Glaciar Exploradores, taken in +3...
was completely covered with debris. B is the main body.

streams are recognized at the western and easternedges, while on the +331 aerial photographs the western outlet stream was dried out due to surface lowering. When we visited the wind gap at the westernedge in December ,**., the lake level on the glacierside was about ,* m lower than the wind gap.
A relief of the moraine on the proximal side is up
to 2* m, while on the distal side it is +.*ῌ,** m from
Río Exploradores. The moraine is extensively covered with trees, particularly on the distal side due tomild climate with abundant rain; however, it is still
ice-cored at many sites. The evidence for ice-cores
includes: (+) seepage of water from the proximal baseof the moraine (even in winter); (,) exposure of icecore at the base due to erosion; and (-) bulging of theproximal slope, ﬂowage of surﬁcial rubbles and tiltingof trees on them due to core-ice melting. For thisA is a branch joining on the west, which

reason, much of the proximal side is devoid of vegetation or with fallen trees of +*ῌ+/ cm thick, while thedistal side is covered with thick soils and dense trees(many conifers) with the diameter at breast height(DBH) of /*ῌ0* cm.
The proximal slope of the eastern part of themoraine ridge is totally devoid of vegetation, on
which rock fall is very active, particularly when it israining. Abundant water seepage from the base ofthis part, including winter time, indicates that a large
core-ice still exists inside this part. The nature of
sediments is totally di#erent between the upper andthe lower part. The upper part consists of ﬁne material that has slightly indurated with weak stratiﬁcation, inclining toward the distal side, and the proximal slope is more than /*ῌ, while the lower part consists mainly of gravel of loose materials resting at theAniya et al.

53

angle of repose, some of which are subrounded orsubangular indicating the inﬂuence of running water.
Many fallen rocks originate from the lower slope. A
lot of wood pieces are seen embedded here on both theupper and lower parts.

-) Modern Moraines: seven samples were dated.
-A, ca. +*2 BP (plant); -B, ca. +*3 BP (organic matter); C, ca. ++/ BP (wood); -D, ca. +,+ BP (wood); -E, +,- BP(organic matter); -F, ca. +-. BP (plant); -G, ca. +.1 BP(organic matter).

Modern terminal moraines (TM-)
These moraines are located between the main
moraine (TM,) and the present snout. At places,
there are proglacial lakes between TM- and the snout.
From the ﬁeldwork and the aerial photographic interpretation, this moraine system can be further divided
into two types (see Fig. - inset), according to vegetation cover, size, morphology, degree of rock weathering, and development of mosses on rocks.

..+ Interpretation of +.C data
A sample for +.C data is normally a piece of woodthat was embedded in a moraine or destroyed by aglacier advance, or organic matters/plant remains
found in a depression that was supposedly formed bya glacier advance. Interpretation of these data is totally di#erent though. In case of a piece of wood, theage of a sample indicates that the glacial advance waslater than that age (maximum possible age). On theother hand, the age of organic matter or plant remains
found in a depression indicates that the glacier advance was well before the age of such samples (minimum possible age). As for a wood sample, we normally do not know its origin and transportation processes until its deposition. As for the organic matters, we are usually not sure how long it took for theorganic matter to be formed in a depression that wasformed by a glacier advance. It is not di$cult to
suppose that this decomposition/sedimentation process is very di#erent under di#erent climate conditions and nature of sediments (gravelly or clayey/
silty), and in Patagonia it is inferred to range from +**to more than ,*** years (Mercer, +310). Therefore,
interpretation of the +.C age must be carefully done,
considering the nature and the environment of samples.

-.-

TM-ῌ+
This moraine system is located near the easternedge, in front of a water pool for the outlet stream.
This system comprises several small moraine ridges
transverse to the glacier ﬂow direction and two kettle
ponds developed here. Nothofagus found on this moraine system are large, with the DBH ranging up to .*ῌ/* cm near the water pool. The present snout abutson this system, with striking contrast in appearance.
The area (rocks) without vegetation is covered withextensive mosses. Boulders include many limestones, which cannot be found elsewhere on the moraine.
-.-.+

TM-ῌ,
This system is located on the proximal side of theMain moraine (TM,). In many places, active proglacial lakes are located between this system and thepresent snout. In contrast to TM-ῌ+, the topographyof this moraine system is generally ﬂat, with somehummocky areas. Invasion of vegetation is fairly
well, and at places Nothofagus trees with the DBH of+/ῌ,* cm are found. There exist extensive ice coresbeneath the soil of about -* cm thick. Recent meltingof core ice is very striking, with trees falling, ponds
enlarging, and steps on the surface formed due todi#erential melting (Aniya et al., ,**/).
-.-.,.. +.C Samples and dating results
Sampling sites are shown in Figure -, and thefollowing dates were obtained for each moraine system.
+) Invernada Moraine: two organic samples were collected from two depressions near the top, whichyielded the following ages.
+A, ca. +*0 BP: +B, ca. +** BP.
,) Main Moraine: six wood samples were collectedfrom this moraine, with the following ages.
,A, 3,/*ῌ/* BP; ,B, +3**ῌ/* BP; ,C, +.**ῌ.* BP; ,D,+*/*ῌ/. BP; ,E, 21*ῌ/* BP, and ,F, 2,*ῌ0* BP.

