Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Geology”

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.

At least 109 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

Spatial geologic data model for the Gunnison, Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre National Forests mineral resource assessment area, southwestern Colorado and digital data for the Leadville, Montrose, Durango, and Colorado parts of the Grand Junction, Moab, and Cortez 1° x 2° geologic maps

The digital geologic and geographic information system (GIS) data presented here were prepared to aid in Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, Gunnison National Forest (GMUG) mineral resource assessment Project studies by the U.S. Geological Survey Mineral Resource Program. The goals of the GMUG Project is to provide mineral resource data and an assessment for undiscovered mineral resources in U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Bureau of Land Management (BLM) lands in southwestern Colorado. The Project area covers a large region in southwestern Colorado that is bounded by latitudes 37o 45’ to 39o 30’ north and longitudes 106o to 109o west. The study area is covered by all or parts of six 1o x2o topographic and quadrangle geologic maps, which include geologic maps for the Leadville (Tweto and others, 1978), Montrose (Tweto and others, 1976), Durango (Steven and others, 1974), Grand Junction (Cashion, 1973), Moab (Williams, 1976), and Cortez (Haynes and others, 1972) quadrangles. These geologic maps were used inasmuch as a complete remapping and compilation effort for this study area was beyond the scope of the Project.

Colorado↗

Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey, 1995

This collection of 20 papers continues the annual series of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) reports on geologic investigations in Alaska1 . Contributions cover a broad spectrum of earth science topics and report results from all parts of the State (fig. 1). USGS activities in Alaska include studies of environment and climate, hazards, resources, and geologic framework. Five papers in this volume discuss aspects of environment and climate. Environmental geochemistry of parts of southwestern and south-central Alaska is the focus of four articles; a fifth study, of emergent postglacial lake shorelines in southwestern Alaska, contributes to ongoing investigations of paleoclimate. Two papers address geologic hazards. The first assesses ground deformation in Katmai National Park at Novarupta dome, site of the largest volcanic eruption in this century, and the second evaluates earthquake risks related to the "Twin Peak fault" near Anchorage. Resources, including metallic minerals in northern, southwestern, and southeastern Alaska and coal in south-central Alaska, are discussed in four articles. Nine geologic framework studies apply a variety of techniques to a wide range of subjects throughout Alaska, including tectonics, geophysics, geochronology, bio stratigraphy, sedimentology, paleogeography, and paleomagnetism. Two bibliographies at the end of the volume list reports about Alaska in USGS publications released in 1995 and reports about Alaska by USGS authors in non-USGS publications in 1995.

Alaska↗

Military geology unit of the U.S. Geological Survey during World War II

On June 24, 1942, the temporary Military Geology Unit of the U.S. Geological Survey was formalized after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers requested them to prepare terrain intelligence studies to meet wartime priorities. The entire Military Geology Unit wartime roster was 114 professionals, including 88 geologists, 11 soil scientists, and 15 other specialists; 14 were women. Assisting staff (illustrators, typists, photographers, and others) totaled 43. The unit produced 313 studies, including 140 major terrain folios, 42 other major special reports, and 131 minor studies. These reports contain about 5,000 maps, 4,000 photographs and figures, 2,500 large tables, and 140 terrain diagrams. Most products were designed in the beginning for general strategic planning in Washington and later for detailed strategic planning overseas; they utilized graphics and nontechnical, telegraphic-style tabular texts. The Military Geology Unit's principal effort was the preparation of the terrain folios titled Strategic Engineering Studies. They varied somewhat in content and format, but the key components usually were introduction, terrain appreciation, rivers, road and airfield construction, construction materials, and water resources. The folios, produced at an average rate of about one per week and at an average cost of $2,500, were compiled from scientific journals, books, maps, and photographs available in the Washington area by a team of 3 to 8 scientists; 8 to 12 teams might be working concurrently. MGU personnel took great pride in never having missed a delivery deadline.

