Is Geomorphology Within Geography or Geology?

» Geomorphology » Is Geomorphology Within Geography or Geology?

Is Geomorphology Within Geography or Geology?

From previous post, we looked at What Is Geomorphology? From there we can coin the following definition:

Geomorphology may be defined as a science that studies landforms. It describes them and analyses their evolution systematically. It also classifies them.

Two disciplines claims credit to the procreation of the science of Gemorphology, tat is, they claim to be the 'origin' or 'domain' of the subject. They are:

Geography and
Geology.

This article seeks to address the controversy that arises with respect to the domain of origin of Geomorphology. Is it Geology or Geography?

But which of either is truly the bedrock from which Geomorphology was found? Well, the main aim of this study is to investigate and prove the originality of the subject.

METHODOLOGY

To better deal with the matter at hand, first we take a brief look at the history of Geomorphology. Then we look at some contributions made with respect to subject matter by persons in related disciplines in this century.

HISTORY OF GEOMORPHOLOGY

Although the study of geomorphology has been around since ancient times, the first official geomorphologic model was proposed between 1884 and 1899 by the American geographer, William Morris Davis. His geomorphic cycle model was inspired by theories of uniformitarianism and attempted to theorize the development of various landform features.

Davis's geomorphic cycle model says that a landscape undergoes a preliminary uplift that is paired with erosion (the removal or wearing down) of materials in that uplifted landscape. Within the same landscape, precipitation causes streams to flow more rapidly. As they grow their power then cuts into the ground's surface both at the start of the stream and lower down the stream. This creates the stream channels present in many landscapes.

This model also says that the slope angle of the land is gradually reduced and the ridges and divides present in certain landscapes become rounded over time because of erosion. The cause of this erosion is not however limited to water as in the stream example. Finally, according to Davis's model, over time such erosion occurs in cycles and a landscape eventually morphs into an old erosional surface.

Davis's theory was important in launching the field of geomorphology and was innovative at its time as it was a new attempt to explain physical landform features. Today however, it is not usually used as a model because the processes he described are not so systematic in the real world and it failed to take into account the processes being observed in later geomorphic studies.

Since Davis's model, several alternative attempts have been made to explain landform processes. Walther Penck, an Austrian geographer, developed a model in the 1920s for example, that looked at ratios of uplift and erosion. It did not take hold though because it could not explain all landform features.

During the early 1900s, the study of regional-scale geomorphology was termed "physiography. Physiography later was considered to be a contraction of "physical" and "geography", and therefore synonymous with physical geography.

From the brief history captioned above, two Geographers, not Geologists were cited for their contribution to the kick-off of Geomorphology. Though their models weren't adopted much, it is stated that they played a vital role in launching the field of Geomorphology. This therefore means Geography has a upper hand in terms of history of Geomorphology.

Now, what do persons of relative disciplines in this century got to say on the field of Geomorphology?

Paul R. Larson, an Assistant Professor in Geography Department of Physical Sciences, sometime ago asked this same question online, under the Subject: Geomorphology as a field of study;

"Is Geomorphology within Geography or Geology?" [3]

Let's take but a swift look at some of the responses he got from geographers and geologists alike:

"I would suggest that you are confusing two issues. First, I believe that all geoscientists, regardless of their disciplinary backgrounds, would agree that the study of geomorphology is more important today than ever it has been in the past. The second and separate issue is where geomorphology finds its home: in physical geography or physical geology. Much of physical geography is geomorphology in many universities (esp. in Canada & the UK) and much of physical geology is geomorphology at others (esp. in the US). Perhaps the problem at your own institution is that two administrative units are claiming it as their own? In the end the resolution of such conflicts is as arbitrary as the way we divide up the sciences in general." - Ted Hickin. Professor, Earth Sciences & Geography, Simon Fraser University Burnaby BC, CANADA.

I will begin with a question, where are these geomorph naysayers from, the UK? As you may know, teaching geomorphology within geology departments is somewhat unique to the US. Geomorphology is often seen as "physical geography".

While I feel that geomorphology has the same connection to geography that let's say geophysics has to physics--this analogy can be extended to geochemistry and engineering geology--I do not think geophysics should be taught be the physics department. It sounds like someone found the support for teaching geomorphology to be weak and concocted this argument to save their own skin. I am here to say that this type of augment is short-sighted at best. - Jeffery A. Kirtland, P.G. Masters at Western Washington University.

As a geographer who moved into a geology department by choice, I would ask them where in physical geology they discuss the atmospheric characteristics and processes that generate precipitation that cause rainfall and runoff. Rainfall is hardly a geologic topic... Ask how they address temperature changes and the causes for them...hardly geologic in nature EXCEPT for long term events such as raising a mountain range... Ask how the wind is created and how that is a geologic force... If they are older, they will not understand and they don't want to. I learned early on at IOWA that pre-Pleistocene geologists haven't got a clue about present processes. I have asked questions about aspect with regard to the receipt of energy on surfaces facing different directions and to most they ignore the variable... How do they treat environmental geology without reference to atmospheric processes? How do they deal with soil? Biologic forces?