Samples from Invernada moraine
Samples +A and +B both yielded a modern age ofca. +** BP. Although these samples were collectedfrom a layer just above the gravel in depressions near
the top of the moraine, this cannot be indicative of theage of the moraine formation, judged from the circumstance and the environment of the moraine.
..+.+

Samples from the main moraine
Ages of these samples are wide spread, ranging
from 3,/* BP to 2,* BP. Of these samples, ,A (3,/*ῌ
/* BP), ,B (+3**ῌ/* BP), ,C (+.**ῌ.* BP), ,D (+*/*ῌ/.
BP) were collected from the proximal slope of themoraine. The age of sample ,A is very di#erent andfrom the general circumstance of the iceﬁeld it is very
likely that it was reworked many times before being
embedded in the moraine. Therefore, we can safely
exclude this sample from our subsequent discussion.
The age of +3** BP of sample ,B was obtainedwith a piece of wood that was embedded in the proximal slope by a proglacial lake near the western edgeof the main moraine. The piece of wood was chippedfrom a tree trunk of about -* cm thick, which was oneof the piled-up tree trunks. From the size of tree

..+.,

54

Bulletin of Glaciological Researchtrunks and the way they are clustered, it is unlikelythat these were subglacially transported and subsequently brought up onto the surface by thrusting. It
seems rather that these tree trunks were mostly transported supraglacially. Around this sampling site,which is about +* m above the present proglacial lakelevel, there is a weak-bedding structure on the slope,indicating a higher level of the old proglacial lake.
From these circumstances, we interpret that the formation of the main moraine was after this date, +3**BP.
One of the distinctive characteristics of the main
moraine is that the ridge near the eastern edge has a
bedding structure, although weak, that inclines toward the distal side. Samples ,C (+.**ῌ.* BP) and,D (+*/*ῌ/. BP) were collected from the proximal sideof this bedded part. Because the age of samples becomes progressively older from the top (Fig. 1), it ispossible to interpret that the formation of this moraine started around +.** BP and culminated around+*/* BP. This interpretation is close to the Aniya andNaruse’s (+333).
It is di$cult, however, to suppose that such structure was formed in random deposits of supraglacial
debris, because the bedding structure is normallyfound in sediments that were deposited in water. It
is therefore natural to suppose that either these aresubglacial sediments by subglacial streams that werebrought up by thrust, or sediments in a proglaciallake. These strata contain a lot of subround or sub-angular gravel, indicating strong e#ect of runningwater. Because the thickness of these strata is morethan ,* m, it seems unlikely that this was brought upby thrust and we interpret that this strata was sediments in a proglacial lake. Varved clay layers thatare normally recognized in sediments in still-standing
water cannot be found in this sediment though. The
reason may be that at Glaciar Exploradores, there is
no strong contrast in melting between summer andwinter, and the volume of the outlet stream does not
ﬂuctuate much without lake freezing. From this interpretation of the nature of this layer, it is probablethat wood pieces originated somewhere upstream
where Nothfagus are abundant. Fallen trees were
probably subglacially transported and near the snout
were brought up onto the surface by thrust and thendeposited in a proglacial lake. From these data, themoraine formation was probably later than +*/* BP.
Samples ,E (21*ῌ/* BP) and ,F (2,*ῌ0* BP) werecollected at the same site on the distal side of themoraine (Fig. 2). There are horizontal strata here inwhich tree remains with -*ῌ.* cm thick were embedded. Since the tree remains were laid down, its origin
cannot be ascertained; if they were washed into a lake
after being killed somewhere else, or if they were
killed and buried in situ by impounding water due tomoraine formation or glacial advance. According totheir origin, the interpretation would be totally opposite. If the interpretation is the former, the glacialadvance took later than 2,* BC, or if the latter, theFig. 1. Sampling sites on the eastern part of the main moraine (TM,) and theirdates. Compare with Figure - for the location.

Aniya et al.

55

obtain a maximum age of about ,/*ῌ-** years. The
development of vegetation and soil is very well in thisarea, because of mild, temperate climate; however, incomparison to those at the Invernada Moraine, theylook much younger.
TMBy a proglacial lake behind TM-ῌ,, we foundseveral fallen trees due to the recent melting of thecore ice, and cut one of them for tree ring count.
About -* cm above the root, ,* rings were counted at
the section with a diameter of +/ cm. This area wasdebris-covered glacier in +3.. (see Fig. 0). So trees
started growing ,*ῌ-* years later and in about ,*years it grew to a height of around / m. Such rapid
invasion of trees and subsequent rapid growth areprobably due to thick debris, mild climate and abundant precipitation.
/.,0.

