Origin of Submarine Canyons

DOUGLAS JOHNSON
Columbia University

Outline of Discussion
INTRODUCTION

I. HYPOTHESES INVOLVING A TECTONIC ORIGIN.

II. HYPOTHESES INVOLVING A NON-TECTONIC ORJGIN.
I. Hypotheses of Subaerial Origin.
A. Recently Ssbrnerged River Gorges.
B. Ancient Submerged River Gorges Re-exceoated by Land-
sliding.
C. Groundwater Sapping.
2. Hypotheses of Submarine Origin.
D. Submarine Landslides.
E. Submarine Currents.
3. Hypotheses of Subterranean Origin.
F. ~Subterranean Rivet" Outlets.
G. Foundering of Subterranean Caverns.
H. Solntion along Faults by
a. Uprising Subterranean Waters.
b. Down-filtering Marine Waters.
I. Non-deposition along Faults due to Up-rising Subterranean
II:-' aters.
J. Sapping by Ssbmerged Artesian Springs.

(Continuation of E. Submarine Currents, from Vol. I, NO.3, pp. 230-243)

[Strength and Weakness of the Turbidity Hypothesis. The points favor-

able to tl>eTtirbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyon origin have
been most ably marshalled by Daly.v' With characteristic skill he pictures
the conditions believed by him to exist en continental shelves during
Glacial time, and i1lustrates the consequences which in his opinion must
have resulted. "Each of the four sets of ice-caps grew slowly and melted
61. Reginald A. Daly, "Origin of Submarine 'Canyons.'" Amer. [our. Sci., VoL 31,
PP· 401-420, 1936.
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS

slowly, each process taking at least 25,000 years. Hence for more than
200,000 years, out of the million years or so that have elapsed since the
Ice Age dawned, wind waves and tidal waves were beating on the mud
and sand of the continental shelves-a condition utterly unlike that now
ruling. These more or less mobile sediments had been- built into em-
bankments with widths measuring scores of kilometers and with depths
averaging at least tens of meters. The volume of fine sediments was
therefore enormous and sufficient to keep the tidal currents and storm
waves of the lowered ocean well charged with solid particles for a large
fraction of the 200,000 years. The waves were especially muddy because
the depth of water on the outer, still submerged parts of the shelves was
small. Then, too, the average storminess of the world was doubtless more
pronounced during the Glacial epochs than at present. Storms no more
intense than those now affecting the shelves must have made the water
_overlying the continental slope (the fall-off of each shelf) much richer
in suspended sediment than the water of similar location in pre-Glacial,
Interglacial, or post-Glacial times. The tidal currents and gales of the
twentieth century disturb the bottom of the North Sea so powerfully
that sand is thrown up from depths of 40 to 50 meters to the decks of
laboring ships. So long as sediment was 'suspended' in the water on the
Pleistocene shelves, that water was effectively denser than the clean water
farther out to sea or the water below the zone of rapid stirring. There
must have been a tendency for the weighted water to dive under the
cleaner water, to slide along the gently inclined bottom of the shelf, and
to Bow still faster down the steeper continental slope. Since the solid
particles kept settling out, the horizontal distance through which any
such density current operated was limited. It is therefore important to re-
member throughout the discussion of the general hypothesis, that the
belt of strong agitation by waves was, at the times of lowered sea level,
much nearer to the continental slope than now. In principle the imagined
bottom current would be similar to the Bow of ink or muddy water
placed at the appropriate point in a tilted, partly filled glass of clear
water. Each of those denser fluids slides down along the inclined 'Boor'
of containing glass .....
"If a thick, uniform sheet of mercury were kept continuously pouring
out from the whole shore of a continent, it is easy to see what would hap-
pen in a general way. The mercury would quickly seek and Bow down
any slight, initial, transverse depression in the continental shelf and erode
 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

the depression deeper. With this progressive deepening, more and

more mercury would be drawn into the new trough from both sides,
thus increasing the thickness, velocity, and eroding power of the stream
of mercury that occupies the trough. To him 'that hath shall be given:
Reaching the much steeper continental slope, the mercury flood, so con-
centrated, would slide down yet faster and dig a deeper trough in the
soft sediments beneath the slope. Continued long enough, a submarine
'canyon' would there be produced. This fanciful analogy may help to
~arify the hypothesis now to be elaborated."
Daly then presents evidence and arguments to show that under the
conditions pictured large quantities of sediment could be taken into sus-
pension during storms, or contributed by settling from overlying muddy
river water; that much of this sediment would settle very slowly even in
sea water; that the resulting increase in effective density would be suf-
ficient to develop submarine currents of considerable velocity; that the
drag of such currents might initiate the seaward sliding of mobile, water-
soaked mud on the sea floor, with consequent mixing of the agitated mud
and original currents, and a resulting further increase in the drag and
cutting power of the latter; that the turbidity currents would be further
accelerated by seaward moving hydraulic CUrrentswhen strong onshore
winds piled sea water upon the coastal flats; and that the combined force
of these currents might be sufficient to excavate submarine canyons in
poorly lithified sediments of the continental shelves during Glacial time,
and possibly to some extent also in pre-Glacial time.
No. limited quotations from, or summaries of, Daly's article can do
full justice to the plausibility of the turbidity current hypothesis of can-
yon origin as presented by that author. The reader must study the original
text to appreciate fully the best case that has been made (and probably
that can be made) in favor of the competence of turbidity currents to
erode suboceanic gorges of vast magnitude. Let us now consider some
of the weaknesses of this hypothesis of canyon origin.

r'S"blamstrine Trenches of the Rhine and Rhone Rivers. First we must note
t; that there are important errors and omissions in Daly's presentation of
evidence and arguments which make his case in favor of turbidity cur-
rents appear much stronger than it really is. This is notably true in his
discussion of the sublacustrine trenches of the Rhine and Rhone river
deltas in lakes Constance and Geneva, and the evidence they offer as to
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS

the competence of turbidity currents to cut subaqueous gorges of great

magnitude. After discussing the trench of the Rhone, Daly writes: "In
his first paper on the subject Forel .rtlpported the conclusion of de Salis,
that the trench was cut (crouse} by the bottom current, flowing because
of the load of silt and consequent excess of density."·' In this sentence
the weight of the two authorities quoted would appear to support the
turbidity current hypothesis of trench erosion. But so far as the writer
can discover: (a) von Salis did not believe the bottom current was flow-
ing because of the load of silt and consequent excess of density; (b)
Forel himself did not support the view that the bottom current resulted
solely from the load of silt and consequent excess of density; and (c)
Forel never accepted von Salis's view that the trench of the Rhine (the
only trench discussed by von Salis), or that of the Rhone, was due solely
to erosion':
(a) The reference to de Salis, apparently based on the French of
Forel, obviously concerns the paper by von Salis cited on an early page
of the present essay. Daly does not refer directly to this paper, but cites
Forel's first (1885) paper on the Rhine and Rhone trenches. In this
first paper, however, there is no reference to von Salis. At that time
Forel apparently had not seen the article by that investigator, and gave
an independent explanation of the trenches. Two years later (1887)
Forel published his second and principal essay, in which the work of
von Salis is quoted, but not in the sense given by Daly. The latter author
gives no citation of this major contribution by Forel, but does cite (in
addition to Fore!"s later work, Le Leman, which restates much of the
1887 paper) two pages of the volume in which the 1887 paper occurs,
one citation apparently being to a brief abstract (pages XXlI-XXllI of
the Proces Verbaux) of that paper containing no reference to von Salis;
the other to irrelevant matter and probably representing a typographical
error. Because of this apparent confusion of references the reader cannot
be sure what were the particular statements Daly intended to cite, nor
whether Daly saw the original form of Forel's principal paper with its
reference to von Salis.
In any case the views of both von Salis and Forel as set forth in the
literature cited in the present essay appear to be clear. In his 1887 paper
Forel quotes von Salis, in free translation, as concluding that the trench
of the Rhine was cut by a bottom current formed when the river water
sinks to the hottom of the lake, this sinking being due to the difference
62. Italics by the present writer.
 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

in tenz perature of the two waters ("et l'on peut attribuer cette chute a
la difference de temperature des deux eaux"}. 03 Forel correctly quoted
von Salis who, as already noted on an earlier page, made no referenceto
any excess of density due to the load of silt carried by the river water, but
accepted the prevailing view that the waters of the Rhine and Rhone
sank because they were colder than the lake waters. In the words of von
Salis: "Es durfte daraus mit Recht geschlossen worden sein, dass das
Flusswasser an dec Mundung versinke, was man sich bekanntlich aus
der Temperaturverschiedenheit erkliirt hat.?"
While later studies have demonstrated that temperature differences
are not, as von Salis believed, the sale factor in causing the Rhine and
Rhone waters to sink in their respective lakes, they constitute one nf three
factors all of which combine during part of the year to make this sink·
ing possible. A correct appreciation of this fact becomes of vital irn-
portance when one tries to establish an analogy between the known bot-
tom currents in Lakes Constance and Geneva, and hypothetical bottom
currents in the ocean where temperature differences constitute one of
two factors, out of the three involved in the lakes, which tend to prevent
analogous bottom currents.
(b) Forel did not, as one might infer from reading Daly's paper,
support the view that the bottom currents believed to be responsible for
the Rhine and Rhone trenches resulted solely from the load of silt car-
ried by these streams and the consequent excess density of their waters.
He held, rather, that the bottom currents were due to excess density
resulting from a combination of three factors, one of which (material
held in solution) varied but little throughout the year, while the other
two (temperature differences and material carried in suspension) were
negligible or non-active at some seasons, highly important in others.
Thus he found that from late fall to early spring the amount of material
carried in suspension by the Rhone was negligible, being even less than
that carried in solution; but that from late spring to early autumn the
quantity of material carried in suspension was enormous, greatly over-
balancing all other factors combined, but generally cooperating with
them in determining the excess density of the river water.
In his discussion of Forel's hypothesis Daly makes no mention of the
63. F. A. Porel, "Le Ravin sous-lacustre du Rhone dans le lac Leman." Bull. Sor.
Valid. des Sci. n«; Vol. 23. pp. 85-1°7,1887_
64. Ad. von Salis, "Hydrotechnische Nonzen: II. Die Tiefenmessungen im Bodensee."
Scbioeiz. Beazeit., Vol. 3, No. 22, p. 127, 1884.
 ORIGIN OF SU BMARIN E CANYONS