Book chapter↗

Distribution of phytobenthos in the Yakima River basin, Washington, in relation to geology, land use and other environmental factors

Benthic-algal distributions in the Yakima River, Washington, basin were, examined in relation to geology, land use, water chemistry, and stream habitat using indicator-species classification ( TWINSPAN ) and canonical correspondence analysis (CCA). Algal assemblages identified by TWINSPAN were each associated with a narrow range of water-quality conditions. In the Cascade geologic province, where timber harvest and grazing are the dominant land uses, differences in community structure (CCA site scores) and concentrations of major ions (Ca and Mg) and nutrients (solute P, SiO 2 and inorganic N) varied with dominant rock type of the basin. In agricultural areas of the Columbia Plateau province, differences in phytobenthos structure were based primarily on the degree of enrichment of dissolved solids, inorganic N, and solute P from irrigation-return flows and subsurface drainage. Habitat characteristics strongly correlated with community structure included reach altitude, turbidity, substratum embeddedness (Columbia Plateau), large woody-debris density (Cascade Range), and composition and density of the riparian vegetation. Algal biomass (AFDM) correlated with composition and density of the riparian vegetation but not with measured chemical-constituent concentrations. Nitrogen limitation in streams of the Cascade Range favored nitrogen-fixing blue-green algae and diatoms with endosymbiotic blue-greens, whereas nitrogen heterotrophs were abundant in agricultural areas of the Columbia Plateau.

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences↗

Geologic models underpinning the 2018 US Geological Survey assessment of hydrocarbon resources in the Eagle Ford Group and associated Cenomanian–Turonian strata, United States Gulf Coast, Texas

The availability of new geologic and production data has greatly increased since 2010, when the US Geological Survey (USGS) last assessed undiscovered, technically recoverable oil and gas resources in the Cenomanian–Turonian (CT) Eagle Ford Group (EFG) across Texas. This new information facilitated an updated assessment of undiscovered continuous oil and gas resources in the Eagle Ford and associated CT strata. Literature and USGS research data were used to build the geologic models for the assessment units (AUs). The USGS defined six continuous AUs within the EFG: (1) Eagle Ford Marl Continuous Oil, (2) Eagle Ford Marl Continuous Gas, (3) Submarine Plateau-Karnes Trough Continuous Oil, (4) Submarine Plateau-Karnes Trough Continuous Gas, (5) CT Mudstone Continuous Oil, and (6) CT Mudstone Continuous Gas. An additional AU, the CT Slope Continuous Gas AU, was defined but not quantitatively assessed. The boundaries of these AUs were defined by thickness, lithofacies, thermal maturity, regional geology, and the spatial distribution of productive fairways. The resulting total mean estimates for undiscovered, technically recoverable resources for these six AUs are 8.5 billion bbl of oil and 66 trillion ft 3 of gas. These results for both oil and gas resources are within the top five volumes of previously assessed continuous accumulations in the United States and attest to the importance of the EFG and associated CT strata as a significant source of petroleum well into the future.

Texas↗

U.S. Geological Survey coastal and marine geology research; recent highlights and achievements

The USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program has large-scale national and regional research projects that focus on environmental quality, geologic hazards, natural resources, and information transfer. This Circular highlights recent scientific findings of the program, which play a vital role in the USGS endeavor to understand human interactions with the natural environment and to determine how the fundamental geologic processes controlling the Earth work. The scientific knowledge acquired through USGS research and monitoring is critically needed by planners, government agencies, and the public. Effective communication of the results of this research will enable the USGS Coastal and Marine Geology Program to play an integral part in assisting the Nation in responding the pressing Earth science challenges of the 21st century.

Circular↗

Geologic studies in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey during 1985

This circular contains short reports about many of the geologic studies carried out in Alaska by the U.S. Geological Survey and cooperating agencies in 1985. The topics cover a wide range in scientific and economic interest. Separate bibliographic listings of published reports are included. These listings are: (1) data releases and folio components derived from the Alaska Mineral Resource Assessment Program, (2) reports on Alaska released in U.S. Geological Survey publications in 1985, and (3) reports about Alaska by U.S. Geological Survey authors in various scientific journals in 1985.

