KAME AREAS IN WESTERN NEW YORK 5H 
scarcely be suggested by the form of the hills in either of the 
other kame areas. It should be noted here that the directions 
of the Hopper and Fort hill ranges are nearly at right angles to 
each other. 
There can be no doubt that the greater part of the material 
of all the groups has been derived from the Ontario excavation 
and rock degradation upon the north, and has been carried 
southward up hill. It has been lifted hundreds of feet by 
either ice or water, or both combined. Upward currents prob- 
ably do not exist in the body of the ice-sheet sufficient to lift 
the subglacial débris to such a height in so short a distance. 
Indeed, the material, if taken from the ground moraine, would 
require to be lifted far above its present height, as the fully 
rounded gravel and the large proportion of sand represent the 
wear of a considerable journey by stream transportation. 
The theory advanced by Professor Shaler’ several years ago 
seems the most acceptable. In some manner the lifting of the 
gravel and sands may have been done by forceful upward cur- 
rents of water at the ice-front, impelled by the hydraulic pres- 
sure of water in the lofty ice-sheet to the northward. The 
kame deposits under discussion were doubtless formed in the 
waters of lake Warren, along a belt where the deep static 
waters opposed the detritus-burdened, glacial torrents. The 
buoyant effort of the static water probably kept the ice-front 
comparatively steep or high. The heavier glacial streams would 
probably cause deep reéntrant angles in the ice-front, or even 
canon-like indentations, which would be choked by the piling of 
the detritus until a balance was established between the height 
of the detrital dam and the lifting power of the stream. The 
full analysis of the interaction of the three agencies, the ice- 
sheet, the subglacial streams, and the static water, would be 
exceedingly instructive in this study. 
Professor Shaler supposed the Martha’s Vineyard kames to 
*On the Origin of Kames. Proc. Boston Soc. Nat. Hist. Vol. XXIII., 1884, pp. 
36-44. Geology of Martha’s Vineyard. Seventh Ann. Rep. U.S. Geol. Sur., 1885-6, 
PP: 314-322. 