BUT....as you collect ammunition to support your position, remember you catch more bears with honey than vinegar. Whereas geomorphology can be in either department, it still involves the same variables. Emphasis can change from instructor to instructor....but we must be certain that the students learn about the entire system and not just one full of bias. Hope these random thoughts help. - Jack Vitek.

If the geologists aren't interested in the largest nonfuel geological resource (sand and gravel), If they have no interest in groundwater quantity and quality, If they don't care about analogs for sedimentary depositional environments, If they are unconcerned with process-related hazards such as floods, If they find human/landscape interactions (construction, reclamation) irrelevant, and If they find planetary geology uninspiring, then they should definitely relegate those topics to someone (like a physical geographer) who is interested in them. - William W. Locke. Professor, Geology. Department of Earth Sciences. Montana State University – Bozeman.

These responses, from highly educated individuals in relative disciplines, strongly argue with total sincerity, in favour of Geography (Physical Geography) to be precise as the motherboard of Geomorphology.

But what exactly is the content of the question asked by Paul R. Larson? He asked and I quote:

"I have a question for everyone. What do you say to the geologists who claim that there is no longer a need for the study of geomorphology, that it is nothing more than physical geology? Our school is in the process of a semester conversion, and the geomorphology course was a casualty of the process. Geology dropped it, but I was successful in adding it to the geography curriculum. There seems to be no small degree of antipathy toward the subject among the geologists here on campus. So, I wondered how others have handled the question." - Paul R. Larson, Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Geography. Department of Physical Sciences. Southern Utah University.

Examining the question, we can see that while the Geology department of the Southern Utah University had refused the adding of Geomorphology to their curriculum; seeing the course as nothing more than "physical geology", the Geography department openly embraces it.

Furthermore, a look at the "USGS dictionary" referenced with respect to Paul's question, we have Geomorphology defined as:

The science that treats the general configuration of the Earth's surface; specif., the study of the classification, description, nature, origin, and development of present landforms and their relationships to underlying structures, and of the history of geologic changes as recorded by these surface features. In the United States, it has come to replace the term "physiography" and is usually considered a branch of geology; in Great Britain, it is usually regarded as a branch of geography.
Strictly, any study that deals with the form of the Earth (including geodesy, and structural and dynamic geology). This usage is more common in Europe, where the term has even been applied broadly to the science of the Earth.
The features dealt with in, or a treatise on, geomorphology; e.g., the geomorphology of Texas.

From the first definition, we are told that in the United States, Geomorphology was used to replace the term "physiography" which is a joint-word viz physical and geography.

"Physiography later was considered to be a contraction of "physical" and "geography", and therefore synonymous with physical geography, and the concept became embroiled in controversy surrounding the appropriate concerns of that discipline. Some geomorphologists held to a geological basis for physiography and emphasized a concept of physiographic regions while a conflicting trend among geographers was to equate physiography with "pure morphology," separated from its geological heritage.[5]

While in Great Britain, it is regarded as a branch of geography. The second definition gives support to the latter as it claims the term is more common in Europe; of which Great Britain is part of. And therefore by inference, it is more of physiography i.e. Geography than of Geology.

However, another referenced dictionary - the "Water Words Dictionary", included geology in its definition. It defines Geomorphology as:

That branch of both physiography and geology that deals with the form of the earth, the general configuration of its surface, and the changes that take place in the evolution of land forms. The term usually applies to the origins and dynamic morphology (changing structure and form) of the earth's land surfaces, but it can also include the morphology of the sea floor and the analysis of extraterrestrial terrains. Sometimes included in the field of physical geography, geomorphology is really the geological aspect of the visible landscape.

The "Hypertext Webster Gateway" also referenced; also included geology in its definition, defining it as thus:

geomorphology n : the branch of geology that studies the characteristics and configuration and evolution of rocks and land forms [syn: {morphology}]

GEOMORPHOLOGY AND GEOGRAPHY

One of the most popular divisions of geography is physical geography. By studying geomorphology and its processes, one can gain significant insight into the formation of the various structures found in landscapes worldwide, which can then be used as a background for studying the many aspects of physical geography. [2]

CONCLUSION

From all that has been touched thus far, though but a few, we can infer the following deductions:

• That Geomorphology is a branch of both physiography and geology.

• However, it is of the domain (origin) of Geography - physical geography.

REFERENCES

1. Geomorphology Summary - Institute of Lifelong Learning, University of Delhi. Delhi-11007.