Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Natural Hazards”

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

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

486 records · Page 5Linked to original sources
USGS2025

A spatial analysis of the groundwater emergence flood hazard in Long Island, New York and near coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound in New York, Connecticut, and Rhode Island

Long Island, New York and near coastal areas surrounding Long Island Sound are densely populated and, like other coastal areas, are susceptible to flooding from several potential sources, including stormwater from precipitation events, tidal flooding and storm surge, and groundwater inundation or groundwater emergence flooding. The latter refers to the intersection of a rising water table with land surface or critical infrastructure. Many studies of flood drivers either neglect or only briefly discuss how shallow groundwater conditions may contribute to or exacerbate flood conditions. As part of a comprehensive study of compound flood hazards in the near coastal areas surrounding Long Island and Long Island Sound, a spatial analysis was completed, in cooperation with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Long Island Sound Study, using available regional datasets to characterize the potential hazard for groundwater emergence flooding. The approximately 3,100 square mile study area was subdivided into 11,407 900-meter by 900-meter (approximately 3,000-feet by 3,000-feet) grid cells, for the purposes of integrating the spatial datasets to calculate and map the groundwater emergence flood hazard. The depth to the water table, hydrologic soil groups, and National Land Cover Database were harmonized to the common grid. A groundwater emergence flood hazard rank was calculated for each grid cell for current average conditions following a set of rules accounting for the depth to the water table and the percent of area within each cell with slow infiltrating soils. A higher sea level position scenario was also calculated for the Long Island part of the study area. The calculated groundwater emergence flood hazard rank was reviewed in concert with the National Land Cover Data Base to identify developed areas and associated infrastructure that may be at risk to groundwater emergence flooding. Study results indicate that the groundwater emergence flood hazard is highest in coastal areas and near surface water where the water table is close to ground surface. Inland areas away from surface water bodies are not likely to be exposed to groundwater emergence flooding. For Long Island, under a scenario with higher sea level position, a greater groundwater emergence flood hazard is calculated in some locations closer to the coast and where land is submerged. Away from the coast and surface-water drainage, the groundwater emergence flood hazard is similar between the current average sea level condition and a higher sea level position scenario.

EarthArXiv↗
USGS2024

Framework for mapping liquefaction hazard–Targeted design ground motions

Liquefaction-induced ground failure poses substantial challenges to geotechnical earthquake engineering design. Current approaches for designing against liquefaction hazards, as specified in most seismic provisions, focus on estimating a liquefaction factor of safety ( 𝐹⁢𝑆𝐿 ) and typically characterize earthquake loading using design parameters based on probabilistic or deterministic ground motion levels. Because 𝐹⁢𝑆𝐿 is estimated deterministically, this basis of design neglects considerable uncertainties for estimating liquefaction triggering and its consequences and results in a lack of liquefaction-specific design criteria, particularly as structural design has advanced toward risk-targeted performance objectives. This study presents a framework for developing liquefaction-targeted design criteria based on a minimum acceptable return period of liquefaction, informed by probabilistic liquefaction hazard analysis (PLHA). PLHA quantifies annualized rates of liquefaction by considering contributions from (1) the full ground-motion probability space, and (2) uncertainties in liquefaction triggering using probabilistic models. PLHA is used in this study to characterize the current, effective return periods of 𝐹⁢𝑆𝐿 ( 𝑇𝑅,𝐹⁢𝑆 ) obtained from conventional liquefaction hazard analysis (CLHA) using uniform-hazard ground motions. 𝑇𝑅,𝐹⁢𝑆 is evaluated in a parametric study of nearly 100 sites throughout the conterminous United States. The results indicate large geographic variations in acceptable liquefaction hazard levels, with implied 𝑇𝑅,𝐹⁢𝑆 ranging between approximately 1,000 to 3,000 years. To address these inconsistencies without the computational demands of full PLHA, a framework is proposed for developing a liquefaction-targeted design peak ground acceleration, 𝑃⁢𝐺⁢𝐴𝐿 , for use in liquefaction models that result in consistent liquefaction design levels across all geographic locations. The mapped 𝑃⁢𝐺⁢𝐴𝐿 is shown to be somewhat sensitive to site-specific properties, and adjustment factors are developed and presented. The proposed 𝑃⁢𝐺⁢𝐴𝐿 mapping procedure produces 𝐹⁢𝑆𝐿 estimates that are consistent with those obtained from full PLHA at a target 𝑇𝑅,𝐹⁢𝑆 , providing a promising roadmap to incorporating PLHA concepts into current liquefaction design methods.

Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engin↗
USGS2026

The 2025 Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model Update: Ground motion model selection and comparison

We evaluate, select, and describe the ground-motion models (GMMs) used in the 2025 update of the U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). We identify the most appropriate models that align with GMM selection criteria for use in the PRVI region to improve the accuracy of seismic hazard assessments. The update incorporates globally applicable GMMs suited for the active crustal and subduction earthquakes in the region. We include region-specific adjustments to these GMMs derived from local site response analyses derived from ground motion records. The unadjusted and regionally-corrected GMMs are combined to create a robust model for predicting median ground motion. The model integrates epistemic uncertainty through a median ground motion logic tree that accounts for variations in magnitude and distance. This study compares the GMMs selected for the 2025 PRVI NSHM, including both as-provided and regionally adjusted NGA-West2 and NGA-Subduction models, with those used in the 2003 PRVI NSHM. We evaluate how changes in model selection, weighting, aleatory variability, and epistemic uncertainty influence seismic hazard estimates. Trends with distance, magnitude, and spectral period are analyzed to evaluate how the scaling behavior of the newer GMMs differs from that of earlier models. Relative to the GMMs used in the 2003 NSHM for this region, the 2025 models generally predict lower ground motions. Comparisons with additional GMMs indicate that the adjustments applied for PRVI are consistent with regional-specific modifications developed elsewhere globally. The increase in aleatory variability and epistemic uncertainty in the 2025 update results in a notable increase in hazard levels from these wider uncertainty bounds. These changes can result in as much as a 10%–20% variation in probabilistic ground motion at the 2% in 50 years exceedance level for hazard maps computed across the region for representative site classes and periods.

Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands↗
USGS2023

The 2023 US 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model: Overview and implications

The US National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) was updated in 2023 for all 50 states using new science on seismicity, fault ruptures, ground motions, and probabilistic techniques to produce a standard of practice for public policy and other engineering applications (defined for return periods greater than ∼475 or less than ∼10,000 years). Changes in 2023 time-independent seismic hazard (both increases and decreases compared to previous NSHMs) are substantial because the new model considers more data and updated earthquake rupture forecasts and ground-motion components. In developing the 2023 model, we tried to apply best available or applicable science based on advice of co-authors, more than 50 reviewers, and hundreds of hazard scientists and end-users, who attended public workshops and provided technical inputs. The hazard assessment incorporates new catalogs, declustering algorithms, gridded seismicity models, magnitude-scaling equations, fault-based structural and deformation models, multi-fault earthquake rupture forecast models, semi-empirical and simulation-based ground-motion models, and site amplification models conditioned on shear-wave velocities of the upper 30 m of soil and deeper sedimentary basin structures. Seismic hazard calculations yield hazard curves at hundreds of thousands of sites, ground-motion maps, uniform-hazard response spectra, and disaggregations developed for pseudo-spectral accelerations at 21 oscillator periods and two peak parameters, Modified Mercalli Intensity, and 8 site classes required by building codes and other public policy applications. Tests show the new model is consistent with past ShakeMap intensity observations. Sensitivity and uncertainty assessments ensure resulting ground motions are compatible with known hazard information and highlight the range and causes of variability in ground motions. We produce several impact products including building seismic design criteria, intensity maps, planning scenarios, and engineering risk assessments showing the potential physical and social impacts. These applications provide a basis for assessing, planning, and mitigating the effects of future earthquakes.

