SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “earthquake hazards”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 343 records · Page 19Linked to original sources

USGS1986

Cooperative earthquake research between the United States and the People’s Republic of China

Cooperative research by scientists of the United States and the People's Republic of China (PRC) has resulted in important new finding concerning the fundamental characteristics of earthquakes and new insight into mitigating earthquake hazards. Much of the research is being conducted under the U.S State Department Protocol for Scientific and Technical Cooperation in Earthquake Studies between the PRC State Seismological Bureau (SSB) and the U.S Geological Survey and the National Science Foundation. Activites and prgoress accomplished under the protocol were the subject of two special sessions at the 1985 American Geophyiscal Union Fall Meeting in San Francisco, Calif.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗

USGS1995

Influence of static stress changes on earthquake locations in southern California

Earthquakes induce changes in static stress on neighbouring faults that may delay, hasten or even trigger subsequent earthquakes 1–10 . The length of time over which such effects persist has a bearing on the potential contribution of stress analyses to earthquake hazard assessment, but is presently unknown. Here we use an elastic half-space model 11 to estimate the static stress changes generated by damaging (magnitude M ≥5) earthquakes in southern California over the past 26 years, and to investigate the influence of these changes on subsequent earthquake activity. We find that, in the 1.5-year period following a M ≥5 earthquake, any subsequent nearby M ≥5 earthquake almost always ruptures a fault that is loaded towards failure by the first earthquake. After this period, damaging earthquakes are equally likely to rupture loaded and relaxed faults. Our results suggest that there is a short period of time following a damaging earthquake in southern California in which simple Coulomb failure stress models could be used to identify regions of increased seismic hazard.

California↗

USGS2005

Stress distribution along the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte transform fault system

Tectonic loading and Coulomb stress transfer are modeled along the right-lateral Fairweather-Queen Charlotte transform fault system using a threedimensional boundary element program. The loading model includes slip below 12 km along the transform as well as motion of the Pacific plate, and it is consistent with most available Global Positioning System (GPS) displacement rate data. Coulomb stress transfer is shown to have been a weak contributing factor in the failure of the southeastern (Sitka) segment of the Fairweather fault in 1972, hastening the occurrence of the earthquake by only about 8 months. Failure of the Sitka segment was enhanced by a combination of cumulative loading from below (95%) by slip of about 5 cm/yr since 1848, by stress transfer (about 1%) from major earthquakes on straddling segments of the Queen Charlotte fault (M 8.1 in 1949) and the Fairweather fault (M 7.8 in 1958), and by viscoelastic relaxation (about 4%) following the great 1964 Alaska earthquake, modeled by Pollitz et al. (1998). Cumulative stress increases in excess of 7 MPa at a depth of 8 km are projected prior to the M 7.6 earthquake. Coulomb stress transferred by the rupture of the great M 9.2 Alaska earthquake in 1964 (Bufe, 2004a) also hastened the occurrence of the 1972 event, but only by a month or two. Continued tectonic loading over the last half century and stress transfer from the M 7.6 Sitka event has resulted in restressing of the adjacent segments by about 3 MPa at 8 km depth. The occurrence of a M 6.8 earthquake on the northwestern part of the Queen Charlotte fault on 28 June 2004, the largest since 1949, also suggests increased stress. The Cape St. James segment of the fault immediately southeast of the 1949 Queen Charlotte rupture has accumulated about 6 MPa at 8 km through loading since 1900 and stress transfer in 1949. A continued rise in earthquake hazard is indicated for the Alaska panhandle and Queen Charlotte Islands region in the decades ahead as the potential for damaging earthquakes increases.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗

USGS1995

Utah braces for the future

Almost 75 percent of Utah's population lives near the Wasatch Fault. Earth scientists have shown that this fault has repeatedly experienced strong earthquakes of magnitude 7 or larger and will continue to do so in the future. Efforts to increase public awareness of earthquake hazards in Utah have resulted in residents and community leaders taking actions that will save lives and reduce damage in future earthquakes.

