Valleys Formed by Rivers.
One strong voice before 1860 appears to have called Americans back to truths expounded by Desmarest and Hutton. Dana in 1850[[20]] amply demonstrated that valleys on the Pacific Islands owe neither their origin, position or form to the sea or to structural factors. They are the work of existing streams which have eaten their way headwards. Even the valleys of Australia cited by Darwin as type examples of ocean work are shown to be products of normal stream work. Dana went further and gave a permanent place to the Huttonian idea that many bays, inlets, and fiords are but the drowned mouths of stream-made valleys. In the same volume in which these conclusions appeared, Hubbard (1850)[[21]] announced that in New Hampshire the “deepest valleys are but valleys of erosion.” The theory that valleys are excavated by streams which occupy them was all but universally accepted after F. V. Hayden’s description[[22]] of Rocky Mountain gorges (1862) and Newberry’s interpretation of the canyons of Arizona (1862); but the scientific world was poorly prepared for Newberry’s statement:[[23]]
“Like the great canons of the Colorado, the broad valleys bounded by high and perpendicular walls belong to a vast system of erosion, and are wholly due to the action of water.... The first and most plausible explanation of the striking surface features of this region will be to refer them to that embodiment of resistless power—the sword that cuts so many geological knots—volcanic force. The Great Canon of the Colorado would be considered a vast fissure or rent in the earth’s crust, and the abrupt termination of the steps of the table lands as marking lines of displacement. This theory though so plausible, and so entirely adequate to explain all the striking phenomena, lacks a single requisite to acceptance, and that is truth.”
With such stupendous examples in mind, the dictum of Hutton seemed reasonable: “there is no spot on which rivers may not formerly have run.”
Denudation by Rivers.
The general recognition of the competency of streams to form valleys was a necessary prelude to the broader view expressed by Jukes (1862)[[24]]
“The surfaces of our present lands are as much carved and sculptured surfaces as the medallion carved from the slab, or the statue sculptured from the block. They have been gradually reached by the removal of the rock that once covered them, and are themselves but of transient duration, always slowly wasting from decay.”
Contributions to the Journal between 1850 and 1870 reveal a tendency to accept greater degrees of erosion by rivers, but the necessary end-product of subaërial erosion—a plain—is first clearly defined by Powell in 1875.[[25]] In formulating his ideas Powell introduced the term “base-level,” which may be called the germ word out of which has grown the “cycle of erosion,” the master key of modern physiographers. The original definition of base-level follows:
“We may consider the level of the sea to be a grand base-level, below which the dry lands cannot be eroded; but we may also have, for local and temporary purposes, other base-levels of erosion, which are the levels of the beds of the principal streams which carry away the products of erosion. (I take some liberty in using the term ‘level’ in this connection, as the action of a running stream in wearing its channel ceases, for all practical purposes, before its bed has quite reached the level of the lower end of the stream. What I have called the base-level would, in fact, be an imaginary surface, inclining slightly in all its parts toward the lower end of the principal stream draining the area through which the level is supposed to extend, or having the inclination of its parts varied in direction as determined by tributary streams.)”
Analysis of Powell’s view has given definiteness to the distinction between “base-level,” an imaginary plane, and “a nearly featureless plain,” the actual land surface produced in the last stage of subaërial erosion.