Earthquake Spectra↗
USGS2026

Magnetic storms and geoelectric hazards

Magnetic storms induce geoelectric fields at Earth's surface that can interfere with grounded long-line systems. The September 1859 storm disrupted global telegraph operations, the March 1989 storm caused a blackout in Canada and interfered with electric-power-transmission systems in the United States, and other storms have had related impacts. The geographic and temporal dependence of geoelectric fields are functions of both geomagnetic variation and local surface impedance, which differ considerably across different geological regions. These dependencies can be mapped across the contiguous United States by combining magnetotelluric impedance tensors with ground magnetometer time series. This review illustrates such mapping for the 1989 storm and shows that power-system interference was experienced where surface impedance is high, and when and where geoelectric fields were intense. Statistical analyses indicate that storms comparable to that of March 1989 occur roughly once every four solar cycles. Ongoing developments in numerical modeling and real-time monitoring are anticipated to enable prediction of geoelectric hazards. ▪ Magnetic storms can induced electric fields in the solid Earth that interfere with electric-power-transmission systems. ▪ Geoelectric hazards depend on the storm-time geomagnetic disturbance and the electrical conductivity structure of Earth. ▪ Historically, impacts on telecommunication and power-transmission systems in the United States have been concentrated in the East and Midwest. ▪ The future occurrence of a magnetic superstorm could cause widespread disruption of electric-power-transmission systems.

Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences↗
USGS2025

Subduction zone earthquake catalog separation tool: Implementation in the USGS 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands National Seismic Hazard Model

The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) periodically releases updates to National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for the United States and its territories leveraging current scientific knowledge and methodologies to guide public policy, building codes, and risk assessments regarding potential ground shaking due to earthquakes that may result in infrastructure damage. In subduction zones, there is a need to separate the earthquake catalog into tectonic regimes to create specific seismicity models for which the most appropriate ground‐motion models are then applied. Here, we describe newly developed methods and software, called CatSep, that classifies subduction zone events into three primary tectonic regimes: crustal, interface, and intraslab. This method incorporates information about the location of the earthquake relative to the subducting slab, the depth of the Mohorovičić discontinuity, and the earthquake’s moment tensor. Applying this method is a first step in the NSHM workflow for regions covering U.S. subduction zones. Results using this subduction zone earthquake catalog separation tool for the 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands NSHM earthquake catalog are presented and analyzed.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗
USGS2024

Updating the crustal fault model for the 2023 National Seismic Hazard Model for Alaska

We present the crustal fault model for Alaska, based on geologic observations, as a primary input for the 2023 revision of the U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model. We update the 2013 Alaska Quaternary fault and fold database to produce a simplified model of 105 fault sections and four fault zone polygons with basic geologic parameters including slip sense and rate. Significant updates include the following: (1) a slip rate of ∼53 mm/year on the Queen Charlotte Fault indicating it accommodates all of the plate boundary motion; (2) quantified slip rates on megathrust splay faults in the southern Prince William Sound region and near Kodiak Island; (3) improved details of structures in the Chugach-St. Elias orogen; (4) revision of the Castle Mountain Fault from right-lateral slip to a predominantly reverse fault; (5) improved Interior Alaska tectonic models that clarify relationships between the Denali, Totschunda, and thrust faults on both sides of the Alaska Range; (6) identified large earthquake sources in the eastern Brooks Range; and (7) omission of the Chatham Strait section of the Denali Fault. The fault model underscores that the collision of the Yakutat microplate is the dominant driver of active crustal faulting in most of Alaska.

Alaska, Yukon↗
USGS2024

Using surficial geologic maps, vegetation, and monitoring to address erosion impacts from grazing in Channel Islands National Park, California

Employing a map-unit classification scheme based on geomorphic process and age, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) mapped Quaternary surficial deposits of the five islands comprising Channel Islands National Park (CHIS), California, as no such maps previously existed. Mapping was motivated through an agreement with the National Park Service (NPS) to aid natural resource assessments, including post-grazing disturbance recovery and identification of mass wasting and tectonic hazards. The resulting detailed (1:12,000 scale) maps portray areas of upland erosional transport processes and alluvial, fluvial, eolian, beach, marine terrace, mass wasting, and mixed depositional processes at a scale commensurate with the process signal on the landscape. Detailed, GPS-located observations of sedimentology, pedogenic development, landscape position, and geomorphology constrain map unit identification. In addition, map-unit boundary delineation was determined in a GIS using a variety of high-resolution (sub-meter) aerial imagery and lidar-based DEMs complemented by derivative raster products. The GIS geodatabase schema used is GeMS compliant. Resolvable map-unit widths are as small as 10-15 meter. Locational accuracy of unit boundaries is estimated to be as low as 10 m or better. Detailed mapping is at a scale allowing determination of geomorphic transport processes operating on the landscape and conveys geologic information to land managers at a resolution commensurate with park resources. Map unit ages are constrained by relative soil chronostratigraphy, vertebrate and invertebrate fossils, and materials collected for dating control using radiogenic, luminescence, and cosmogenic radionuclide techniques. Associated topical studies examined connections between geology, surface water, and vegetation distribution and restoration.