fact that this investigator attributed considerable importance to the ef-

fects of differences in temperature between the river and lake waters.
Instead, he says that "if the hypothesis [of turbidity currents] is well
founded, the water of rivers that are building deltas into [resb-uiater
Laees of nearly the same temperatttre6' should plunge under the water
of the respective lakes" when these rivers carry much sediment; cites the
entrance of the muddy Rhone into Lake Geneva as an example; and
presents only that part of Forel's explanation which has to do with
turbidity currents. Yet Forel gave much time and labor to detailed studies
of temperature conditions in the Rhone River and in Lake Geneva; and
his major paper (r887) on the origin of the trenches devotes much space
to demonstrating the existence of important contrasts in temperature
between the river water and the lake water; contrasts which, without in-
tervention of other factors, in winter would cause the river water to
spread out over the lake water, but during summer would cause the river
water to sink in the lake to variable depths up to 40 metres, thus at that
season cooperating with the effects of material carried in solution and in
suspension to give a bottom current reaching to much greater depths.
In his earliest paper66 Fore! gave temperature contrasts first place as
a cause for sinking of the river water; and in his later works?" he con-
tinued to assign an important role to temperature differences, even when
recognizing that at certain seasons these alone may temporarily be un-
favorable to the generation of bottom currents. Seldom does he mention
such currents without including reference to the e!ement of temperature.
"Les eaux froides et chargees d'alluvion" is typical of his expressions,
even in his later works. Hence to omit all references to these temperature
differences when citing Forel's explanation is to give a very incomplete
idea of that writer' 5 views, and to make him assign greater potency to
turbidity currents than he actually did.
Not cnlyForel, but most of those who have since discussed the origin
of the Rhine and Rhone trenches, have emphasized the importance of

65. Italics by present writer.

66. F. A. Forel, "Les ravins sous-Iacustres des fieuves gfaciaires." Acad. Sci. Paris, Ct.
Rend., Vol. JOI, pp. 725-728, 1885.
67. F. A. Forel, "Sur l'inclinaison des couches isothermes dans les eaux profondes du
lac Leman." Aced. Sci. Paris, Ct. Rena., Vol. 102, pp. 712-714, 1886.
---"Le ravin sous-lacustre du Rhone dans Ie lac Leman." Bull. Soc. Valid. de
Scis. Nat., Vol. 23, pp. 85-107, 1887·
---Le Leman. Vol. I. (Lausanne) 543 pp., 1892. See PP· 373, 384, 386.
---Le Leman. Vol. II. (Lausanne) 651 pp., 1895. See p. 275·
---Handbuch der Seenkunde. (Stuttgart) 249 pp., 19°1. See p. 84·
 330 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

temperature differences and other factors in helping to account for the

sinking of the river waters below the lake waters to give rise to a bottom
current. Forel" studied not only temperature differences but also dif-
ferences in the quantity of mineral matter found dissolved in river and
lake, in his effort to explain the sinking of the Rhone waters. He found
that throughout the year the Rhone water had a content of dissolved salts
appreciably greater than that of Lake Geneva, as a result of which the
river water from that cause alone must have a density slightly greater
than that of the lake water. Eberhard Graf von Zeppelin" accepted the
view that the combination of lower temperature and greater turbidity
caused the Rhine and Rhone river waters to sink "under the warmer and
lighter water of the lakes." Delebccquc'? is an exception to the general
rule in that he usually mentions turbidity alone when discussing the
origin of the Rhine and Rhone bottom currents, although he affirms his
acceptance of Forel's ideas, and points out that river water rendered more
dense by material in solution rather than by suspended sediment would
behave in the same manner. Heirn" repeatedly places first emphasis
upon temperature differences, with differences in quantity of material
in solution and of material in suspension following in the order named.
Heim further shows that the turbid waters of certain streams are, espe-
cially in late summer or early autumn, lighter than the waters of those
lakes into which they empty; and that under these circumstances the tur-
bid water spreads over the lake surface as a floating muddy film, with
the result that no sublacustrine trench is formed, or if temporarily begun,
is soon filled and thus obliterated. Kleinschmidt;" discussing the Rhine
trench, appears to consider as most important the "relatively low tern-
perature" of the Rhine water, and as of secondary importance its content
of material; believes that during summer the river water sinks only part

68. F. A. Forel, "Le ravin sous-Iacustre du Rhone," Bull. Soc. Valid, de Scis. Nal ..
Vol. 23. pp. 85-1°7, 1887_ See pp. 95-99. .
69. Eberhard, Graf von Zeppelin, "Der 'Bodensee-Forschungen' beaw. der Begleit-
worte dritter Abschnitt: Die hydrographischen Verhaltnisse des Bodensees." Ver. f.
Gescb. de! Bodensees u, sem, Umge., Scb., Vol. 22, pp. 59-103, 1893. See P. 81-
70. A. Delebecque, "Les ravics sous-lacustres des fleuves glaciaires." Arch. de! SciI.
PhYJ. et Nat., 4e per., Vol. I, pp. 48,5-487, 1896.
---"'Influence de la composition de l'eau des lacs sur la formation des ravins
sous-Iecustres." Acad. Sci. Paris, Ct. Rend., Vol. 123. pp. 71-72, 1896.
--- Les LaCI franra;!. (Paris) 436 pp .. J898.
71. Albert Heim, "Der Schlammabsatz am Grunde des Vierwaldstattersee." NaJ"r-
[orscb. Gesell. Zi,r;ch, Vierteliabrsscb., Vol. 45, pp. J64-182. 1900.
---Geolog;e der Scbweiz. Vol. I. (Leipzig) 704 pp., 1919. See pp. 430-431.
72. E. Kleinschmidt, "Beitrage zur Limnologie des Bodensees." Ver. f. GeICh. des
Bodensees u. sein. Umge., Scb., Vol. 49, pp. 34-69, 192J. See pp. 66-68.
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS 331
way toward the bottom and that then deposition occurs everywhere in
front of the river's mouth; but that in the short winter season, when
alone, in his opinion, the river water reaches into the depths, the fine
deposits are removed along the bottom and sides of the current to give
a trench which thus owes its existence in part to upbuilding of Jateral
areas and in part to intermittent erosion of the channel bed. More re-
cently Schmidle?" repeatedly mentions temperature conditions alone
when accounting for the sinking of the Rhine water in Lake Constance,
but limits this sinking to 100 metres. He explains the deeper part of the
trench as an unfilled tectonic depression, an explanation early advanced
by Du Parc,74 and others, but rejected by most students of the Rhine and
Rhone trenches.
The foregoing citations from the literature are sufficient to show that
there has never been complete agreement as to when the bottom cur-
rents in Lakes Constance and Geneva are active, to what depths they
descend, or what factor is dominant at different seasons in causing the
Rhine and Rhone river waters to flow as currents on the bottoms of the
lakes. There is not even substantial agreement that turbidity is the domi-
nant factor during the season when the Rhine and Rhone are most
heavily charged with sediment. The fact, observed by Heim and
many others and further discussed below, that many turbid streams enter
lakes without sinking to the bottom and without producing subaqueous
trenches, is evidence of the strongest kind that factors other than turbid-
ity may be controlling as to whether river or lake will have the superior
density. Under these circumstances it is manifestly inadmissable to
ignore those factors other than turbidity which were invoked by Forel
and his followers in their efforts to explain the sublacustrine trenches of
the Rhine and Rhone deltas. Especially is this true when the origin of
these trenches is cited in support of an hypothesis of origin for sub-
marine canyons which must involve these same factors, but under condi-
tions in which certain of the factors will tend to prevent, instead of to
produce, the required bottom currents.
(c) While von Salis did believe that the Rhine trench was due solely
to erosion by a bottom current, that view was never accepted by ForeI.
In his first paper on the subject, apparently written before he had seen
73. W. Schmidle, "Die Geologie des Bodenseebeckens." Ver. f. Gescb, des Bodensees
11.sein, Umge., Scb., Vol. 50, pp. 38-55. 1922. See pp. 49, 50.
74. L. Du Pare, "Le ravin sous-lecusrre du Rhone." Arcbs. des Sci. Pbys. et Nat., 3e
per., Vol. 27, pp. 350-353, 1892.
 332 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