Alaska↗

The U.S. Geological Survey Flagstaff Science Campus—Providing expertise on planetary science, ecology, water resources, geologic processes, and human interactions with the Earth

T he U.S. Geological Survey’s Flagstaff Science Campus is focused on interdisciplinary study of the Earth and solar system, and has the scientific expertise to detect early environmental changes and provide strategies to minimize possible adverse effects on humanity. The Flagstaff Science Campus (FSC) is located in Flagstaff, Arizona, which is situated in the northern part of the State, home to a wide variety of landscapes and natural resources, including (1) young volcanoes in the San Francisco Volcanic Field, (2) the seven ecological life zones of the San Francisco Peaks, (3) the extensive geologic record of the Colorado Plateau and Grand Canyon, (4) the Colorado River and its perennial, ephemeral, and intermittent tributaries, and (5) a multitude of canyons, mountains, arroyos, and plains. More than 200 scientists, technicians, and support staff provide research, monitoring, and technical advancements in planetary geology and mapping, biology and ecology, Earth-based geology, hydrology, and changing climate and landscapes. Scientists at the FSC work in collaboration with multiple State, Federal, Tribal, municipal, and academic partners to address regional, national, and global environmental issues, and provide scientific outreach to the general public.

Arizona↗

U.S. Geological Survey STATEMAP Program—Geologic mapping for the public good

As of 2020, STATEMAP has invested more than $150 million in 48 State geological surveys, matched dollar for dollar, to complete geologic mapping projects crucial to the health and security of State natural resources and residents. For more information about STATEMAP and other geologic mapping efforts supported by the National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program, visit https://ncgmp.usgs.gov .

Fact Sheet↗

The National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program’s U.S. GeoFramework Initiative — Delivering a digital database of geologic map information by 2030

The U.S. Geological Survey's National Cooperative Geologic Mapping Program's U.S. GeoFramework Initiative responds to Congressional direction to implement the National Geologic Map Database Phase Three. The U.S. GeoFramework Initiative aims to create and deliver a new digital geologic framework of the United States by 2030. This Fact Sheet outlines the collaborations needed and plans taken to achieve that goal.

Fact Sheet↗

Geologic framework for the national assessment of carbon dioxide storage resources─South Florida Basin: Chapter L in Geologic framework for the national assessment of carbon dioxide storage resources

This report presents five storage assessment units (SAUs) that have been identified as potentially suitable for geologic carbon dioxide sequestration within a 35,075-square-mile area that includes the entire onshore and State-water portions of the South Florida Basin. Platform-wide, thick successions of laterally extensive carbonates and evaporites deposited in highly cyclic depositional environments in the South Florida Basin provide several massive, porous carbonate reservoirs that are separated by evaporite seals. For each storage assessment unit identified within the basin, the areal distribution of the reservoir-seal couplet identified as suitable for geologic Carbon dioxide sequestration is presented, along with a description of the geologic characteristics that influence the potential carbon dioxide storage volume and reservoir performance. On a case-by-case basis, strategies for estimating the pore volume existing within structurally and (or) stratigraphically closed traps are also discussed. Geologic information presented in this report has been employed to calculate potential storage capacities for carbon dioxide sequestration in the storage assessment units assessed herein, although complete assessment results are not contained in this report.

Florida↗

Topographic and hydrographic GIS datasets for the Afghan Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey 2013 mineral areas of interest

Afghanistan is endowed with a vast amount of mineral resources, and it is believed that the current economic state of the country could be greatly improved through investment in the extraction and production of these resources. In 2007, the “Preliminary Non-Fuel Resource Assessment of Afghanistan 2007” was completed by members of the U.S. Geological Survey and Afghan Geological Survey (Peters and others, 2007). The assessment delineated 20 mineralized areas for further study using a geologic-based methodology. In 2011, a follow-on data product, “Summaries and Data Packages of Important Areas for Mineral Investment and Production Opportunities of Nonfuel Minerals in Afghanistan,” was released (Peters and others, 2011). As part of this more recent work, geologic, geohydrologic, and hyperspectral studies were carried out in the areas of interest (AOIs) to assess the location and characteristics of the mineral resources. The 2011 publication included a dataset of 24 identified AOIs containing subareas, a corresponding digital elevation model (DEM), elevation contours, areal extent, and hydrography for each AOI. In 2012, project scientists identified five new AOIs and two subareas in Afghanistan. These new areas are Ahankashan, Kandahar, Parwan, North Bamyan, and South Bamyan. The two identified subareas include Obatu-Shela and Sekhab-ZamtoKalay, both located within the larger Kandahar AOI. In addition, an extended Kandahar AOI is included in the project for water resource modeling purposes. The dataset presented in this publication consists of the areal extent of the five new AOIs, two subareas, and the extended Kandahar AOI, elevation contours at 100-, 50-, and 25-meter intervals, an enhanced DEM, and a hydrographic dataset covering the extent of the new study area. The resulting raster and vector layers are intended for use by government agencies, developmental organizations, and private companies in Afghanistan to assist with mineral assessments, monitoring, management, and investment.

