Search USGS⌕ Search

USGS · 70263636

Rupture scenarios for the 3 June 1770 Haiti earthquake

Abstract

The 2010 M 7.0 Haiti earthquake provided the impetus to reconsider historical earthquakes in Hispaniola ( Bakun et al. , 2012 ). That earthquake also shed new light on complex fault systems along Haiti’s southern peninsula ( Douilly et al. , 2013 ; Saint Fleur et al. , 2015 ). Recently, the 2021 M 7.2 Nippes earthquake ( Calais et al. , 2022 ; Douilly et al. , 2022 ), and a recent study reconsidering the 1860 sequence ( Martin et al. , 2022 ) further underscored the complexity of fault systems and large earthquake ruptures along the peninsula. Motivated by these studies and recent geological investigations ( Prentice et al. , 2010 ; Saint Fleur et al. , 2020 ), we reconsider the 3 June 1770 Haiti earthquake to explore the conventional assumption that it was the last major ( M ≥7.5) earthquake along the Enriquillo–Plantain Garden fault (EPGF). Accounts provide compelling evidence for substantial liquefaction in the Cul‐de‐Sac plain, one or more likely landslide‐driven tsunami in Gonaïves Bay, and extensive landsliding that created at least three documented landslide dams. We consider three end‐member rupture scenarios that are consistent with available constraints: two scenarios with M 7.7 and rupture lengths of 150–170 km, and one scenario with a ∼90 km rupture and M 7.5. Absent future work to identify and date paleoevents along the southern peninsula, none of these scenarios can be ruled out. Our preferred rupture model extends from the Miragoâne pull‐apart to near la Selle mountain, with a rupture length of 127 km, M 7.6, and a high stress drop. Rupture could have been on the EPGF or on an oblique thrust fault associated with overthrusting of the Massif de la Selle. The results do support the conclusion that the 1770 earthquake was the last major earthquake in southern Haiti, with a magnitude upward of M 7.5 and significantly more severe shaking in southern Haiti than during the 2010 earthquake.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 17.77196094061692° to 20.050612215978532° latitude; -74.57038450016687° to -71.67124675813444° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Susan E. Hough, Stacey S. Martin, Steeve Symithe, Richard W. Briggs. 2022-11-15. Rupture scenarios for the 3 June 1770 Haiti earthquake. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120220108

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