von Salis's article, Forel attributed the origin of the trenches partly to
erosion along the axis of the current, and partly to deposition of lateral
dykes in the stagnant water on either side. After reading von Salis's
article, in which the channel was attributed wholly to erosion, Fore!
published his second paper showing that no erosion was required to ac-
count for the observed facts, although the possibility of some erosion in
favorable localities is recognized. Still later, in his great work on Le
Leman, he seems even more firmly committed to the view that the sub-
lacustrine trenches are phenomena of deposition and not of erosion.
Daly recognizes that Forel's latest view was unfavorable to the ero-
sion hypothesis; but he does not give the evidence which led that investi-
gator to abandon even that measure of erosion he was first willing to
admit. This evidence is highly pertinent to any discussion of the turbid-
ity current hypothesis of submarine canyons which seeks support in the
phenomena of the Rhine and Rhone trenches. For, as Daly is careful to
point out, there are serious objections to the conception that differential
deposition of silt may account for submarine canyons. If Forel was cor-
rect in his belief that the sub lacustrine trenches of the Rhine and Rhone
are the product of such differential deposition, arguments in favor of
the turbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyons, based on analogy
with these trenches, lose their force .
• Forel states most fully in his "Le Leman" the considerations which im-
pelled him to abandon his earlier view that the trenches might be in part
a phenomenon of erosion. He shows that the bottom current of river
water, flowing between walls of stagnant lake water, must set up eddies
on either side in which the river water will mix with the lake water,
lose its velocity, and deposit its burden of silt. There must thus result
two parallel dykes or levees between which the bottom current of river
water will be contained. The lateral dykes are shown by soundings to
have the form of typical levees of deposition, sloping gently downward
on their outer sides, but more steeply on their inner sides, facing the cur-
rent. The dykes stand in relief on the delta surface. Furthermore, in
the case of the Rhone trench, the bottom of the so-called ravine has
about the same elevation as the general surface of the delta beyond the
limits of the dykes. As Delebecque later expressively phrased it, "If one
imagines the two dykes which limit the ravine to be removed, there
would remain only a scarcely perceptible furrow on the surface [of the
delta l" In the case of the Rhine trench the bottom of the depression is
described by Forel as sensibly below the surface of the delta.
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS 333
It thus appears that both theoretical considerations and observed facts
support Fore!' s conclusion that the sublacustrine trenches of the Rhine
and Rhone are depositional phenomena and not the product of erosion.
The levee-like form of the dykes, the fact that they stand in relief above
the general surface of the deltas, and that the bottom of the channel in
one case scarcely reaches below that surface, festify strongly to the cor-
rectness of Forel's interpretation. That the bottom of one trench should
extend sensibly below the adjacent delta surface is, as Forel recognized,
wholly compatible with the idea that the trench is entirely the product
of deferred deposition along the axis of the sublacustrine river current.
Forel's conclusion that the sublacustrine trenches of the Rhine and
Rhone are purely depositional phenomena apparently was anticipated by
Wey,75 who in r887 wrote: "While the opinion prevails among
various scientists that it [the Rhine trench] has been produced through
scouring ("auswaschung") I am of the opinion that it was formed
through the lateral deposition of sediments, and remained open because
deposition could not take place there on account of the velocity of the
water." Wey then shows that a comparison of the gradients of the trench
and of the Rhine channel just above its mouth indicates that the bottom
current, while sufficient to prevent deposition, was too weak to produce
the trench by erosion. The opinion of Weyand Forel was widely ac-
cepted, and effectively supplanted the earlier view, apparently originated
by von Salis, that the trenches were erosional phenomena.
The conclusion that the sublacustrine trenches of the Rhine and Rhone
are purely depositional phenomena becomes of vital importance when
one.comes to consider the problem of submarine canyons. In addition to
the almost insuperable objections cited by Daly against considering sub-
marine canyons as the product of differential deposition of the conti-
nental shelves, we may add three further objections: the enormous
depth and breadth of the canyons under this hypothesis call for currents
of titanic proportions of which there is no evidence; the continental
shelves do not exhibit the levee-like forms bordering the canyons which
appear beside the Rhine and Rhone trenches, and which are expectable
under the depositional hypothesis of canyon origin; submarine canyons
have their greatest depths (below the adjacent shelf surface) far out
from their heads, and not toward their inner ends as in sublacustrine
trenches formed by differential deposition.
75. J. Wey, "Die Ungestaltung der Ausmiindung des Rheins und der Bregenzer-Ach
in den Bodensee wahrend der letzten 20, bezw. 24 Jahre." Schweiz. Baaxeis., Vol. 9,
No.6, pp. 36-37, 1887.
 334 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

It should further be noted that the depositional hypothesis of Wey

and Forel implies the existence of very weak bottom currents even when
turbidity, salinity and temperature combine to make the river water flow
down the lake floor. If, as is generally admitted, the submarine canyons
trenching the continental shelves cannot be explained as phenomena of
differential deposition, then under the turbidity current hypothesis we
must invoke turbidity currents powerful enough to plunge to enormous
depths and to erode well lithified deposits, even when salinity and
temperature conditions are, as we shall see, opposed to such action.
It is not surprising, therefore, that Forel was firmly of the opinion that
there was nothing in common between the origin of the sublacustrine
trenches he studied so ably and the origin of submarine canyons.
A most significant aspect of the problem presented by the Rhine and
Rhone trenches, not covered by Daly"s discussion, is the fact that these
trenches are exceptional features. Forel recognized that other sediment-
laden streams entering the Swiss lakes did not have trenches opposite
their mouths, and that this presented a further problem requiring solu-
tion. As one element of the solution he suggested" that trenches might
be produced by differential deposition only where fine material carried
in suspension greatly exceeded the quantity of coarse debris transported
by the stream. "A heavy load of coarse gravel deposited by the inflowing
stream immediately at its entrance into the lake would not permit estab-
lishment of the rather complicated mechanism of the sublacustrine
trench." Delebccque?" and Collet" later expressed similar views. Dele-
becque thought formation of the trenches was further dependent upon
the river's having sufficient length for its coarse debris to be largely
reduced by friction to fine material capable of being held in suspension;
and (following Schloesing70) upon the lake waters, containing a quan-
tity of CaO + MgO not less than 0.06 grams per litre, in order to in-
sure rapid precipitation of suspended sediment. As noted on earlier
pages) Heim and others recognized that turbid river waters sometimes

76. F. A. Forel, Le Leman. Vol. I. (Lausanne) 543 pp., 1892. See pp. 383-384.
77. A. Delebecque, "Les ravins sous-Jacustres des fieuves glaciaires." Archs. des Sci.
Pbys. et Nat , qe per., Vol. I, pp. 485-487, 1896.
--Les Lacs irancais.(Paris) 436 pp., 1898. See pp. 62-72.
78. Leon W. Collet, Les Lacs. (Paris) 320 pp., ]925.
--"Le Charriage des alluvions dans certains cours d'eau de [a Suisse." Ann. der
Scbweizeriscbe Landesbydrogmpbie, VoL II, No. It pp. 1-192, 19J6. See p. 15I.
79. Ch. Schloesing, "Sur la precipitation des Iimous par des solutions salines tres-
etendues." Acad, Sci. Paris, Ct. Rend., Vol. 70, pp. 1345-1348, 1870.
 ORIGlN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS 335
spread over the surfaces of lakes; sometimes sink to moderate depths
and then spread laterally between upper lighter and lower heavier
masses of water; and sometimes sink to the bottoms of lakes, under
which conditions alone are sublacustrine trenches formed. Even when
sinking of heavier water below the lake surface is sufficiently sudden
to produce a violent commotion readily visible to all, sub lacustrine
trenches are rarely formed. As Forel'" pointed out, every Alpine river
charged with glacial waters which enters a lake plunges violently under
the lake waters; but sublacustrine trenches are few.
We are not here concerned with the question as to which investiga-
tors correctly diagnosed the reasons for the fact that turbid rivers do
not always form trenches when they enter lakes. Until there is sub-
stantial agreement on this point we cannot with any assurance apply
their conclusions to conditions found in the ocean. But it is important
for us to face the fact that whereas turbid rivers are numerous, sub-
aqueous trenches off their mouths are comparatively rare; and to recog-
nize that this implies balancing of diverse factors under such condi-
tions that the presence of abundant sediment in water is not controlling
as to the results produced.
One further point deserves emphasis. Forel and other investigators
have made clear the fact that where the sublacustrine trenches are found
the sinking of the heavier river water is a spectacular phenomenon
which can not escape popular attention. For nearly two thousand years,
at least since the time of Pliny who commented on the frequent oc-
currence of the phenomenon, the plunging of heavy river water under
lighter lake water has been a widely recognized curiosity of nature.v
In Lake Constance where the heavy Rhine waters plunge downward the
resulting commotion is popularly known as the Brecb, in Lake Geneva
the violent disturbance caused by the almost vertical descent of the
heavy Rhone waters is called the Bntailliere, "battle of waters." Accord-
ing to Forel the name is well deserved. "Small boats must employ cau-
tion in the violently agitated waves .... the whirlpool of waters at
the surface [is] a gigantic gyration, a veritable Maelstrom .... there
is evident suction, which can only be explained by a vertical downward
plunging of the water."",
If the supposedly weak density currents held responsible for the
80. F. A. Forel, Le Leman. Vol. 1. (Lausanne) 543 pp., 1892. See p. 388.
8!. Ibid., p. 388.
82. Ibid., p. 386
 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

production, through differential deposition, of the insignificant trenches

of the Rhine and Rhone give rise, at their inception, to such spectacular
phenomena as the Brech and the Batailliere, what should we expect of
analogous currents sufficiently vigorous and extensive to produce by
mechanical erosion the gigantic gorges cut into the margins of the con-
tinental shelves? It seems reasonable to suppose that analogous currents
would produce similar phenomena on a scale somewhat comparable to
the greater results achieved. Nothing comparable is known where
muddy rivers now enter the sea, nor where waves now beat upon muddy
sea bottoms. Is it reasonable to suppose that when continental glaciers
were more extensive than now, and sea level a few hundred feet lower,
conditions were so radically different as to produce on a grand scale
phenomena now unknown along the continental borders? Or is it net
more reasonable to believe with Forel that the explanation of sub-
marine canyons must be found in some process wholly unlike that which
produced the sublacustrine trenches of the Rhine and Rhone?
Daly closed his brief discussion of the work of Forel and his fol-
lowers with the following statement: "The whole assemblage of facts
won by the able, careful experts, Forel, Heim, Collet, and the hy-
drographers of the Swiss Government, seems strongly to favor the gen-
eral conception of the genesis of the submarine trenches now being
presented" (i.e., the conception of canyon cutting by turbidity cur-
rents). The writer would be inclined to close the present discussion
with the statement that when the facts set forth by Forel, Heim, and
their followers are more fully examined they are found to offer no
support for the turbidity current hypothesis of canyon origin. Such
support must be found, if at all, in evidence and arguments based 00
other foundation than analogy with trenches of the Rhine and Rhone
rivers in Lakes Constance and Geneva. As Forel himself pointed out
half a century ago, a satisfactory theory of origin for submarine can-
yons must be radically different from the theory advanced by him to
explain sublacustrine trenches.

rC"rrents in the Strait of Gibraltar. As a second analogy believed

l to support the turbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyon origin,
Daly cites the well-known double current at the Strait of Gibraltar.
Here the upper waters to a depth of nearly 200 metres flow from the
Atlantic into the Mediterranean basin at an average speed of fcur or
five kilometres per hour, while the lower current Bows outward to the
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS 337
Atlantic even more steadily with a velocity of the same order, which
velocity rises to seven kilometres or more when wind and tide are
favorable. "Yet the essential cause of each four-kilometer current is a
difference of density between Mediterranean and Atlantic water that is
only about 2!IOOO of either. Here, then, we have a case of a bottom
current powerful enough to move even gravel and yet caused by an
excess of density of the same order as that of sea water which is tern- J
porarily loaded with sediment."
(The difference in density between the Atlantic and Mediterranean
waters is primarily due to a difference in salinity, and the double cur-
rent at the Strait of Gibraltar is commonly referred to as a salinity cur-
rent. But one cannot safely attribute the observed normal velocities to
the observed differences in densitiJThe writer has elsewhere" described
the Gibraltar currents at some length, and here quotes from that descrip-
tion, italicizing matter especially pertinent to the present discussion:

"Evaporation is an effective agent in producing salinity currents, but in this

case the surface current must of course flow inward toward the region of
evaporation, where the water is increasing in density and the snri ace is being
lowered, while the heavier salt water will flow outward at a lower level. A
striking example of such circulation is found in the Strait of Gibraltar. The
annual evaporation from the surface of the Mediterranean amounts to a layer
of water at least 3 meters deep according to Fischer, and greatly exceeds the
influx of fresh water, with the result that the waters in the sea become denser
and the surface lower than is the case in the Atlantic Ocean. The higher and
lighter waters of the Atlantic flow into the Mediterranean as a surface stream
of marked strength, while deep-water observations prove that a strong current
of more saline water moves outward on the bottom. The great velocity of these
currents is a matter of considerable interest. Maury quotes the following from
the abstract log of Lieutenant W. G. Temple for March 8, 1855, relating to
the in flowing surface current: 'Weather fine; made l}i pt. leeway. At noon,
stood in to Almiria Bay, and anchored off the village of Roguetas. Found a
great number of vessels waiting for a chance to get to the westward, and
learned from them that at least a thousand sail are weatherbound between
this and Gibraltar. Some of them have been so for six weeks, and have even
got as far as Malaga, only to be swept back by the current. Indeed, no vessel
had been able to- get out into the Atlantic for three months past.' It would
seem from this that the surface salinity current, reinforced 110 doubt by an
83. Douglas Johnson, Shore PrOUJJes and Shoreline Development. (New York)
S84 pp., 1919. See pp. 134-135, 139·
 JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY
hydralilic current due to heaping up of urater in the Gulf of Cadiz under
westerly winds, and perhaps also to some extent by a direct wind current, had
a velocity sufficiently great to prevent sailing vessels from passing westward
to the Atlantic for months at a time. Helland-Hansen has shown that tidal
currents also affect the movement of the waters in the strait, the direction of
flow at a depth of 10 meters even being reversed from its usual inward course
for a brief period on the day of his observations. . . . .
"Investigations of the outlet of the G6ta-Elf into the Kattegat showed that
a reaction current flowed well into the bed of the river as a distinct bottom
current of salt water. A sunken object was moved up the river channel by this
current, in direct opposition to the surface flow. It was shown that this current
could not be explained as a mere salinity current due to differences of specific
gravity between the fresh and salt water. Ekman even goes further, and re-
gards the bottom currents at the outlet of the Baltic Sea and in the Strait of
Gibraltar as in large part reaction currents, Cronander, on the other hand,
would seem to doubt the existence of true reaction currents, even at the outlet
of the G6ta-Elf where Ekman made his principal study. While there are
probably reaction currents developed both at the mouth of the Baltic and at
the inlet to the Mediterranean, Ekman seems to push his theory too far and
to lose sight of the facts that salinity currents of large volume must exist under
the conditions obtaining at such straits as those in question, and that any
reaction currents found there are secondary phenomena of less importance
than the currents which give rise to them."

{It will be seen from the foregoing quotations that conditions at the
Strait of Gibraltar are far from simple. The velocities of the inflowing
and outflowing currents are not those due simply to differences in
density, but result from a combination of favorable circumstances. Even
were there no density differences between the Atlantic and Mediter-
ranean waters, there would be a strong surface hydraulic current into
the latter basin due to the lowering of the Mediterranean by excessive
evaporation; a similar inward hydraulic current due to the action of
prevailing westerly winds in piling up Atlantic waters in the Gulf of
Cadiz; and presumably reaction currents outward along the bottom
induced by the inflowing hydraulic currents. These currents would be
independent of temporary wind and tidal currents which might ac-
celerate them at some periods, retard or reverse them at other periods.
Even were the observed velocities of the Gibraltar currents due
solely or primarily to salinity differences, they could not be considered
as analogous to the turbidity currents invoked by Daly to carve canyons
 ORIGIN OF SUBMARINE CANYONS 339
on an open continental shelf. The high velocities of currents in the
Strait result from the funneling of water from vast areas through a
comparatively narrow channel between two great land masses. There
is no valid analogy between currents moviog in the open sea, and those
flowing through a narrow opening in an extended land barrier. As is
well known, tidal currents which are scarcely perceptible on the open
continental shelf acquire very high velocities when forced through
narrow inlets. The same must hold for currents of any ori~in';
(To be continued in the next issue)

Resllme
Les considerations favorables a I'hypothese que les canons sous-marins ont
ete creuses par des courants d'eau trouble, deja exposes par Daly, sont brieve-
ment resumes. Ensuite on demontre que Jes arguments presentes par cet au-
tacite sont mains forts qu'ils ne paraissent pas. Au lieu d'appuyer J'hypothese
que les ravins sous-Iacustres du lac Constance et du lac Leman ont ete
creuses par des courants d'eau d'une densite superieure a cause de leur charge
de sediments, von Salis a attribue la difference de densite a la difference de
temperature des deux eaux ; tandis que Fore! a invcque une combinaison
favorable des differences de temperature, de charge de rnatieres en solution,
et de matieres en suspension. Forel a aussi considere les ravins comme des
produits de depots differencies plutdt que comme des produits d'erosion.
II a rejete explicitement I'idee que les canons sous-marins de l'ocean ont ete
formes d'une maniere analogue aux ravins sous-Iacustres du lac Constance
et du lac Leman.
Les ravins sous-Iacustres sont des phenomenes assez rares, tandis que les
fleuves d' eau trouble debouchants dans des lacs sont nornbreux. Evidemmenr Ie
developpernent de ces ravins depend de conditions bien particulieres. Les
canons sous-marins n' ont pas les digues laterales qui caracterisent les ravins
sous-Iacustres, ni la plus grande profondeur (au-dessous de la surface
adjaccnte) pres de leur entree. On est force de conclure, avec Fcrel, que
l'hypothese satisfaisante pour expliquer les ravins sous-Iacustres ne suffit pas
pour cxpliqucr les grands canons sous-marins.
Daly a cite Ies forts courants du detroit de Gibraltar pour renforcer I'hy-
pothese que des courants rapides peuvent resulrer de faibles differences d~
densite. On montee que Ies courants du detroit resultent d'une combinaison de
conditions favorables, et que Ja velocite d'un courant dans un passage etroit
entre deux continents n'est pas comparable a la velocire des courants sur las
face de la plate-forme continentale en pleine mer.
34° JOURNAL OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

Dans Ie prochain article on discutera I'effet de la salinite sur la deposition

du limon, la lithification des sediments dans la plate-forme continentale, Ies
effets de la temperature et de la salinite sur la descente des eaux troubles dans
I'ocean, ainsi que certaines autres considerations peu favorables a I'hypothese
que les canons sous-marins ant ete creuses par des (Durants marins charges
de sediments en suspension.
Ensuite on considerera les hypotheses d'une origine a la fois souterraine
et sous-marine.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons
DOUGLAS JOHNSON
Columbia Unive·ysity

Outline of Discussion
INTRODUCTION

I. HYPOTHESES INVOLVING A TECTONIC ORIGIN.

II. HYPOTHESES INVOLVING A NON-TECTONIC ORlCIN.
1. Hypothesesof SubaerialOrigin.
A. Recently Submerged River Gorges,
B. Ancient Submerged River Gorges Re-excavated by Land-
sliding.
C. Grol/ndwater Sapping.
2. Hypotheses of Submarine Origin.
D. Submarine Landslides.
E. Submarine Currents.
3. Hypotheses of Subterranean Origin.
F. Subterranean River Outlets.
G. Foundering of Subterranean Caverns.
H. Solution along Faults by
a. Uprising Subterranean Waters.
b. Down-filtering Marine Waters.

I. Non-deposition along Fattlts due to Up-rising Subterranean

lP'aters.
J. Sapping by Submerged Artesian Springs.

(Continuation of E. Snbmerine Currents, from Vol. I, NO,4, pp. 324.34°)

Effect of Salinity on Deposition of Fine Sediment. One requirement

of the turbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyons is that sedi-
ment in large quantities must be held in suspension in sea water for
long periods of time. This is necessary to enable the currents to flow
outward over the shelf surface and far down its frontal slope without
losing the load which is assumed to give the moving water its effective
superior density. The well-known fact that fine sediment settles with
comparative rapidity in salt water appears to create a difficulty for the
hypothesis. Daly admits that the law holds for solid particles that are
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 43
clayey and exceedingly smatl, but quotes Vernon-Harcourt's conclusion
(in opposition to findings by Sidell) that river silts settle in sea water
only about ten per cent faster than in Thames River water, and cites
Wheeler's experimental results to the same effect.
To evaluate the opinions of Vernon-Harcourt and Wheeler we must
understand fully the particular problem they were studying and the
nature of their investigations. In connection with studies of the Mis-
sissippi River Sidell'" endeavored to answer the question whether the
river drops its load to form a bar or delta at its mouth solely because the
river current is checked on meeting the ocean waters, or whether sub-
stances dissolved in sea water accelerated the precipitation. It thus appears
that Sidell's attention was centered on the coarser debris deposited im-
mediately at the river's mouth and not on the material carried in sus-
pension far out to sea. His experiments, however, were such as to give a
conclusion based on behavior of the finest material carried in suspension;
for he found that Mississippi River water alone required from ten to
fourteen days to settle (apparently meaning to become clear), whereas
mixtures of such water with various salts and acids "became perfectly
limpid in from fourteen to eighteen hours." Sidell's conclusion, that the
coarser material forming the bar or delta was precipitated quickly be-
cause of substances dissolved in the sea water, did not properly follow
from his experiments.
Sidell's demonstration that fine material in suspension is precipitated
much more rapidly in salt water than in fresh was abundantly confirmed
by later investigators; but his conclusion respecting the more rapid
deposition 0'£ a bar or delta in salt water was frequently cited without
realization of the fact that his experiments dealt with one type of
sediment, his conclusion with another type. In r868 Skey" showed
that solutions of various neutral salts cause rapid clearing of water
holding clay in suspension and suggested that "the transparency of the
sea, into which is continually pouring such enormous quantities of
turbid water, may be entirely due to the presence of so much saline
matter." Schloesing86 in 1870 secured similar results with clay, and
S4. A. A. Humphreys and H. 1. Abbott, Report on the Miuiuippi River (Bureau of
Topographical Engineers, War Dept.}, rS61. Appendix A (Survey by Capt. Talcott,
1838, Rept. of Assistant W. H. Sidell, pp. 5-14). See also: Reprint with additions,
1876, pp. 495-503.
85. Wm. Skey, "Coagulation and Precipitation of Clay by Neutral Salts Generally."
Chem. News, Vol. 17, p. 16o, 1868.
86. Ch. Schloesing, "Sur la precipitation des limons par des solutions salines tres-
etendues." Acad. Sci. Paris, Ct. Rend., Vol. 70, pp. 1345-1348, 1870.
44 Journal of Geomorphology
also with the loam or silt of arable soils ("limons de terres arables"},
He did not experiment directly with silts carried by rivers, but believed
sea water should prove an active precipitant for such silts and hasten
their deposition at river mouths. Three years later Waldie" found
that during the rainy season the silt in the muddy Hugli settled very
slowly. Basing his reasoning on the results secured by Skey and Schloes-
ing, Waldie attributed this fact to excessive dilution, during heavy
rains, of the saline matter normally found in the river water. By mak-
ing good the deficiency of salines he brought about much more rapid
precipitation of the mud. In r883 Brewer" reported that clay from the
Niobrara formation when added to pure water would not settle corn-
pletely in thirty months; but that a like portion in salt water would
settle completely in thirty minutes. Experiments with muddy waters
of the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers gave similar results, and Brewer
concluded that when muddy river waters enter the sea "practically it is
the degree of saltness which controls the deposition." Further experi-
ments'" with fine soils and pulverized rock as well as with true clays,
confirmed Brewer's earlier conclusions. In 1886 Carl Barus"? reported
the results of experiments with fine solid particles of tripoli, red bolus,
white bolus, talc and bone ash. He found that all were precipitated
more rapidly as the proportion of salt in the water was increased, and
that the differences were readily apparent to the eye. Certain acids and
alkalies are also effective precipitants. According to Barus and Schnei-
der" "one molecule of HCl in ten thousand up to fifty thousand
molecules of water is still clearly effective." 'J. Joly" in 1900 reported
that the precipitating effects of salt in solution were marked in experi-
ments with finely powdered carbon, kaolin, quartz, obsidian, and basalt
It thus appears that by 1900 different investigators had firmly

