Symons and his exploits first came to my attention when I was studying J Harlen Bretz’s paper on the Grand Coulee. Written in about 1931, the paper provides a great example of his fully matured style. It also seems somehow more “relaxed” than many of his previous papers. By this I mean to say that the tone is so calm, and the flow of information and observations so effortlessly moved along, it leaves the impression that Bretz especially enjoyed the process of crafting this particular work. He was getting ready to set the Scablands debates aside – perhaps, in his mind, forever. The previous seven years had been a long and difficult professional slog. Shortly after writing this paper he embarked on a cruise to the east coast of Greenland as “geologist” with the Louise Arner Boyd Expedition of 1933. He would not return to the Scablands fray again until the early 1950s. In 1973 he (jokingly?) characterized his participation as being part of a “mid-life” crisis. He was fifty-one at the time.
In Chapter IV of the Grand Coulee paper, Bretz provides an overview of the studies that proceeded his own. Lt. Symons’ report was only the second such study. The officer-engineer was as well schooled as many geologists of the era – indeed, there were no formal graduate geology schools as such until the late 1800s, so most men in the field at the time had trained in engineering and/or mining programs. To his eyes, features of the Grand Coulee suggested “…the courses of many of the most deeply encanyoned rivers of (the) country were determined to a very great extent by their waters collecting in great fissures.” He also believed that at one point the Columbia River had somehow been redirected through the Grand Coulee for an indefinite period. Which, of course, it was.
At any rate, I suspect Bretz enjoyed reading through Symons’ long report, and he may have gotten a special kick out of the appendix of 25 map sections (plus the much reduced map showing the entirety of the river covered by the individual sections). I certainly have. It provides a wonderful insight into the period as well as the region’s geology.
________
When I first began studying the Symons’ report, my nine year old granddaughter happened into my office. “What are these,” she asked while thumbing through the map sections. I explained. “Cool,” she exclaimed, then headed for the kitchen and her snacks. It occurred to me at that moment to wonder just what the bunch of them might look like, once all spread out on some kind of flat surface. Here’s the general idea:
Once I’d put them in this order (Canadian - US boundary at the top, Columbia - Snake River confluence forground) I thought it would be even cooler if the sections were colored (see above). I tried to enlist Jane’s help with this, but she demurred. After messing with a few sections on my own, I moved on to more pressing projects. I’ve never been good at staying between the lines anyway. (But I'm keeping the pencils.) I think this could be a fun geography project for youngsters, but given Jane’s lack of interest, I am not sure. At any rate, the report – complete with map supplement – can be found here.