Fact Sheet↗

USGS1988

Seismic design and engineering research at the U.S. Geological Survey

The Engineering Seismology Element of the USGS Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program is responsible for the coordination and operation of the National Strong Motion Network to collect, process, and disseminate earthquake strong-motion data; and, the development of improved methodologies to estimate and predict earthquake ground motion. Instrumental observations of strong ground shaking induced by damaging earthquakes and the corresponding response of man-made structures provide the basis for estimating the severity of shaking from future earthquakes, for earthquake-resistant design, and for understanding the physics of seismologic failure in the Earth's crust.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗

USGS1986

Prototype operational earthquake prediction system

An objective if the U.S. Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 is to introduce into all regions of the country that are subject to large and moderate earthquakes, systems for predicting earthquakes and assessing earthquake risk. In 1985, the USGS developed for the Secretary of the Interior a program for implementation of a prototype operational earthquake prediction system in southern California.

Earthquakes & Volcanoes (USGS)↗

USGS2017

An open repository of earthquake-triggered ground-failure inventories

Earthquake-triggered ground failure, such as landsliding and liquefaction, can contribute significantly to losses, but our current ability to accurately include them in earthquake-hazard analyses is limited. The development of robust and widely applicable models requires access to numerous inventories of ground failures triggered by earthquakes that span a broad range of terrains, shaking characteristics, and climates. We present an openly accessible, centralized earthquake-triggered groundfailure inventory repository in the form of a ScienceBase Community to provide open access to these data with the goal of accelerating research progress. The ScienceBase Community hosts digital inventories created by both U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and non-USGS authors. We present the original digital inventory files (when available) as well as an integrated database with uniform attributes. We also summarize the mapping methodology and level of completeness as reported by the original author(s) for each inventory. This document describes the steps taken to collect, process, and compile the inventories and the process for adding additional ground-failure inventories to the ScienceBase Community in the future.

Data Series↗

USGS2018

Additional period and site class maps for the 2014 National Seismic Hazard Model for the conterminous United States

The 2014 update of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the conterminous United States (2014 NSHM; Petersen and others, 2014, 2015) included probabilistic ground motion maps for 2 percent and 10 percent probabilities of exceedance in 50 years, derived from seismic hazard curves for peak ground acceleration (PGA) and 0.2 and 1.0 second spectral accelerations (SAs) with 5 percent damping for the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) site class boundary B/C (time-averaged shear wave velocity in the upper 30 meters [V S30 ]=760 meters per second [m/s]). We now provide uniform NEHRP site class maps for 2, 5, and 10 percent probabilities of exceedance in 50 years derived from hazard curves for additional spectral periods. For the central and eastern United States (CEUS) and western United States (WUS), hazard curves and maps for PGA, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 second SAs are now available. The WUS additionally includes hazard curves and maps for 0.75, 3.0, 4.0, and 5.0 second SAs. The use of region-specific suites of weighted ground motion models (GMMs) in the 2014 NSHM precluded the calculation of ground motions for a uniform set of periods and site classes for the conterminous United States. At the time of the development of the 2014 NSHM, there was no consensus in the CEUS on an appropriate site-amplification model to use; therefore, we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP site class A, for which most stable continental GMMs were originally developed, based on simulations for hard rock site conditions (V S30 =2,000 m/s). In the WUS, however, the active crustal Next Generation Attenuation Relationships for the WUS (NGA-West2 GMMs) and subduction GMMs allow amplification of ground motions based on site class (defined by V S30 ); so we calculated hazard curves and maps for NEHRP site classes B (V S30 =1,080 m/s), C (V S30 =530 m/s), D (V S30 =260 m/s), and E (V S30 =150 m/s) and site class boundaries A/B (V S30 =1,500 m/s), B/C (V S30 =760 m/s), C/D (V S30 =365 m/s), and D/E (V S30 =185 m/s). The 2014 NSHM introduced a set of criteria for selecting GMMs for use in the NSHMs. When calculating additional period and site class maps, we verified whether the 2014 NSHM original suites of GMMs satisfied these ground motion selection criteria at all additional periods and site classes using GMM magnitude-distance scaling relation plots. Results of our analysis show that certain GMMs give unrealistic results at longer periods, distances, and softer soils in the WUS. In these rare instances, the GMM was removed from the original suite of GMMs (for all periods and site classes) and the weights of the remaining GMMs in the suite were renormalized. Ratio maps show these updated suites of weighted GMMs result in probabilistic ground motion changes of less than 10 percent in the WUS at PGA, as well as 0.2 and 1.0 second SAs, except in the Pacific Northwest, where differences as much as 20 percent are seen. Hazard curves and uniform hazard response spectra at test sites across the conterminous United States were produced to verify that results were reasonable. The additional period and site class maps, and the hazard curves from which they were derived, are available for download from the USGS ScienceBase Catalog.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2015