87. D. Waldie, "On the Muddy Water of the Hugh during the Rainy Season with Refer-
ence to Its Purification and to the Calcutta Water-Supply." Proc. Asia. Soc. Beng., Vol.
42, pp. 175·178, 1873, (abstract). JOUT. Asia. Soc. Beng., Vol. 42, Part II, pp. 210-
226, 1873.
88. Wm. H. Brewer, "On the Subsidence of Particles in Liquids." Nat. Acad. Sri.
Mon., Vol. 2, pp. 165-175, 1883.
89. Wm. H. Brewer, "On the Suspension and Sedimentation of Clays." Amer. [out,
Sci., Vol. 29, pp. 1-5, 188s.
90. Carl Barus, "Subsidence of Fine Solid Particles in Liquids." U. S. Geol. SurlJ.,
Bull. 36, pp. II-40, 1886.
91. C. Barus and E. A. Schneider, "Uber die Natur der kolloidalen Losungen." Zeit.
Phys. Cbem., Vol. 8, pp. 278-298, 1891.
92. J. ]oly, "On the Inne~ Mechanism of Sedimentation." Roy. Dublin Soc. Proc., Vol.
9. pp. 325-332, 1900.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 45
establishedthe fact that very fine solid particles of many kinds of earthy
materials (including clay, various fine river silts, silt of arable soils,
tripoli, talc, quartz, obsidian, basalt, and other rocks) are precipitated
muchmore quickly in salt water than in fresh water. They had shown,
further, that the rapidity of precipitation increases with increase of
salinity but not in the same proportion. Several of these investigators,
and particularly many geologists not cited here, had without sufficient
warrant invoked the results of these investigations to explain or help
explain the deposition of bars and deltas at the mouths of rivers.
It was this last explanation against which Vernon-Harcourt in 1900

and Wheeler in "90" directed their attacks. In so doing they, like those
whoseviews they opposed, failed to make a sufficiently clear distinction
between the various types of debris brought out by large and relatively
sluggish muddy rivers to be deposited in the ocean: (a) Coarse sand
and gravel moved along the stream bed largely by traction, and quickly
dropped when the velocity of the current is checked, thus helping to
form bars or deltas at the river's mouth. Samples of the river's water,
even when taken from the lower part of the current, will contain little
if any of this material. (b) Fine sand and relatively coarse silt, moved
partly by traction and partly by saltation, but held in suspension only
temporarily where eddying currents are active. While capable of being
carried farther than coarse sand and gravel, this material is deposited
with relative rapidity when the river's current is checked. Consequently
it is the chief constituent of large deltas built by muddy rivers. Samples
of the river's water taken near the surface of the stream will contain
little if any of this material; but samples taken close to the stream bed
will contain much of it. (c) Fine silt carried mostly in suspension. This
material tends to remain in suspension so long as the river is in motion,
and settles very slowly even when the river water becomes stagnant. As
a result it is in large part carried past the delta, and scores or even
hundreds of miles out to sea whenever the river water floats, as it
usually does, on the heavier salt water of the ocean. Samples of the river
water, even when taken at the surface of the stream, will contain con-
siderable quantities of this material. (d) Extremely fine particles of
clay and possibly other varieties of rock flour, carried in suspension, and
capable of remaining in suspension in completely stagnant river water
for days, months, or even years. Like the fine silt, this material is car-
ried far out to sea, and samples taken from any part of the stream will
contain appreciable quantities of it.
46 Tournai of Geomorphology

Of these four classes of material the first two settle so quickly in

fresh water that addition of salts to the water cannot appreciably in-
crease the rate of their precipitation. It is even conceivable that their
precipitation might, under favorable circumstances, be slightly retarded,
the cause" of the phenomenon described by Sidell, Skey, Schloesing
and their followers not operating effectively in the case of coarse debris,
and the retarding effect of more dense saline water coming into play,
It is materials of the two categories last mentioned above (c and d) that
are supposed to remain long suspended in pure water, but to be quickly
precipitated in salt water.
H with these fundamental facts clearly in mind we examine the work
of Vernon-Harcourt" and Wheeler, we find that the results obtained by
them, properly interpreted, do not invalidate the conclusion reached
by earlier investigators to the effect that the presence of soluble salts
in water greatly accelerates the precipitation of fine silt and other rna-
terial carried in suspension. Vernon-Harcourt's experiments were di-
rected to proving that bars and deltas at river mouths are due to check-
ing of the river's current, and not to the action of sea water. In this
he was doubtless substantially correct, for bars and deltas consist largely
of materials too coarse to be affected by the presence of salts in water,
It is vitally important to note that most of Vernon-Harcourt's samples,
in part "deltaic silts," were taken from the bottoms of rivers where
the coarser silt, sand, and other coarse debris is most abundant. Only
one sample of truly suspended material was studied: mud from the
Nile deposited in bottles filled near the surface of the river. And in
this case the sediment was precipitated within 13 minutes in sea water,
but required 3 days to settle in distilled water, which even then retained
a measure of turbidity. Vernon-Harcourt was not primarily interested
in material carried in suspension, and remarked that the fine light
matter carried in suspension in the upper layers of river water is not
representative of the "silt" carried down by a river and eventually dis-
charged into the sea. Elsewhere he states that with the exception of the
93. The cause of the more rapid precipitation of fine sediment in saline waters is
debated at length in some of the works cited, and in other easily accessible literature;
but is not directly concerned in the present problem.
94. 1. F. Vernon-Harcourt, "Experimental Investigations on the Action of Sea \'(fater
in Accelerating the Deposit of River Silt and the Formation of Deltas." Mill. of Proc.Lnst.
Cio. Eng., Vol. 142, pp. 272-287, 1900.
W. H. Wheeler, "The Settlement of Solid Matter in Fresh and Salt Water." Nature,
Vol. 64, pp. 181-182, 1901.
---'The Sea Coast. (London) 361 pp., 1902. See pp. 62-65.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 47
Nile silt, there was no sign of that great difference in the rate of settle-
ment of the samples of silt as a whole in sea water and in fresh water
recorded by Me. Sidell, "unless mere turbidity is taken into account."
For Vernon-Harcourt, studying the origin of delta deposition, material
in suspension and turbidity were properly negligible matters; and the
study of deltaic deposits and bottom load of rivers was pertinent. But
students of "suspension currents" or "turbidity currents" must not make
the mistake of applying Vernon-Harcourt's conclusions to their problem.
In Vernon-Harcourt's experiments the river water employed was that
of the Thames, but as this investigator points out, Thames water con-
tains calcium bicarbonate and calcium sulphate in solution, both of
which salts are active precipitants for fine sediment. As Vernon-Har-
court himself tells us: "These results furnish an explanation of the cause
of silt settling in Thames water, with its small quantities of salts in
solution, only a little more slowly than in sea water with its much larger
proportion of salts in solution; for the chief salts in solution in Thames
water are calcium bi-carbonate and calcium sulphate, very weak solutions
of which have more influence in promoting the deposit of silt than
the stronger solutions of the other salts experimented with, except
potassium chloride."
Wheeler experimented with material deposited by rivers in flood
plains and by brackish and salt water currents in estuaries and salt
marshes, rather than with material being carried in suspension by rivers.
As Allen" acutely pointed out, Wheeler was dealing with material
which had already undergone precipitation, and as he apparently took
no precaution to remove metallic salts which might have caused pre-
cipitation the first time, these may have remained and prevented the
particles from going into suspension when the experiments were made.
For this reason Wheeler's results are not applicable to the problem of
suspension or turbidity currents, although this investigator properly
rejected Sidell's conclusion that precipitation by salt water was an im-
portant factor in bar and delta formation. That Wheeler seriously mis-
understood some phases of the problem with which he was dealing is
further indicated by his statement that "the very great distance over
which solid matter brought down by rivers remains in suspension after
reaching the sea, extending from six miles at the mouth of the Rhone

95. H. S. Allen, "The Settlement of Solid Matter in Fresh and Salt Water." Nature,
Vol. 64, pp. 279-280, 1901.
48 Journal of Geomorphology

to thirty-five from the outlet of the Nile, up to 300 miles over which
the sea water is stated to be discoloured by the effluent of the Amazon.
appears to indicate that salt water is capable of retaining solid matter
in suspension for a longer time than fresh water." Apparently Wheeler
was not familiar with the phenomenon of muddy river water floating
for vast distances over the heavier salt water of the sea.
We conclude that salts in solution probably playa negligible role in
causing deposition of the materials found in bars and deltas at the
mouths of rivers entering the sea, partly because such salts cannot greatly
accelerate the deposition, rapid in any case, of relatively coarse silt and
still coarser material transported by large rivers, and partly because
the lighter fresh river water does not readily mix effectively with the
heavier sea water; but that salts in solution are highly effective in pre-
cipitating fine silt and other fine material carried in suspension, when the
salt solutions actually come in contact with such materials.
Since material of the first category [subdivided into (a) and (b) of
the four types discussed on an earlier page} is quickly dropped close
to shore when brought by rivers, and quickly redeposited when stirred
up by wave agitation on the sea bottom, it is difficult to see how it can
figure prominently as a factor in developing turbidity currents. And
since material of the second category [subdivided into types (c) and
(d) on an earlier page} is rapidly precipitated in the presence of soluble
salts, and with difficulty taken into suspension again in the presence of
such salts, it is hard to see how it can load sea water to a sufficient extent
and for a sufficient time to produce turbidity currents' of appreciable
importance on the floor of the sea. The existence of fine sediment on
outer portions of the continental shelf and down its frontal slope is
eloquent testimony to the absence of effective currents of this type at the
present time, and casts doubt on their existence in the Glacial epoch.

