In a recent paper by Veilette published in the Canadian Journal of Earth Sciences, the large interlobate formation in the Abitibi-Timiskaming region was called a moraine; this confuses me and might mislead other readers, too. Now I have seen some parts of this formation, and I would like to make a comment on the use of the term in this context. After the 12th INQUA Congress in Ottawa, Canada, I had an opportunity to participate on the well-organized and interesting postcongress excursion C-10 (Ottawa-KuujjuarapikMontrkal) (INQUA Excursion Guide Book C-10, INQUA 1987). During that trip our excellent guides, Dr. Jean Veillette and Dr. Jean-Serge Vincent, showed us many details of the Hamcana Lake McConnell interlobate formation. They provided an interesting interpretation of the genesis of these huge gravel and sand concentrations, which are several kilometres wide, extend over a distance of some 800 km, and rise above the surrounding landscape (see Veillette). We fully agreed that we were able to find in this vast formation sections with glaciofluvial deltas, with esker characteristics, with kettle holes, and with glaciofluvial meltwater channels on some surfaces. In many cases we saw stratification typical of glaciofluvial deltas formed in glacially dammed lakes: for example, in the Lake McConnell moraine at Opimika Narrows and in the Hamcana interlobate moraine at Val-d'Or. They have exactly the same characteristics as, for example, the Vesivehmaa sandur delta of the Salpausselka icemarginal formation, southern Finland (see Fogelberg 1970; Atlas of Finland 1986, folio 122). In the Harricana interlobate formation a series of esker deltas was noted close to the position of the retreating ice front. Our guides could show us good evidence that the Hudson Bay and Labrador ice sheets during Late Wisconsinan time met in this interlobate zone and that these deposits were laid down by meltwaters collected in a zone of weakness between these two ice lobes that was characterized by crevasses and depressions. My question is, why call a totally glaciofluvial formation a moraine? (see Veillette). It causes confusion. We have no size limits for eskers. They can be small or very high and wide and flat, elongated formations deposited by glacial meltwaters in subor interglacial tunnels or in open crevasses facing towards the ice edge, or a group of consecutively occumng deltas deposited in open water (glacial lake or sea) at the ice margin. Eskers can be formed in an interlobate zone, as reported from Finland (Hheenkangas Pohjankangas and Pudasjarvi Taivalkoski esker complexes, etc.; see Punkari 1980; Atlas of Finland 1986, folio 122). We could call these interlobate formations esker complexes or just large interlobate eskers. The only reason Veillette called the Hamcana Lake McConnell formation an interlobate was that one of the referees wanted to change his term Hamcana Lake McConnell glaciofluvial interlobate complex to ( J . Veillette, personal communication, 1987). I hope there is not a new trend to rename glaciofluvial formations moraines. Moraines are distinctly different, glaciogenic landforms. When thinking of process and genesis of landforms, we have to clearly separate glaciogenic and glaciofluvial landforms.
Read full abstract