Kinematics of shallow backthrusts in the Seattle fault zone, Washington State

Near-surface thrust fault splays and antithetic backthrusts at the tips of major thrust fault systems can distribute slip across multiple shallow fault strands, complicating earthquake hazard analyses based on studies of surface faulting. The shallow expression of the fault strands forming the Seattle fault zone of Washington State shows the structural relationships and interactions between such fault strands. Paleoseismic studies document an ∼7000 yr history of earthquakes on multiple faults within the Seattle fault zone, with some backthrusts inferred to rupture in small (M ∼5.5–6.0) earthquakes at times other than during earthquakes on the main thrust faults. We interpret seismic-reflection profiles to show three main thrust faults, one of which is a blind thrust fault directly beneath downtown Seattle, and four small backthrusts within the Seattle fault zone. We then model fault slip, constrained by shallow deformation, to show that the Seattle fault forms a fault propagation fold rather than the alternatively proposed roof thrust system. Fault slip modeling shows that back-thrust ruptures driven by moderate (M ∼6.5–6.7) earthquakes on the main thrust faults are consistent with the paleoseismic data. The results indicate that paleoseismic data from the back-thrust ruptures reveal the times of moderate earthquakes on the main fault system, rather than indicating smaller (M ∼5.5–6.0) earthquakes involving only the backthrusts. Estimates of cumulative shortening during known Seattle fault zone earthquakes support the inference that the Seattle fault has been the major seismic hazard in the northern Cascadia forearc in the late Holocene.

Washington↗

USGS2001

Seismic images and fault relations of the Santa Monica thrust fault, West Los Angeles, California