Degree of Lithification of Shelf Sediments. As demonstrated on earlier

pages, under the turbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyon
origin, currents of this type cannot be assigned the lesser task of prevent· I
iog deposition along their lines of flow while the continental shelves
were built up on either side; they must be supposed to have eroded the
canyons after the shelves of pre-Pleistocene deposits had been formed. It
thus becomes important to enquire into the degree of lithification of
sediments composing the shelves.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 49

Daly" suggests that the degree of lithification of the shelf sediments

may not be very great, and quotes Stetson to the effect that" most of the
material" of the [canyon] walls is not hardened into rock in the ordi-
nary sense of that term," and that "the steepness of the walls at Georges
Bank need imply rigidity of the material in general no greater than that
illustrated in the visible day of the Island of Martha's Vineyard, where
the clay, like typical loess, is tenacious enough to stand in nearly vertical
cliffs and yet offers little resistance to attack by running water." Daly
also raises questions as to when the lithification was accomplished, and
as to whether it may be concretionary and local.
As to the two questions last quoted: manifestly it is not easy to date
with certainty the lithification of sediments in the submerged continental
shelves. But no hypothesis of canyon origin can command confidence
which depends upon the precarious assumption that Cretaceous and
Tertiary sediments escaped lithification throughout the long period from
their deposition to Glacial time, only to undergo lithification after the
canyons were cut. Since all three canyons examined by Stetson on
Georges Bank had lithified sediments in their walls, a canyon further
south revealed similar conditions, and "rock" has been reported from
canyon walls in other regions, any assumption that lithification is con-
cretionary in nature or local in extent must remain wholly gratuitous
until proofs to this effect are forthcoming. The more reasonable assump-
tion is that the materials repeatedly dredged from different canyon walls
are fairly representative of shelf sediments in the areas examined.
This brings us to consideration of the degree of lithification indicated
by materials thus far recovered from the canyon walls. Comparison with
the clays of Martha's Vineyard seems of doubtful value. If the clays
referred to by Daly are those exposed in the steep and picturesque cliffs
of the classic Gay Head locality, it may be noted that they are intimately
associated with layers of "puddingstone or conglomerate," "greensand
marl much altered above by iron solutions," "coarse brown sand partly
indurated into sandrock," "a heavy stratum of disintegrated rock in the
condition of moderately loose sand," "black layers of lignite," "osseous
conglomerate," "coarse sand .... sometimes indurated into a moder-
ately coherent sandstone," and other beds which have helped to give a
greater degree of rigidity to the section than is implied in the term

96. R. A. Daly, "Origin of Submarine 'Canyons:" Amer, JOM. Sci., Vol. 31, pp. 401-
,po, 1936.
97. All italics are by the present writer.
50 Journal of Geomorphology
"clays" commonly assigned to the mass as a whole. It will be noted,
also that there is evidence of the disintegration of beds formerly more
resistant than now; and Uhler states that the beds "have been softened
by atmospheric agencies."9s Similar softening on exposure is reported
by Shaler when describing the near-by Weyquosque clay beds. "Where
the Weyquosque beds on Martha's Vineyard have been freshly bared by
the frequent landslips which occur there the material is so firm that an
ordinary pick can not well be driven into it at one stroke to the depth of
more than one or two inches. After exposure to the action of the atmos-
phere the material becomes relatively very soft."?"
The behavior of sediments on land which are close to the surface and
free from a heavy overburden, which are subjected to mechanical dis-
integration by variations in temperature, by frost action, by alternate
wetting and drying, and by other physical changes, and which are sub-
jected to erosion by swiftly flowing concentrated streams of fresh water,
can afford no clue to the behavior of sediments encountered by sub-
marine currents cutting deeply into a submerged continental shelf. A
safer procedure is to ascertain the nature of the sediments as dredged
from submarine canyon walls, and to judge as best we can whether ma-
terials of their character will yield readily to such currents as may reason·
ably be supposed to exist near the shelf margins.
Fortunately the investigations of Stetson and others are giving us a
rapidly increasing amount of data on this point. In reporting the results
of a dredging trip (r934) to the canyons cut in Georges Bank Stetson'?"
states that in places the slope of the canyon walls "is considerably above
the angle of repose for unconsolidated material, which indicates that
these walls consist of rock."'Ol Dredging brought up from one canyon

98. Charles Lyell, "On the Tertiary Strata of the Island of Martha's Vineyard in Massa-
chusetts." Geol. Soc. Lond., Proc., VoL 4, pp. 31-33, 1843.
P. R. Uhler, "A Study of Gay Head, Martha's Vineyard." 1I1af)'!and Acad. Sci. Trans.,
Vol. I, pp. 204-212, 1892.
--"Gay Head." Sci., Vol. 20, pp. 176'177, 1892.
---"Observations on the Cretaceous at Gay Head." Sci., Vol. 20, pp. 373-374,
1892.
99. N. S. Shaler, J. B. Woodworth, and C. F. Marbut, "Glacial Brick Clays of Rhode-
Island and Southeastern Massachusetts." US. Geol. Snro., s-nb Ann. Rept., Part I, pp.
957-10°4,1896.
100. H. C. Stetson, "Bed-Rock from the Continental Margin on Georges Bank." Amer.
Geo pbss. Union, Trans. i Stb Ann . .Meet., Part I, pp. 226-228, 1935.
---"GeoIogy and Paleontology of the Georges Bank Canyons." Part I. Geology.
Bull. Geot. Soc. Am., Vol. 47, pp. 339-366, 1936.
101. All italics in these quotations are by the present writer.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons
wall "a fairly well indurated sandstone" of upper Cretaceous agel some
fragments of which "showed weathered surfaces on all sides and were
obviously talus lying at the base of the cliff; other pieces showed freshly
broken faces." From another canyon wall" a friahle glauconitic sand-
stone" of Navarro age was secured, and from a third "an impure
glauconitic sandstone, late Tertiary in age." The walls of three canyons
yielded a "hard green silt" or "indurated green silt" believed to be of
late Tertiary age which "twice anchored the dredge firmly enough to
check the ship's headway," and which "came up in large angular chunks,
and was sufficie1ltly compact and firm so that neither the washing it reo
ceivedon the trip to the surface, nor the strong compression in the dredge
while towing, obliterated the freshly broken appearance of some of the
faces." Stetson speaks of "the upper Cretaceous and the late Tertiary
rocks," and says "there can be no question but that the fossiliferous rock
wasfound in place." Daly!02 quotes Stetson as stating verbally that "much
lessthan half of the wall of any Georges Bank trench is endowed with the
strength of hard rock, the lithified material occurring in individual layers
separated by soft layers."
A later dredging expedition (r935) to the outer part of the Hudson
submarine canyon, to two canyons cutting the shelf margin off the Dela-
ware coast, and to one off Maryland, showed Stetson 103 that "in many
places the slope of the walls is apparently above the angle of repose of
unconsolidated material." Surface deposits were unconsolidated, but
more compact clay and other material was dredged from the steep can-
yon walls. "No surface-deposits could ever attain the degree of compac-
tion displayed here. In a tow from the southernmost valley the dredge
came up full of fragments of a coarse-grained, highly indurated sand-
s/one which unfortunately was un fossiliferous. These were obviously
talus blocks, as they were weathered on all sides." In 1936 during fur-
ther dredging in the submarine canyons of Georges Bank "two new
hard sandstone formations were encountered in the canyon walls," one
of these being identified as Peedee (upper Cretaceous) in agel04 These
last observations, and possibly those of the preceding swnmer, were

102. R. A. Daly. "Origin of Submarine ·Canyons.''' Amer. [our, Sci., Vol. 31, pp. 401-
-1-20,1936. See p. 418.
103. H. C. Stetson, "Dredge-Samples from the Submarine Canyons between the Hud-
SOn Gorge and Chesapeake Bay:' Amer. Geopbys. Union, Trani. t rtb Ann. Meet., pp.
223-225. ]936.
104. H. C. Stetson, "Further Investigations of the Submarine Valleys of Georges Bank."
Geol, Soc. Amer., Proc, for 1936, p. 105. ]937.
 Journal of Geomorphology

made by Stetson subsequent to the verbal observations quoted by Daly

and cited on an earlier page.
Taken altogether the degree of lithification described by Stetson
appears highly unfavorable to the hypothesis of canyon cutting by
turbidity currents operating at the margin of the continental shelf.
Shepard's report'·' that twelve out of fifteen canyons examined by him
off the coast of California "have definitely rocky material on the walls"
is in accord with Stetson's findings. Thus the question is not whether
turbidity currents during the Pleistocene were strong enough to erode
"loose sand and mud." It is rather whether they were strong enough to
erode sandstone and possibly other material "endowed with the strength
of hard rock," even if such hard rock forms much less than half tbe
canyon walls and occurs in individual beds separated by "indurated
silt" and possibly by other material less resistant to erosion. To such a
question one must hesitate to give an affirmative answer.
Having shown that evidence offered in favor of the turbidity current
hypothesis of canyon origin is less convincing than has been believed,
we turn to other considerations which appear to militate against accept-
ance of this hypothesis.

Effects of Salinity and Tem perature on Turbidity Currents in the Ocean.