California↗
USGS2025

Fiber-optic sensing for earthquake hazards research, monitoring and early warning

The use of fiber‐optic sensing systems in seismology has exploded in the past decade. Despite an ever‐growing library of ground‐breaking studies, questions remain about the potential of fiber‐optic sensing technologies as tools for advancing if not revolutionizing earthquake‐hazards‐related research, monitoring, and early warning systems. A working group convened to explore these topics; we comprehensively examined the application of fiber optics in various aspects of earthquake hazards, encompassing earthquake source processes, crustal imaging, data archiving, and technological challenges. There is great potential for fiber‐optic systems to advance earthquake monitoring and understanding, but to fully unlock their capabilities requires continued progress in key areas of research and development, including instrument testing and validation, increased dynamic range for applications focused on larger earthquakes, and continued improvement in subsurface and source imaging methods. A key current stumbling block results from the lack of clear data archiving requirements, and we propose an initial strategy that balances data volume requirements with preserving key data for a broad range of future studies. In addition, we demonstrate the potential for fiber‐optic sensing to impact monitoring efforts by documenting the data completeness in a number of long‐term experiments. Finally, we outline the features of a instrument testing facility that would enable progress toward reliable and standardized distributed acoustic sensing data. Overcoming these current obstacles would facilitate progress in fiber‐optic sensing and unlock its potential application to a broad range of earthquake hazard problems.

California, Oregon, Washington↗
USGS2025

Identification of representative earthquakes for probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis (PTHA) using earthquake rupture forecasts and machine learning

As probabilistic tsunami hazard analysis (PTHA) focuses more on assessments for localized, populous regions, techniques are needed to identify a subsample of representative earthquake ruptures to make the computational requirements for producing high-resolution hazard maps tractable. Moreover, the greatest epistemic uncertainty in seismic PTHA is related to source characterization, which is often poorly defined and subjective. We address these two salient issues by applying streamlined earthquake rupture forecasts (ERFs), based on combinatorial optimization methods, to an unsupervised machine learning workflow for identifying representative ruptures. ERFs determine the optimal distribution of a millennia-scale sample of earthquakes by inverting the observed slip rate on major faults. We use two previously developed combinatorial optimization ERFs, integer programming and greedy sequential, to produce the optimal location of ruptures with seismic moments sampled from a regional Gutenberg–Richter magnitude–frequency distribution. These ruptures in turn are used to calculate peak nearshore tsunami amplitude, using computationally efficient tsunami Green's functions. An unsupervised machine learning workflow is then used to identify a small subsample of the earthquakes input to ERFs for onshore PTHA analysis. We eliminate epistemic uncertainty related to source distribution under traditional PTHA analysis; in its place, a quantifiable, less subjective and generally smaller uncertainty related to the input to ERFs is included. The Nankai subduction zone is used as a test case, where previous ERFs have been conducted. Results indicate that the locations of representative earthquakes are sensitive to choice of magnitude–area relation and to whether a minimum cumulative stress objective is imposed on the fault. In general, incorporating ERFs into PTHA provide a physically self-consistent method to incorporate fault slip information in determining representative earthquakes for onshore PTHA, eliminating a major source of epistemic uncertainty.

Nankai subduction zone↗
USGS2025

Using gridded seismicity to forecast the long-term spatial distribution of earthquakes for the 2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands National Seismic Hazard Model

Gridded (or background) seismicity models are a critical component of probabilistic seismic hazard assessments, accounting for off‐fault and smaller‐magnitude earthquakes. They are typically developed by declustering and spatially smoothing an earthquake catalog to estimate a long‐term seismicity rate that can be used to forecast future earthquakes. Here, we present new gridded seismicity models for use in the 2025 National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands (PRVI). The previous PRVI NSHM was released in 2003, and our new models incorporate updates to both data and methodology. We utilize an updated earthquake catalog based on improved Puerto Rico Seismic Network data with newly characterized completeness epochs. The catalog is divided into crustal, subduction interface, and intraslab seismicity using new methods and Slab2 subduction zone geometries. To forecast the long‐term spatial distribution of earthquakes, we use an updated methodology developed for the 2023 U.S. 50‐state NSHM, considering three declustering methods and two spatial smoothing methods based on 2D Gaussian kernels. To adapt it for the complex seismotectonics of the region, we also adopt probabilistic methods to account for events with unknown depths and uncertainties in tectonic classification, and develop a new method for spatial scaling to counteract the effects of spatial variability in network coverage while maintaining the use of smaller events. Finally, we test the performance of these spatial models in forecasting the location of M w ≥ 5earthquakes in the region. Our updated methodology improves the representation of epistemic uncertainty relative to the 2003 model, and our results demonstrate the effectiveness of the new measures we have introduced to address heterogeneities in network detection and systematically evaluate forecast performance.

Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands↗
USGS2024

The 2023 U.S. 50-state National Seismic Hazard Model: Changes in 2023 compared to 2018 ground motions

We present the 2023 U.S. National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) for all 50 states that applies new smoothed seismicity, fault rupture, and ground motion models. New data and methods are introduced in the 2023 earthquake rupture forecast that include: new earthquake catalogs - excluding induced earthquakes, alternative declustering methods, spatially smoothed seismicity distributions, full-catalog scaled rates to account for aftershocks, updated CEUS-WUS attenuation boundary, new magnitude-scaling equations, new geodetic and geologic deformation models, and alternative fault system solutions accounting for a more complete representation of epistemic uncertainty potential for earthquake generation in Alaska, Hawaii, and the conterminous U.S. Improved ground motion models consider new Next Generation Attenuation NGASubduction, modified NGA-East, and adjustments to account for regional biases in ground shaking observations. Semi-empirical and 3D simulations of ground motion are applied to account for shaking at 21 oscillator periods, 2 peak motions, and 8 site conditions. Site effects models are constructed for western U.S. basins (Seattle, Portland/Tualatin, San Francisco, Central Valley of California, Los Angeles, and Salt Lake City) and for sites with deep sedimentary wedges found across the central and eastern U.S. Gulf Coast and Atlantic coastal plain regions. These models result in substantial changes compared to the older NSHMs and are differentiated for the earthquake rupture forecast and ground motion model changes to display sensitivities and impacts.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2024

Plan to coordinate post-earthquake investigations supported by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP)

Introduction This report presents a plan supported by the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) to coordinate domestic and international post-earthquake investigations (herein called “the Plan”). Post-earthquake scientific and engineering investigations are undertaken to capture critical information to understand the causes and impacts of the event, lessons from which can substantially improve the Nation’s resilience after future earthquakes. NEHRP is the Federal Government’s coordinated nationwide program to reduce risks to life and property from earthquakes. The Plan describes the activation and coordination of the four designated NEHRP Agencies in the Federal Government: Federal Emergency Management Agency, National Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. National Science Foundation, and U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). The Plan also describes coordination between NEHRP Agencies and other organizations that may participate in pre-event and post-earthquake investigations, including non-NEHRP Federal agencies; State, regional, local, Tribal, and territorial agencies; domestic nongovernmental organizations; academic institutions and affiliated organizations; private companies; foreign governmental agencies and nongovernmental organizations; and international organizations. The Plan delineates the coordination of NEHRP post-earthquake scientific and engineering investigations to document the direct, indirect, and cascading physical and societal impacts from fault rupture and ground shaking hazards and from secondary hazards such as landslides, liquefaction, and tsunamis. In addition, the Plan identifies pre-event activities necessary to ensure that post-earthquake investigations are executed effectively. The USGS is the lead NEHRP Agency for activating and coordinating NEHRP post-earthquake investigations and for implementing this Plan. The USGS also leads coordination of the NEHRP Agencies in completing the pre-event activities identified in the Plan. The Plan has new information and supersedes USGS Circular 1242, “The Plan to Coordinate NEHRP Post-Earthquake Investigations,” which was published in 2003. This second-generation Plan was developed with the assistance of the Applied Technology Council (ATC) of Redwood City, California, under USGS contract 140G0121P0309, ATC-155. A 17-member Project Review Panel provided guidance on plan development, and input was solicited from subject matter experts representing key stakeholder groups and from participants at a public workshop.