In May 1997, the US Geological Survey (USGS) and the University of Southern California (USC) acquired high-resolution seismic reflection and refraction images on the grounds of the Wadsworth Veterans Administration Hospital (WVAH) in the city of Los Angeles (Fig. 1a,b). The objective of the seismic survey was to better understand the near-surface geometry and faulting characteristics of the Santa Monica fault zone. In this report, we present seismic images, an interpretation of those images, and a comparison of our results with results from studies by Dolan and Pratt (1997), Pratt et al. (1998) and Gibbs et al. (2000). The Santa Monica fault is one of the several northeast-southwest-trending, north-dipping, reverse faults that extend through the Los Angeles metropolitan area (Fig. 1a). Through much of area, the Santa Monica fault trends subparallel to the Hollywood fault, but the two faults apparently join into a single fault zone to the southwest and to the northeast (Dolan et al., 1995). The Santa Monica and Hollywood faults may be part of a larger fault system that extends from the Pacific Ocean to the Transverse Ranges. Crook et al. (1983) refer to this fault system as the Malibu Coast-Santa Monica-Raymond-Cucamonga fault system. They suggest that these faults have not formed a contiguous zone since the Pleistocene and conclude that each of the faults should be treated as a separate fault with respect to seismic hazards. However, Dolan et al. (1995) suggest that the Hollywood and Santa Monica faults are capable of generating Mw 6.8 and Mw 7.0 earthquakes, respectively. Thus, regardless of whether the overall fault system is connected and capable of rupturing in one event, individually, each of the faults present a sizable earthquake hazard to the Los Angeles metropolitan area. If, however, these faults are connected, and they were to rupture along a continuous fault rupture, the resulting hazard would be even greater. Although the Santa Monica fault represents a hazard to millions of people, its lateral extent and rupture history are not well known, due largely to limited knowledge of the fault location, geometry, and relationship to other faults. The Santa Monica fault has been obscured at the surface by alluvium and urbanization. For example, Dolan et al. (1995) could find only one 200-m-long stretch of the Santa Monica fault that was not covered by either streets or buildings. Of the 19-km length onshore section of the Santa Monica fault, its apparent location has been delineated largely on the basis of geomorphic features and oil-well drilling. Seismic imaging efforts, in combination with other investigative methods, may be the best approach in locating and understanding the Santa Monica fault in the Los Angeles region. This investigation and another recent seismic imaging investigation (Pratt et al., 1998) were undertaken to resolve the near-surface location, fault geometry, and faulting relations associated with the Santa Monica fault.

California↗

USGS2014

Comparing population exposure to multiple Washington earthquake scenarios for prioritizing loss estimation studies

Scenario-based, loss-estimation studies are useful for gauging potential societal impacts from earthquakes but can be challenging to undertake in areas with multiple scenarios and jurisdictions. We present a geospatial approach using various population data for comparing earthquake scenarios and jurisdictions to help emergency managers prioritize where to focus limited resources on data development and loss-estimation studies. Using 20 earthquake scenarios developed for the State of Washington (USA), we demonstrate how a population-exposure analysis across multiple jurisdictions based on Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) classes helps emergency managers understand and communicate where potential loss of life may be concentrated and where impacts may be more related to quality of life. Results indicate that certain well-known scenarios may directly impact the greatest number of people, whereas other, potentially lesser-known, scenarios impact fewer people but consequences could be more severe. The use of economic data to profile each jurisdiction’s workforce in earthquake hazard zones also provides additional insight on at-risk populations. This approach can serve as a first step in understanding societal impacts of earthquakes and helping practitioners to efficiently use their limited risk-reduction resources.

Washington↗

USGS2006

The 1906 earthquake and a century of progress in understanding earthquakes and their hazards

The 18 April 1906 San Francisco earthquake killed nearly 3000 people and left 225,000 residents homeless. Three days after the earthquake, an eight-person Earthquake Investigation Commission composed of 25 geologists, seismologists, geodesists, biologists and engineers, as well as some 300 others started work under the supervision of Andrew Lawson to collect and document physical phenomena related to the quake . On 31 May 1906, the commission published a preliminary 17-page report titled "The Report of the State Earthquake Investigation Commission". The report included the bulk of the geological and morphological descriptions of the faulting, detailed reports on shaking intensity, as well as an impressive atlas of 40 oversized maps and folios. Nearly 100 years after its publication, the Commission Report remains a model for post-earthquake investigations. Because the diverse data sets were so complete and carefully documented, researchers continue to apply modern analysis techniques to learn from the 1906 earthquake. While the earthquake marked a seminal event in the history of California, it served as impetus for the birth of modern earthquake science in the United States.