Due to the admixture of fresh water coming from the land, sea water in
the zone of wave agitation is less saline and therefore lighter than sea
water deeper down. Thus salinity conditions in the ocean, unlike those
in the Swiss lakes previously discussed, are opposed to the operation of
turbidity currents. It is true that the rivers of fresh water also bring vast
quantities of sediment into the sea, and Daly appeals to them as one
source of the material supposed to create turbidity currents on the con
tinental shelves. But abundant observations indicate that where muddy
river water enters the sea the material in suspension does not overcome
the effects of salinity differences which tend to keep the fresh water on
the surface, and that the muddy river water does not contribute effectively
toward rendering the underlying sea water turbid. Instead of sinking,
the highly turbid river waters float for vast distances over the more
saline, denser sea water below, sometimes extending seaward beyond
the margins of the continental shelf. Thus the muddy waters of the Nile,
Ganges, Brahmaputra, and other rivers float seaward 40 to 100 miles

lOS. F. P. Shepard, "Daly's Submarine Canyon Hypothesis." Amer. J01l1". S6., Vol. 31
pp. 369-379, 1937· See p. 371.
 Origin of Submarine Can)'onj 53
from the coastl9• The turbid waters of the Amazon spread eastward 200
miles, to and beyond the shelf margin.'9' The sediment-laden waters of
the Mississippi, "floating over the heavier salt water, spread out into
broad superficial sheets or layers, which the keels of vessels plough
through, turning up a furrow of clear blue [salt] water."I08 For many
miles off the mouth of the Congo "the water has a dark reddish-yellow
colour, but this forms only a thin layer, as the ship's propellor turns up
the colourless salt water beneath."19' Sailing Directions for this region,
issued by the U. S. Hydrographic Office"' point out that "a vessel is at
times almost unmanageable" because a difference in current direction of
the superficial muddy fresh water and the underlying clear salt water
interferes with steering.
Whether the salt water could become charged with sediment settling
from a muddy layer of overlying river water in sufficient quantity to
initiate a descending current of turbid sea water, seems highly doubtful.
Very fine material settles far more rapidly in salt than in fresh water,
while coarser silt will not remain long suspended in either when the
waters move slowly and without turbulence. To what extent lighter land
waters are mingled with heavier sea water by wave agitation, and the
turbidity of the one thus communicated to the other, is not known, In
any case the mixed waters may, despite their turbidity, be lighter than
the more saline sea water below. The fact that clear sea water is found
immediately helow turbid fresh water far off the mouths of large muddy
rivers seems to indicate that a river' 5 turbidity is not communicated to the
sea water to any great extent. Near the mouth of a river where material
of moderate coarseness is quickly precipitated and where wave turbu-
ence in shallow water is at a maxirnwn, there may be some mixing. But
in these localities it is common to find reaction currents combined with

106. Charles Lyell, Principle; of Geology, Vol. I, nth ed. (London) 65'5 pp., 1875·
See pp. 425-427. 457. 472-474.
107. Lippincott's Gazetteer of the World. Ed. by Angelo and Louis Heilprin. (Phila-
delphia) 2106 pp .. 193I. See p. 57.
lOS. Charles Lyell, A Second Visit to the United States of NOI'th America, Vol. II.
(London) 385 pp., r849. See p. IH·
---Principles of Geology, Vol. I, r ath ed. (London) 655 pp., 1875· See pp.
425-427.457.472-474.
109. J. Y. Buchanan, "On the Land Slopes Separating Continents and Ocean Basins.
Especially Those on the West Coast of Africa." Scot. Geog. Mag., Vol. 3, PP· 217-238.
1887. See p- 223.
110. Sailing Directions for the Southwest Coast of Airica from Cape Pal-mas to Cape
of Good Hope. 3d ed. U. S. Hydrographic Office, No. 105, 442 pp., 1932· See pp. 260-
261.
54 J onrnal of Geomor photo gy
salinity currents flowing toward the river's mouth along the bottorn.!"
a fact seemingly inconsistent with the development of seaward-moving
density currents at the place most favorable to them.
Unlike the Rhine and Rhone waters entering the Swiss lakes, sea
water in the zone of wave action on those continental shelves cut by
submarine canyons is always warmer than the deeper ocean waters. This
gives the surface waters a further deficiency in density which must mili-
tate against their assumed descent into the depths. Even could turbidity
overbalance at the surface the lightness due to lower salinity and higher
temperature, and so start the turbid waters on their way down the sub-
marine slope, it is difficult to see how such movement could fail to be
quickly checked by the increasing salinity and lower temperatures en-
countered in depth, by the loss of turbidity due to deposition of load, and
by frictional resistance against the shelf slope below and the wall of
relatively stagnant water above.

Collateral Considerations. If sediment-laden water flows down the

gently sloping surface of the continental shelf with sufficient velocity
to arrive at the outer margin still so heavily charged as to be capable of
descending the steep scarp to great depths with canyon-rutting power,
one is led to ask whether there would be opportunity for fine sediment
to accumulate on the shelf, and so be available for agitation by the waves
of a glacially lowered sea. Would not a process supposedly so effective
keep the shelf swept clean of fine material? If, on the other hand, we
asswne very slow movement down the surface of the shelf, with conse-
quent opportunity for deposition of fine sediment en route, can we
reasonably suppose that when the lightened waters reach the shelf mar-
gin they will still be so heavily charged with debris as to descend the
steep scarp for thousands of feet into oceanic waters increasingly dense,
and in so doing to develop velocities of canyon-cutting power? Such are
the two horns of the dilemma presented by the basic assumptions of the
turbidity current hypothesis. Between those horns one is forced to seek
a tenable position by assuming sufficient deposition to keep a supply of
fine sediment on the outer borders of the shelf during pre-Glacial and
Interglacial times; yet sufficient velocity for sediment-laden waters to

111. ]. Y. Buchanan, "On the Land Slopes Separating Continents and Ocean Basins,
Especially Those on the West Coast of Africa." Scot, Geog. Mag., VoL 3, pp. 217-238,
1887. See p. 223.
Douglas Johnson, Shore Processes and Shoreline Development. (New York) 584
pp., 1919. See p. 138.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 55
travel the shorter distance (because of lowered sea level) to the shelf
margin during Glacial time and arrive there still heavy enough to plunge
effectively into the deeps. The dilemma must be faced, together with the
fact that its existence, and the assumptions necessary to avoid its two
horns, inevitably weaken confidence in the turbidity current hypothesis
of canyon origin.
Even if we assume that effective densities can be developed in the
manner postulated, it seems more difficult to account for segregation of
the resulting sheet of moving water into restricted threads of swifter
flow than in the case of some other types of submarine currents. Wave
attack on the surface of the nearly flat shelf would be distributed with ex-
ceptional uniformity along the coast. Appeal has been made to segrega-
tion by initial inequalities on the shelf surface due to inequalities of
deposition when the shelf was formed. But such inequalities are numer-
ous and of small magnitude, and give no such basis for assuming con-
centrated currents at widely spaced intervals as may be appealed to
where reaction currents, salinity density currents, temperature density
currents, tidal currents, and certain other types of currents are supposed
to develop opposite widely separated river mouths, tidal inlets, or coastal
embayments.
The magnitude of submarine canyons calls for a continuing process,
enduring at least for long periods of time; whereas it is difficult to see
how any hypothesis of turbidity currents can meet this requirement.
Rivers constantly bring material in suspension to the sea, but we have
seen that they are not effective in loading sea water with sediment. Testi-
mony is abundant and consistent to the effect that where muddy river
water floats over the heavier water of the ocean, the latter is found to be
clear immediately below the turbid surface film. We can only conclude
that sediment sinking from the muddy surface layer of fresh water is so
quickly precipitated when it comes in contact with the salt water that
the latter remains clear. Under these conditions it is doubtful whether
even the bottom layer of sea water could become effectively loaded. In
any case there is no satisfactory evidence that currents formed in this
way are operating today, despite the continuing contributions of muddy
water £lowing into the oceans.
Recognizing that present hydrographic conditions cannot explain the
canyons, Daly placed great weight on the effect of storm waves beating
upon the continental shelf during the lowered sea level of Glacial time.
 Journal of Geomorphology
It is difficult, however, to see how the process here invoked can con-
tinue for any great length of time. Even if we assume that sedimentation
during pre-Glacial and Interglacial times covered the outer part of the
shelf with a greater proportion of fine silt than we find there today, and
further assume the necessary competence of the currents, we face the
difficulty of preserving the supply for the long period of time required
to cut the deeper canyons. Waves are extremely effective in sorting sedi-
ment, and if the finer material is readily taken into suspension and swept
over the shelf margin by turbidity currents, it would seem that the sup-
ply should quickly be exhausted. The rising and falling sea level would
repeatedly shift the zone of maximum wave activity over a broad ex-
panse of shelf; but only a part of this expanse, the outer and deeper
parts, would have accumulated the finest material suitable for loading
sea water effectively. It is, of course, difficult to evaluate the quantities
of time and sediment involved in the equation, and conclusions must
remain largely a matter of personal judgment. But the apparent difficulty
of making the machinery of the turbidity current hypothesis operate
continuously over significant periods of geologic time cannot be ignored.