Postulation of moraine formation ages andrecent glacier advances

Main moraine (TM,)
From the preceding discussion of interpretationof +.C data, indicating the maximum age of ca. 2,* BP,and the tree ring count (,ῌ-** years) and the time
elapsed before plant invasion (not known for sure, but
probably less than /* years from TM-ῌ,), it appears
best to suppose that the moraine was formed sometime between the +,ῌ+1th century, that is, the Medieval warm period to the LIA.
0.+

Modern moraines (TM-)
Ages obtained from organic matters and plantremains range from ca. +/* BP to +** BP. Wood samples -D and -G were collected from sediments on topof the ice-cored moraines, which were probably brought up by thrust. This area was still debris-covered
part of the glacier in +3... Considering the time required for algae and plants to grow in a pond on theice-cored moraine, it seems reasonable to suppose thatthe formation of TM-ῌ+ was sometime between themid- and the late+3th century. Glacial advance atthis time was recognized at Glaciar Colonia of the
HPN (Harrison and Winchester, ,***). The manualinterpretation of the Trimetrogon aerial photographindicates that TM-ῌ, was formed after +3...
0.,

Fig. 2. Sites of samples ,E and ,F on the distal side of
the main moraine (TM,), showing the bedding
structure (about , m thick), near the bottom ofwhich samples were located. Before ca. AD ++**,
it was warm enough to support a forest of large
trees here.

glacial advance occurred before 2,* BC. Here, considering the result of the tree ring analysis in the following section, it is interpreted that the glacial advanceor moraine formation took later that 2,* BP.

/.

Tree ring analysis

TM,
The number of tree rings was roughly counted ona tree section that was cut and left by the road for theroad construction. We counted roughly ,** rings on
the section with a diameter of about .* cm. The largest tree in this area is about /*ῌ0* cm at DBH and if we
simply extrapolate the growth rate (/ years/cm), we/.+

TM- moraines were divided into two types, TM-ῌ+ and TM-ῌ,. Then we can postulate several scenarios for glacial advance and retreat that produced TM-ῌ+ and TM-ῌ,, because the sources of glacier bodies
that produced these moraines are likely di#erent.
Some of them are as follows.
(+) After forming the main moraine sometime between the +,th and +1th century, the glacier retreated.
Then the glacier bodies that formed both TM-ῌ+ and56

Bulletin of Glaciological ResearchTM-ῌ, advanced at the same time around the early +3
th century. The glacier body that formed TM-ῌ+started retreating earlier than the other part, andduring the slow retreat the glacier formed a series ofrecessional moraines (mid- to late +3th century).
Meanwhile, the large part of the glacier that subsequently formed TM-ῌ, had been stationary for a longtime, being blocked by the large main moraine. It
was only ca. +3.*s when that part started receding
after a prolonged period of surface lowering. Because of long stagnation (about +** years?), a mantleof thick debris has been developed, which facilitatedeasy plant invasion along with the mild climate.
(,) After forming the main moraine, the glacier became stagnant for a while. Because of diminishedaccumulation, the glacier surface gradually lowered,
thereby accumulating thick debris cover and eventually started receding. In this process, the eastern part(TM-ῌ+) started receding earlier than the western part(TM-ῌ,), forming a series of recessional moraine ridges.
(-) After forming TM,, the glacier receded. Thenthe glacier advanced at the whole front in the early to
mid-+3th century, and the glacier receded at the whole
front, thereby forming a series of recessional moraines. The TM-ῌ, part advanced again, destroying
the recessional moraine, and remained abutting on theTM, until around the +3.*s before starting recession
again.
(.) Only the TM-ῌ+ part advanced during the early
to mid-+3th century, and receded by the late +3th
century, thereby leaving recessional moraines. The
TM-ῌ, part advanced independently around the beginning of the ,*th century and started losing mass of
ice from the mid-,*th century.
Of these four scenarios, either (+) or (,) seems mostplausible for the following reason. The proximal sideof TM-ῌ+ is a water pool for the only outlet stream atpresent, and the recession of ice on this part is conspicuous, compared with the other parts of the front.
This is because the glacier body (branch) that used tojoin the main body and come down to this part nolonger joins the main body since the +3.*s (see C in
Fig. ,). Therefore, after the +3th century advance,
the glacier part that was fed with this branch could
have started earlier retreat than the TM-ῌ, part. Although the appearance and characteristics of TM-ῌ+and TM-ῌ, are quite di#erent, these are basically the
products of the same glacier advance, and the di#erence in stagnation period and the nature of debris
materials have caused such apparent di#erence.
If we take the scenario (+), Glaciar Exploradores
made two LIA advances. In case of the scenario (,),
there was only one LIA advance. We do not havedecisive data yet. However, in Patagonia, at Glaciar
Ameghino of the HPS two LIA advances are recognized at +0ῌ+1th century and the late +3th century(Aniya, +330), and at a moraine-dammed lake near