GSA Today↗

USGS2007

Velocity and Density Models Incorporating the Cascadia Subduction Zone for 3D Earthquake Ground Motion Simulations

In support of earthquake hazards and ground motion studies in the Pacific Northwest, three-dimensional P- and S-wave velocity (3D Vp and Vs) and density (3D rho) models incorporating the Cascadia subduction zone have been developed for the region encompassed from about 40.2°N to 50°N latitude, and from about -122°W to -129°W longitude. The model volume includes elevations from 0 km to 60 km (elevation is opposite of depth in model coordinates). Stephenson and Frankel (2003) presented preliminary ground motion simulations valid up to 0.1 Hz using an earlier version of these models. The version of the model volume described here includes more structural and geophysical detail, particularly in the Puget Lowland as required for scenario earthquake simulations in the development of the Seattle Urban Hazards Maps (Frankel and others, 2007). Olsen and others (in press) used the model volume discussed here to perform a Cascadia simulation up to 0.5 Hz using a Sumatra-Andaman Islands rupture history. As research from the EarthScope Program (http://www.earthscope.org ) is published, a wealth of important detail can be added to these model volumes, particularly to depths of the upper-mantle. However, at the time of development for this model version, no EarthScope-specific results were incorporated. This report is intended to be a reference for colleagues and associates who have used or are planning to use this preliminary model in their research. To this end, it is intended that these models will be considered a beginning template for a community velocity model of the Cascadia region as more data and results become available.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2013

Workshop on New Madrid geodesy and the challenges of understanding intraplate earthquakes

On March 4, 2011, 26 researchers gathered in Norwood, Massachusetts, for a workshop sponsored by the U.S. Geological Survey and FM Global to discuss geodesy in and around the New Madrid seismic zone (NMSZ) and its relation to earthquake hazard. The group addressed the challenge of reconciling current geodetic measurements, which show low present-day surface strain rates, with paleoseismic evidence of recent, relatively frequent, major earthquakes in the region. Several researchers were invited by the organizing committee to give overview presentations while all participants were encouraged to present their most recent ideas. The overview presentations appear in this report along with a set of recommendations.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Leveraging geodetic data to reduce losses from earthquakes

Seismic hazard assessments that are based on a variety of data and the best available science, coupled with rapid synthesis of real-time information from continuous monitoring networks to guide post-earthquake response, form a solid foundation for effective earthquake loss reduction. With this in mind, the Earthquake Hazards Program (EHP) of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Natural Hazards Mission Area (NHMA) engages in a variety of undertakings, both established and emergent, in order to provide high quality products that enable stakeholders to take action in advance of and in response to earthquakes. Examples include the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM), development of tools for improved situational awareness such as earthquake early warning (EEW) and operational earthquake forecasting (OEF), research about induced seismicity, and new efforts to advance comprehensive subduction zone science and monitoring. Geodetic observations provide unique and complementary information directly relevant to advancing many aspects of these efforts (fig. 1). EHP scientists have long leveraged geodetic data for a range of influential studies, and they continue to develop innovative observation and analysis methods that push the boundaries of the field of geodesy as applied to natural hazards research. Given the ongoing, rapid improvement in availability, variety, and precision of geodetic measurements, considering ways to fully utilize this observational resource for earthquake loss reduction is timely and essential. This report presents strategies, and the underlying scientific rationale, by which the EHP could achieve the following outcomes: The EHP is an authoritative source for the interpretation of geodetic data and its use for earthquake loss reduction throughout the United States and its territories. The USGS consistently provides timely, high quality geodetic data to stakeholders. Significant earthquakes are better characterized by incorporating geodetic data into USGS event response products and by expanded use of geodetic imaging data to assess fault rupture and source parameters. Uncertainties in the NSHM, and in regional earthquake models, are reduced by fully incorporating geodetic data into earthquake probability calculations. Geodetic networks and data are integrated into the operations and earthquake information products of the Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS). Earthquake early warnings are improved by more rapidly assessing ground displacement and the dynamic faulting process for the largest earthquakes using real-time geodetic data. Methodology for probabilistic earthquake forecasting is refined by including geodetic data when calculating evolving moment release during aftershock sequences and by better understanding the implications of transient deformation for earthquake likelihood. A geodesy program that encompasses a balanced mix of activities to sustain missioncritical capabilities, grows new competencies through the continuum of fundamental to applied research, and ensures sufficient resources for these endeavors provides a foundation by which the EHP can be a leader in the application of geodesy to earthquake science. With this in mind the following objectives provide a framework to guide EHP efforts: Fully utilize geodetic information to improve key products, such as the NSHM and EEW, and to address new ventures like the USGS Subduction Zone Science Plan. Expand the variety, accuracy, and timeliness of post-earthquake information products, such as PAGER (Prompt Assessment of Global Earthquakes for Response), through incorporation of geodetic observations. Determine if geodetic measurements of transient deformation can significantly improve estimates of earthquake probability. Maintain an observational strategy aligned with the target outcomes of this document that includes continuous monitoring, recording of ephemeral observations, focused data collection for use in research, and application-driven data processing and analysis systems. Collaborate on research, development, and operation of affordable, high-precision seafloor geodetic methods that improve earthquake forecasting and event response. Advance computational techniques and instrumentation to enable use of strategies like repeat-pass imagery and low-cost geodetic sensors for earthquake response, monitoring, and research. Engage stakeholders and collaborate with partner institutions to foster operational and research objectives and to safeguard the continued health of geodetic infrastructure upon which we mutually depend. Maintaining a vibrant internal research program provides the foundation by which the EHP can remain an effective and trusted source for earthquake science. Exploiting abundant new data sources, evaluating and assimilating the latest science, and pursuing novel avenues of investigation are means to fulfilling the EHP’s core responsibilities and realizing the important scientific advances envisioned by its scientists. Central to the success of such a research program is engaging personnel with a breadth of competencies and a willingness and ability to adapt these to the program’s evolving priorities, enabling current staff to expand their skills and responsibilities, and planning holistically to meet shared workforce needs. In parallel, collaboration with external partners to support scientific investigations that complement ongoing internal research enables the EHP to strengthen earthquake information products by incorporating alternative perspectives and approaches and to study topics and geographic regions that cannot be adequately covered internally. With commensurate support from technical staff who possess diverse skills, including engineering, information technology, and proficiency in quantitative analysis combined with basic geophysical knowledge, the EHP can achieve the geodetic outcomes identified in this document.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Global Earthquake Model (GEM) Risk Map