Flow of Turbid lVater Through Reservoirs. Since the preceding discus-

sion of turbidity currents was written, prominence has been given to the
fact that turbid water sometimes flows from a reservoir, the upper waters
of which remain clear, appearing as a muddy discharge through an
outlet at or near the base of the dam. lIZ Support has been sought in this
112. See, for example, 1. R. Fiock, "Records of Silt Carried by the Rio Grande and Its
Accumulation in Elephant Butte Reservoir." Amer. Geophys. Union, Trans. s ytb Ann.
Meei., pp. 468-473, 1934.
H. M. Eakin, "Silting of Reservoirs." U.S. Dept. Agri., Tech. Bull. 524, pp. 1-127, 1936.
N. C. Grover and C. $. Howard, "The Passage of Turbid Water Through Lake Mead."
Amer. Soc. Cio. Bngs., Procs., Vol. 63, pp. 643-655, 1937.
O. A. Faris and others, "Discussion of 'The Passage of Turbid Water Through Lake
Mead.''' Amer. Soc. Cio. Engs., Procs., VoL 63, pp. 1208-1214, 1937.
W. P. Creager, the same, pp. 14°5-14°7.
D. M. Forester, the same, pp. 1602-1603.
]. C. Stevens, the same, pp. 1810-1812.
R. E. Redden, the same, Vol. 64, pp. 781-784, 1938.
H. N. Eaton, "Report of the Committee on Density Currents." Nat. Res. Coun., Ann.
Rept, Dio. Geol. and Geog., 1936-1937, Appendix M, 3 pp., 1937.
"Report of the Subcommittee on Application of Hydrodynamics to Problems of Geol-
ogy." Nat. Res. Coun., Retu. lmerdio. Comm. on Borderland Fields, 1937, pp. 34-37, 1938.
H. N. Eaton, "Progress-Report of the National Research Council Interdivisional Com-
mittee on Density-Currents." Amer. Geophys. Union, Trans. 19Jh Ann. Meet., Part I, pp.
387-392, 1938.
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 57

phenomenon for the turbidity current hypothesis of submarine canyon

origin. The full significance of the fact is not yet apparent, and will not
be known until highly important investigations now in progress are com-
pleted. Reference to this phase of the turbidity current hypothesis with
further discussion of possible velocity of such currents is presented by
P. H. Kuenen.P"
The hydraulic conditions existing in reservoirs, from which water is
escaping through outlets at a significant distance below the surface, are
not necessarily comparable with those existing in a lake with a surface
outlet, or in the ocean with no outlet. The nature of the currents existing
in such reservoirs, and their effect upon the deposition of fine sediment
(which may settle slowly in any case and never completely so long as
there is even slight movement) remains to be determined. The possible
effect of narrows, such as exist above Boulder Dam, in accelerating cur-
rents and causing turbidity may deserve study. One must further exclude
the possibility that sediment slowly settling, as the water advances
through the reservoir, leaves the surface portions clear but does not all
reach the bottom before the outlet is attained. If this occurs, it proves
the slowness with which sediment is deposited in slightly moving fresh
water, rather than the vigorous flow of a restricted density current close
to the bottom. These are but a few of many matters on which full in-
formation is prerequisite to any final opinion as to the real significance
of the occasional issuing of turbid water from low reservoir outlets.
Studies now in progress at Boulder Dam will doubtless throw valuable
light on the whole question.
Grover and Howard, in discussing the outflow of turbid water from
Lake Mead, state the problem in the following terms: "As the discharge
of turbid water from a reservoir does not occur at all times when such
water is flowing into it, there must- be certain conditions of the inflowing
water related to its specific gravity, viscosity, temperature, size, and de-
gree of dispersion of the silt particles (or other physical qualities and
combinations of them), that are prerequisite to such discharge. Although
such discharges have been mentioned occasionally in engineering litera-
ture, the conditions under which they occur have not, as far as the writers
are informed, been thoroughly described or studied.l'F'" O. A. Faris be-
113. P. H. Koenen, "Density Currents in Connection with the Problem of Submarine
Canyons." Geol. Mag., Vol. ]5, pp. 241-249, 1938. See also same author, "Onderzee-
sche Canyons:' TiidIChrijt Kon, Ned. Aardrijkskundig Genootschap Amsterdam, ae
Reeks. DI. LV, pp. 861-876, 1938.
114. Loc. cit. p. 664.
 Journal of Geomorphology
lieves that the flows result from the disturbance of silt "which was vir-
tually in place; that is, it was no longer in suspension, but had settled to
the reservoir bottom soon after entering the slack-water and formed a
'flocculent' or 'honeycomb' structure of a consistency, ranging from
thick cream to heavy molasses." 115 The importance of flocculation in
bringing about conditions essential to the flow of muddy water through
reservoirs is stressed by a number of writers. In his report of the Corn-
mittee on Density Currents of May I, '937, Eaton states that "the
precise physical conditions that determine the occurrence and mainte-
nance of such currents are not yet known. One of the important func-
tions of this committee should be to decide what data are pertinent to
the solution of the problem and to encourage the securing of these data
at as many localities as possible. Density currents extending the entire
length of a reservoir apparently occur at infrequent intervals; hence it
may take years to obtain a satisfactory knowledge of them."
Pending the results of further study of the phenomenon of turbidity
currents in reservoirs, judgment on the significance of the phenomenon
as related to the problem of submarine canyons must be suspended.

Conclusion. We conclude our survey of the turbidity current hypothesis

of submarine canyon origin with the realization that there are man}'
obstacles, some of them of truly formidable proportions, in the way of
its acceptance. As a working hypothesis it has repeatedly received atten·
tion during the last half century. The theoretical objections urged
against it. however formidable. do not justify us in removing it from
the group of hypotheses deserving further study. It may in time find
place, if not as the sole explanation of submarine canyons, perhaps as
one factor in their creation, or at least in their preservation from oblitera-
tion by filling. But in the present limits of our knowledge the hypothesis
appears of such doubtful validity that one is impelled to seek elsewhere
a more satisfactory explanation of the great trenches found beneath the
sea. Having failed to discover a wholly convincing explanation in sub·
aerial and submarine processes, we turn to the remaining realm, the sub-
terranean regions, to inquire whether within the solid earth, particularly
within those parts projecting under the sea, there are processes in opera-
tion which offer a possible solution of the submarine canyon problem.
l l y. Loe. cit. p. ]208.

(To be continued)
 Origin of Submarine Canyons 59
Resl/me
L'Irypothese que les grands canons sous-marins ant ete creuses par des
(DUrants de fond produits par la densite superieure des eaux chargees de
ediment, exige qu'une grande quantite de sediment reste en suspension dans
l'eau de la mer pour des periodes assez longues. Mais suivant I'opinion Ia
plus repandue des sediments sont precipites avec une rapidite remarquable dans
leseaux salines. Contre cette opinion Daly a cite les observations de Vernon-
Harcourt et de Wheeler a I'effet contraire.
Pour resoudre cette question il faut (l) resumer quelques experiences
dassiqnes sur I'influence des sels differenrs en solution sur la rapidite de
precipitation de sediment; et aussi (2) faire attention a la question partiruliere
examinee par Vernon-Harcourt et par Wheeler, et a Ia nature precise de leurs
experiences. L'examen du premier point dernontre que Ies recherches de plu-
sieurs savants ont bien etabli Je fait que dans des eaux salines, cornrne celles de
Iocean, Ies sediments fins en suspension sont precipites assez vite,-beaucoup
plusvite que dans des eaux douces. L'examen du second point demontre que
Vernon-Harcourt et Wheeler ont tous les deux etudie une question bien dif-
rerente : c'est-a-dire, si les matieres des barres et des deltas aux bouches des
rivieres sent precipitees a cause des seIs dans I'eau de Ia mer, au plutot a
cause de I'arret des courants des rivieres. Ils ont conclu, avec raison, que
l'iufiuence des sels dans la precipitation des matieres des barres et des deltas
est peu importante. L'objet de leurs etudes, et les methodes employees dans
leurs experiences, sont de tel caracrere que leurs resultats, bien interpretes,
n'offrenr aucune refutation des conclusions emises par des investigatcurs de la
pericde precedente.
Puisque les sediments fins sont precipites rapidement dans l'eau saline, et
puisque ces sediments ne sont pas facilement pris en suspension dans la
presence de sels solubles, il est difficile d'admettre que de tels sediments peuvent
charger l'eau de la mer en quantite suffisante, et pour une peri ode de temps
suffisarnent longue, pour produire dans I'ocean des courants d'eau trouble
(turbidity currents) d'une force capable de creuser des canons vraiment gigan-
te5Cjues.

Le degre de consoli9ation des sediments qui composent Ies plates-formes

Continentales dans lesquelles soot creuses les canons sous~marios est une ques-
tion capitale pour I'etudiant qui examine l'origine de ces canons. Si les
plates-formes consistent de sediments fins, pas encore consoli des et bien charges
d'eau, prets a couler sur la moindre excitation, on peut concevoir que meme
des COurants tres faibles peuvent originer des mouvements importants. Mais
si les depots qui constituent Ies plates· formes soot plus solides, et consistent
au moins en partie de roche dure, l'erosion des grands canons par des courants
faibles dans une peri ode de temps assez courte, paraitra peu probable. On
60 Journal of Geomorphology
examine alors Jes faits connus jusqu'a present sur ce point, et constate que Ie;
depots des plates-formes (sauf ceux sur la surface d'un age tout recent) som
assez bien consolides, avec quelques couches de gees et d'autres roches dures
Dans ces circonstances on hesite d'accepter une hypothese qui exige le creuse.
ment des canons profonds par des courants d'eau trouble (turbidity currents)
qui doit avoir, com me nous l'avons vu, une force relativement faible.
L'cau de la mer, dans la zone d'agitation par les vagues, est mains saline el
plus chaude que Ies eaux dans Ies profondeurs de l'ocean. Ainsi Jes (nndi·
tions sont tout a fait differences de celIes dans Ies lacs Constance et Leman,
ou l'eau des rivieres s'enfonce rapidement sous Ies eaux des lacs. Dans I'oceaa
les conditions de salinite et de temperature s' opposent i la naissance des
courants d' eau trouble. II est vrai que Jes rivieres apportent i Ia mer une
vaste quantite de sediment en suspension, et Daly a cherche i trouver dans re
fait un autre moyen de creer des courants d'eau trouble sur Ie fond. Mais les
temoins cites par beaucoup d'observateurs demontrent que 1'eau trouble des
rivieres s'etale sur la surface de I'eau saline et plus dense de la mer sur des
distances prodigieuscs, et que l'eau marine reste assez claire SOllS I' eau fiuviale.
On doit douter, alors, si Ies eaux marines dans Ia zone d' agitation des vaguE'S,
melees avec les eaux fraiches venant de la terre, et moins salines et plus chaudes
que les eaux plus profondes, peuvent descendre effectivement dans l'ocean i
cause d'une charge problernatique de sediment; et on doit douter egalemeu
si Ies eaux marines peuvent devenir effectivement chargees de sediment Sf

precipitant d'une couche superieure de 1'eau fluviale trouble.

Entin, on considere plusieurs aspects generaux de eette question, et note
d'autres diffieultes qui s'opposent i 1'hypothese que les canons sous~marins
ont ete ereuses par des courants developpant sur Ie fond i cause d'une diffe·
renee de densite due i la presence de sediment dans 1'eau. On conclut que
quoique cette hypothese ne devrait pas Hre rejete, mais au contraire merite des
etudes encore plus penetrantes, elle est opposee par des considerations vrai·
ment formidables. Par consequent, on doit pousser l'enquete plus loin, et
descendre dans les regions sauterraines, et demander si Ii, au lieu de dans les
rayaumes subaeriens au sous-marins, on peut trouver une solution de ce proD-
Ierne difficile.