Circular↗
USGS2024

The 2023 Alaska National Seismic Hazard Model

US Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Models (NSHMs) are used extensively for seismic design regulations in the United States and earthquake scenario development, as well as risk assessment and mitigation for both buildings and infrastructure. This 2023 update of the long-term, time-independent Alaska NSHM includes substantial changes to both the earthquake rupture forecast (ERF) and ground motion models (GMMs). The ERF includes numerous additions to the finite-fault model, considers two deformation models, and introduces updated declustering and smoothing algorithms in the gridded background seismicity model. For the Alaska–Aleutian subduction zone, megathrust earthquakes occur on an updated structural and segmentation model, and the moment magnitude (M) 8+ rupture and rate model include a logic tree branch that considers slip rates derived from geodetic models of interface coupling. The megathrust model considers multiple models of down-dip width, and magnitudes are computed using newly developed scaling relations. For subduction intraslab events and subduction interface events with M < 7, the 2023 update uses a smoothed seismicity model with rupture depths derived from Slab2. The 2023 model updates GMMs in all tectonic settings using the recently published Next Generation Attenuation Subduction (NGA-Sub) GMMs for subduction interface and intraslab events, and the NGA-West2 GMMs for active crustal settings. Collectively, additions and updates to the Alaska NSHM result in hazard increases across most of south-central Alaska relative to the previous model, published in 2007. These changes are primarily due to the adoption of updated rate models for the large-magnitude interface events and the NGA-Sub GMMs that have much higher aleatory variability (sigma), consistent with global observations, and that include models of epistemic uncertainty.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

Earthquake-hazard exposure of residents with potential access and functional needs in the United States

Earthquake response plans and earthquake early warning (EEW) systems designed for general populations may not consider potential access and functional needs (AFN) of individuals with physical, sensory, cognitive, or social limitations. Previous efforts to map the distribution of these populations have focused on social-vulnerability indices that ignore or oversimply these limitations. The descriptive and exploratory analysis summarized in this United States (U.S.) case study addresses this gap by identifying and integrating spatially explicit data for AFN-related residential populations, earthquake hazards, and county and county equivalents for the conterminous U.S., Alaska, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. We focus on 13 AFN-related attributes that relate to an individual's ability to access information contained in an EEW alert, to understand and process earthquake information or observed ground shaking, and to take self-protective actions based on this information and physical cues of an earthquake. Depending on the demographic attribute, there are millions to tens of millions of U.S. residents with AFN-related attributes in areas considered to have varying likelihoods (2%, 10%, and 50%) of exceedance of a damaging earthquake in the next 50 years. Although these amounts represent low percentages at the national level, the percentage of individuals with AFN-related attributes in many counties and county equivalents substantially exceeds national percentages. No one county, county equivalent, U.S. state, or U.S. territory has the highest percentage of individuals in all AFN-related attributes; therefore, future efforts to increase individual resilience to earthquakes may benefit from understanding the local context of individuals with potential access and functional needs.

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction↗
USGS2025

Searching for seismic precursors - The Barry Landslide hazard clean up

The Barry Landslide, located in Barry Arm of Prince William Sound, Alaska, poses a major hazard due to its steep, unstable slopes and the potential for a massive landslide-generated tsunami. With an estimated volume of 500–700 million cubic meters, the Barry Landslide could trigger highly destructive waves. In this study, we focus on seismic signals from the Barry Landslide, which are critical for providing timely tsunami warnings. Since the summer of 2020, the region has been instrumented to monitor the landslide, but the seismic record is complicated by the presence of nearby glaciers and frequent regional earthquakes. Among these signals, we analyze a specific class of short-duration, high-frequency seismic events that exhibit strong seasonal variability, increasing in rate from late summer to mid-winter before ceasing abruptly in late winter or early spring. Our analysis suggests that the source of these signals is likely near or beneath Cascade Glacier, adjacent to the landslide, rather than within the landslide mass itself. We apply detection algorithms to construct a time history for this signal type, which we then compare with environmental factors like precipitation, temperature, and slope displacement data from ground-based radar and remote sensing. Correlations indicate that these seismic events may be driven by seasonal hydrological changes, particularly the freeze-up of subglacial water pathways. While these events are not directly linked to landslide motion, they serve as indirect markers of subsurface hydrological conditions that influence slope stability. Our findings highlight the complex interplay between glaciers, groundwater, and landslide dynamics, emphasizing the need for multi-parameter monitoring to assess evolving geohazards in the region.

Alaska↗