The Global Earthquake Risk Map (v2018.1) comprises four global maps. The main map presents the geographic distribution of average annual loss (USD) normalized by the average construction costs of the respective country (USD/m2 due to ground shaking in the residential, commercial and industrial building stock, considering contents, structural and non-structural components. The normalized metric allows a direct comparison of the risk between countries with widely different construction costs. It does not consider the effects of tsunamis, liquefaction, landslides, and fires following earthquakes. The loss estimates are from direct physical damage to buildings due to shaking, and thus damage to infrastructure or indirect losses due to business interruption are not included. The Global Earthquake Hazard Map depicts the geographic distribution of the Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) with a 10% probability of being exceeded in 50 years, computed for reference rock conditions (shear wave velocity of 760-800 m/s). The Global Exposure Map depicts the geographic distribution of residential, commercial and industrial buildings. The Global Seismic Fatalities Map depicts an estimate of average annual human losses due to earthquake-induced structural collapse of buildings. The results for human losses do not consider indirect fatalities such as those from post earthquake epidemics. The average annual losses and number of buildings are presented on a hexagonal grid, with a spacing of 0.30 x 0.34 decimal degrees (approximately 1,000 km2 at the equator). The average annual losses were computed using the event-based calculator of the OpenQuake engine, an open-source software for seismic hazard and risk analysis developed by the GEM Foundation. The seismic hazard, exposure and vulnerability models employed in these calculations were provided by national institutions, or developed within the scope of regional programs or bilateral collaborations. These global maps and the underlying databases are based on best available and publicly accessible datasets and models. Due to possible limitations in the model, regions portrayed with low risk may experience potentially damaging earthquakes. The GEM Risk Map is intended to be a dynamic product, which will be updated when new datasets and models become available. Updated versions of the hazard, exposure, and average annual losses will be released on a regular basis. Additional metrics for each country can be explored at globalquakemodel.org/gem.