Glaciar Soler of HPN, two LIA dates were obtained forthe double moraine ridges (Aniya and Shibata, ,**+).
Therefore, it appears that the scenario (+) is mostplausible.
As the tentative conclusion for the recent glacieradvance, we propose that Glaciar Exploradores advanced sometime between the +,th and+1th centuries,
thereby forming the main, big moraine. In addition
the glacier made another advance around the beginning of the +3th century, thereby producing the secondary moraines. We have no data to infer the glacieradvance that produced the Invernada moraine; however, from the studies at Glaciar Soler (Aniya andNaruse, +333; Aniya and Shibata, ,**+), and the appearance of the moraine, it could be of the Neoglaciation III (Aniya, +33/), that is, sometime between +0**ῌ
+-** BP, from the date of the main moraine.

Acknowdgments
This study was supported by a grant-in-aid for Scientiﬁc Research of Japan Society for Promotion of
Research (No.+/,/-**+, Principal investigator, M.
Aniya). Field support by Mr. Orland Soto on Río
Exploradores during August ,**/ is much appreciated. Without his guide and help, we could not havevisited the Invernada moraine and taken samples.

References
Aniya, M. (+322): Glacier inventory for the Northern Patagonia Iceﬁeld, Chile, and variations +3.././ to +32//20.
Arct. Alpine Res., ,*, +13ῌ+21.
Aniya, M. (+33/): Holocene glacial chronology in Patagonia:
Tyndall and Upsala Glaciers. Arct. Alpine Res., ,1, -++ῌ-,,.
Aniya, M. (+330): Holocene variations of Ameghino Glacier,Southern Patagonia. The Holocene, 0, ,.1ῌ,/,.
Aniya, M. and Naruse, R. (+333): Late-Holocene glacial advances at Glaciar Soler, Hielo Patagonico Norte, SouthAmerica: Trans. Japanese Geomorph. Union, ,*, 03ῌ2-.
Aniya, M. and Shibata, Y. (,**+): The Holocene glacial chronology of Rio Soler valley, Hielo Patagónico Norte, Chile.
In Aniya, M. and Naruse, R. (ed.) Glaciological and Geomorphological Studies in Patagonia, +332 and +333.
Rapid Printing Center, Sapporo, 01ῌ2-.
Aniya, M., Satow, K., Skvarca, P., Anma, R., Aoki, T., Sawagaki,T., Tanikawa, T., Naruse, R., Glasser, N. and Harrison,S. (,**/): Overview of Glaciological Research Project inPatagonia ,**-. Bull. Glaciol. Res., ,,: +*3ῌ++3.
Harrison, S. and Winchester, V. (,***): Nineteenth- and twentieth-century glacier ﬂuctuation and climatic implications in the Arco and Colonia Valleys, Hielo Patagonico
Norte, Chile. Arct. Antar. Alpine Res., -,, //ῌ0-.
Glasser, N., Hambrey, M. J. and Aniya, M. (,**,): An advanceof Soler Glacier, North Patagonian Iceﬁeld, at c. ad +,,,ῌ
+-.,. The Holocene, +, (+), ++-ῌ+,*.
Glasser, N. F., Harrison, S., Winchester, V. and Aniya, M.
(,**.): Late Pleistocene and Holocene palaeoclimate andglacier ﬂuctuations in Patagonia. Global and Planetary
Change .-: 13ῌ+*+.
Glasser, N., Jansson, K. N., Harrison, S. and Rivera, A. (,**/):
Geomorphological evidence for variations of the North
Patagonian Iceﬁeld during the Holocene. Geomorph., 1+,

Aniya et al.

,0-ῌ,11.
Mercer, J. H. (+30.): Advance of a Patagonian glacier. Jour.
Glaciol., / (-2), ,01ῌ,02.
Mercer, J. H. (+302): Variations of some Patagonian glacierssince the Late-Glacial. Am. Jour. Sci., ,00, 3+ῌ+*3.
Mercer, J. H. (+31*): Variations of some Patagonian glaciers

57

since the Late-Glacial: II. Am. Jour. Sci., ,03, +ῌ,/.
Mercer, J. H. (+310): Glacial history of southernmost SouthAmerica. Quarter. Res., 0, +,/ῌ+00.
Mercer, J. H. (+32,): Holocene glacier variations in Southern
South America. Striae, +2, -/ῌ.*.