Report↗

USGS2004

Active shortening of the Cascadia forearc and implications for seismic hazards of the Puget Lowland

Margin-parallel shortening of the Cascadia forearc is a consequence of oblique subduction of the Juan de Fuca plate beneath North America. Strike-slip, thrust, and oblique crustal faults beneath the densely populated Puget Lowland accommodate much of this north-south compression, resulting in large crustal earthquakes. To better understand this forearc deformation and improve earthquake hazard, assessment, we here use seismic reflection surveys, coastal exposures of Pleistocene strata, potential-field data, and airborne laser swath mapping to document and interpret a significant structural boundary near the City of Tacoma. This boundary is a complex structural zone characterized by two distinct segments. The northwest trending, eastern segment, extending from Tacoma to Carr Inlet, is formed by the broad (??? 11.5 km), southwest dipping (??? 11??-2??) Rosedale monocline. This monocline raises Crescent Formation basement about 2.5 km, resulting in a moderate gravity gradient. We interpret the Rosedale monocline as a fault-bend fold, forming above a deep thrust fault. Within the Rosedale monocline, inferred Quaternary strata thin northward and form a growth triangle that is 4.1 to 6.6 km wide at its base, suggesting ??? 2-3 mm/yr of slip on the underlying thrust. The western section of the >40-km-long, north dipping Tacoma fault, extending from Hood Canal to Carr Inlet, forms the western segment of the Tacoma basin margin. Structural relief on this portion of the basin margin may be several kilometers, resulting in steep gravity and aeromagnetic anomalies. Quaternary structural relief along the Tacoma fault is as much as 350-400 m, indicating a minimum slip rate of about 0.2 mm/yr. The inferred eastern section of the Tacoma fault (east of Carr Inlet) crosses the southern part of the Seattle uplift, has variable geometry along strike, and diminished structural relief. The Tacoma fault is regarded as a north dipping backthrust to the Seattle fault, so that slip on a master thrust fault at depth could result in movement on the Seattle fault, the Tacoma fault, or both.

Tectonics↗

USGS2015

Earthquake forewarning in the Cascadia region

This report, prepared for the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council (NEPEC), is intended as a step toward improving communications about earthquake hazards between information providers and users who coordinate emergency-response activities in the Cascadia region of the Pacific Northwest. NEPEC charged a subcommittee of scientists with writing this report about forewarnings of increased probabilities of a damaging earthquake. We begin by clarifying some terminology; a “prediction” refers to a deterministic statement that a particular future earthquake will or will not occur. In contrast to the 0- or 100-percent likelihood of a deterministic prediction, a “forecast” describes the probability of an earthquake occurring, which may range from >0 to <100 percent. When the time window is short (days to months) and the forecast is formulated for operational utility, this term may be “operational earthquake forecasting.” The subcommittee considered short-term forecasts only, herein referred to as “forewarnings,” but not their formulation into messages or their applications, which will be addressed by NEPEC in subsequent activities. The subcommittee considered “direct” and “indirect” forewarnings. Direct forewarnings originate with observed changes in geologic processes or conditions, which may include Increased rates of M >4 earthquakes on the plate interface north of the Mendocino region Changes in shallow seismicity patterns Increased rates of moderate earthquakes within the subducting plate Changes in the pattern of slow slip on the plate interface and other major faults Indirect forewarnings are based largely on model predictions of increased earthquake-occurrence probabilities. In this context, “models” refers to simulations of the processes believed to affect earthquake occurrence, as implemented in computer software, laboratory experiments, or some analog natural system. These indirect forewarnings likely will be more uncertain and difficult to interpret than direct forewarnings. This report also highlights the challenges of assessing the significance of forewarnings, which mostly will be extraordinary events with little or no historical precedent in the Cascadia region.

Cascadia region↗