Open-File Report↗

Topographic and Hydrographic GIS Datasets for the Afghanistan Geological Survey and U.S. Geological Survey 2014 Mineral Areas of Interest

Mineral extraction and associated industries play an important role in the Afghan economy, particularly in the “transitional era” of declining foreign aid and withdrawal of foreign troops post 2014. In addition to providing a substantial source of government revenue, other potential benefits of natural resource development include boosted exports, employment opportunities, and strengthened industrialization (Joya, 2012). Continued exploration and investment in these industries has resulted in large economic improvements since 2007, when this series of studies was initiated. At that time, the “Preliminary Non-Fuel Mineral Resource Assessment of Afghanistan” was completed by members of the U.S. Geological Survey and Afghanistan Geological Survey (Peters and others, 2007). The assessment published a series of country-wide datasets, including a digital elevation model (DEM), elevation contours, hydrography, transportation routes, geophysics, and cultural datasets (Peters and others, 2007). It also delineated 20 mineralized areas for further study using a geologic-based methodology. A second data product, “Summaries of Important Areas for Mineral Investment and Production Opportunities of Nonfuel Minerals in Afghanistan,” was released by Peters and others in 2011. This work highlighted geologic, geohydrologic, and hyperspectral studies that were carried out in specific Areas of Interest (AOIs) to assess the location and characteristics of mineral resources. Also included in the 2011 publication is a collection of appendixes and inventories of Geographic Information System (GIS) datasets for each of the 24 identified AOIs. A third data product was released in 2013 (Casey and Chirico, 2013), publishing datasets for five different AOIs, two subareas, and one AOI extension. Each dataset contains vector shapefiles of the AOI boundary, streams, roads, and contours at 25-, 50-, and 100-meter (m) intervals, as well as raster files of the AOI’s DEM and hillshade. This work represents the fourth installment of the series, and publishes a dataset of eight new AOIs and one subarea within Afghanistan. These areas include Dasht-e-Nawar, Farah, North Ghazni, South Ghazni, Chakhansur, Godzareh East, Godzareh West, and Namaksar-e-Herat AOIs and the Central Bamyan subarea of the South Bamyan AOI (datasets for South Bamyan were published previously in Casey and Chirico, 2013). For each AOI and subarea, this dataset collection consists of the areal extent boundaries, elevation contours at 25-, 50-, and 100-m intervals, and an enhanced DEM. Hydrographic datasets covering the extent of four AOIs and one subarea are also included in the collection. The resulting raster and vector layers are intended for use by government agencies, developmental organizations, and private companies in Afghanistan to support mineral assessments, monitoring, management, and investment.

Open-File Report↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of the Haines area, Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards

The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, brought into sharp focus the need for engineering geologic studies in urban areas. Study of the Haines area constitutes an integral part of an overall program to evaluate earthquake and other geologic hazards in most of the larger Alaska coastal communities. The evaluations of geologic hazards that follow, although based only upon reconnaissance studies and, therefore, subject to revision, will provide broad guidelines useful in city and land-use planning. It is hoped that the knowledge gained will result in new facilities being built in the best possible geologic environments and being designed so as to minimize future loss of life and property damage. Haines, which is in the northern part of southeastern Alaska approximately 75 miles northwest of Juneau, had a population, of about 700 people in 1970. It is built at the northern end of the Chilkat Peninsula and lies within the Coast Mountains of the Pacific Mountain system. The climate is predominantly marine and is characterized by mild winters and cool summers. The mapped area described in this report comprises about 17 square miles of land; deep fiords constitute most of the remaining mapped area that is evaluated in this study. The Haines area was covered by glacier ice at least once and probably several times during the Pleistocene Epoch. The presence of emergent marine deposits, several hundred feet above sea level, demonstrates that the land has been uplifted relative to sea level since the last major deglaciation of the region about 10,000 years ago. The rate of relative uplift of the land at Haines during the past 39 years is 2.26 cm per year. Most or all of this uplift appears to be due to rebound as a result of deglaciation. Both bedrock and surficial deposits are present in the area. Metamorphic and igneous rocks constitute the exposed bedrock. The metamorphic rocks consist of metabasalt of Mesozoic age and pyroxenite of probable early middle Cretaceous age. The igneous rocks consist of diorite and quartz diorite (tonalite) of Cretaceous age. Sedimentary rocks of Tertiary age may be present in the mapped area but are not exposed. The surficial deposits of Quaternary age,-have been divided into the following map units on the basis of time Of deposition, mode of origin, and grain size: (1) undifferentiated drift deposits, (2) outwash and Ice-contact deposits; (3) elevated fine-grained marine deposits, (4) elevated shore and delta deposits, (5) alluvial fan deposits, (6) colluvial deposits, (7) modern beach deposits, (8) Chilkat River flood-plain and delta deposits, and (9) manmade fill. Offshore deposits are described but are not mapped. Southeastern Alaska lies within the tectonically active belt that rims the northern Pacific Basin and has been active since at least early Paleozoic time. The outcrop pattern is the result of late Mesozoic and Tertiary deformational, metamorphic, and intrusive events. Large-scale faulting has been common. The two most prominent inferred fault systems in southeastern Alaska and surrounding regions are: (1) The Denali fault system and (2) the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system. In the general area of Haines, rocks of Mesozoic age northeast of Chilkat River have a simple monoclinal structure. Paleozoic-Mesozoic rocks southwest of Chilkat River are gently to rather complexly folded. Several major and numerous minor faults probably transect the general area of Haines but their exact location and character can only be inferred because their traces are coincident to the long axes of fiords and river valleys, where they are concealed by water or by valley-floor deposits. Inferred faults in or near the Haines mapped area are: (1) Chilkat River fault, (2) Chilkoot fault, (3) Takhin fault, and (4) faults in the saddle area at Haines. Southeastern Alaska lies in one of the two most seismically active zones in Alaska, a State where 6 percent of the world's shallow earthqua

Open-File Report↗

Geological Survey and selected U.S. Bureau of Mines and Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys reports and maps on Alaska released during 1974, indexed by quadrangle

All Geological Survey reports and maps on Alaska published or released to open files during 1974 are listed by the quadrangle (scale 1:250,000) into which Alaska has been divided for topographic mapping (p. 2). Also listed are U.S. Bureau of Mines reports on the geology and mineral resources of Alaska, but not those dealing exclusively with other subjects such as economics. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys published reports on geology and mineral resources are listed, but those released to open files are not. This is because all open-file reports and maps were withdrawn in 1974 for revision, consolidation, or assignment of new identification numbers before possible reissue. At the time of preparation of this index I had received so few newly released open-file reports that I felt that including any of them might cause confusion to potential users because of possible duplication of titles or numbers.

Alaska↗

Reconnaissance engineering geology of the Ketchikan area, Alaska, with emphasis on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards

The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, dramatically emphasized the need for engineering geologic studies of urban areas in seismically active regions. A reconnaissance study of the Ketchikan area in southeastern Alaska is part of a program to evaluate earthquake and other geologic hazards in most of the larger Alaska coastal communities. These evaluations in the Ketchikan area should provide broad guidelines useful in city and land-use planning. Ketchikan, which had a population of approximately 7,000 in 1970, is built on the southwestern end of Revillagigedo Island along the northeastern coastline of Tongass Narrows. Altitudes reach 1,000 feet (305 m) within half a mile (0.8 km) of the coast and near-vertical cliffs characterize the terrain in places. The climate is predominantly marine. Average precipitation is approximately 152 inches (386 cm). The Ketchikan area was covered by glacier ice at least once and probably several times during the Pleistocene Epoch. The present topography, characterized by elongate lakes, U-shaped valleys, fiords, inlets, and passages, clearly reflects the effects of glaciation. The presence of emergent marine deposits, at least 300 feet (91 m) above sea level, shows that the land has been uplifted relative to sea level since the last deglaciation of the region. Bedrock is exposed or is near the surface throughout most of the mapped area. The bedrock consists chiefly of metamorphic rocks. In a few places these rocks have been intruded by igneous rocks. Exposed metamorphic rocks are mostly thinly foliated schists and phyllites, metamorphosed to greenschist facies. Foliation generally strikes northwest with moderate to steep dips to the northeast. Most of the rock is fairly competent and near-vertical cuts tend to be stable. The more indurated metamorphic rock can be used for riprap, but more durable blocks generally can be obtained from the igneous rock. The surficial deposits have been divided into the following map units on the basis of their time of deposition, mode of origin, and grain size: (1) undifferentiated drift (Qd), (2) elevated marine deposits (Qm), (3) stream alluvium (Qa), (4) fan-delta deposits (Qf), and (5) modern beach deposits (Qb). Manmade fill (f) also is mapped as a separate unit. Muskeg, colluvium, and offshore deposits are not included as map units but are discussed in the report under the heading "Surficial deposits (not shown on map)." The undifferentiated drift deposits consist mostly of till or other diamictons, generally less than 25 feet (7.6 m) thick. Exposed elevated marine deposits (Qm) generally consist of sand and gravel less than 5 feet (1.5 m) thick. Stream alluvium (Qa) is chiefly sand, gravel, cobbles, and boulders probably everywhere less than 15 feet (4.6 m) thick. Fan-delta deposits (Qf) consist mostly of loose sand, gravel, and boulders as much as 50 feet (15 m) thick. Modern beach deposits (Qb) are mostly loose sand and gravel generally less than 10 feet (3 m) thick. Two basically different types of manmade fill are present: (1) large fills along the waterfront, commonly 5 to 15 feet (1.5-4.6 m) thick, consisting of silt, sand, gravel, rock, and diverse other materials, and (2) fills, generally less than 10 feet (3 m) thick and consisting of sand, gravel, or crushed rock, placed inland from the waterfront and used as pads for buildings and parking areas. Fairly thick deposits of muskeg may be present in the southeastern part of the mapped area but have not been examined in the field. Colluvial deposits, locally 5 to 8 feet (1.5-2.4 m) thick, consist mostly of decomposing bedrock fragments. Offshore deposits are poorly known; near-shore loose sand and gravel rest on a sloping bedrock surface. Southeastern Alaska lies within the circum-Pacific seismic belt that rims the northern Pacific Basin and has been tectonically active since at least early Paleozoic time. Large-scale faulting has been common. The two most prominent fault systems in southeastern Alaska and surrounding regions are (1) the Denali fault system, and (2) the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system. Of the two, the Fairweather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system is the more active and of most significance in relation to the Ketchikan area. Ketchikan lies within the northwest trend of the Gravina-Nutzotin belt of fault thrusting. The trends of at least some of the linear fiords near the mapped area are controlled by faults. However, it is not known whether a major fault extends up Tongass Narrows offshore from Ketchikan. Between 1899 and 1970, five earthquakes having magnitudes of 8 or greater occurred in or near southeastern Alaska or in adjacent offshore areas; three have occurred having magnitudes of between 7 and 8, at least eight with magnitudes of between 6 and 7, 15 with magnitudes of between 5 and 6, and about 140 have been recorded with magnitudes of less than 5 or of unassigned magnitudes. All of the earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 8, and a large proportion of the others, appear to be related to the Fair-weather-Queen Charlotte Islands fault system or to the connecting Chugach-St. Elias fault to the northwest. Within a 50-mile (80-km) radius of Ketchikan, epicenters of three earthquakes with magnitudes of 5 or less have been recorded. Within a radius of 100 miles (160 km), 10 epicenters have been recorded, two with magnitudes between 6 and 7 and eight with magnitudes of 5 or less. Although no instrumentally recorded earthquakes had epicenters in the mapped area, at least 32 earthquakes that had epicenters elsewhere were felt or possibly felt in Ketchikan. Most of these earthquakes probably had epicenters along the Queen Charlotte Islands fault. Ketchikan is tentatively assigned by me to seismic zone 2. This is a zone in which magnitudes of the largest expectable earthquake would range from 4.5 to 6.0 and where moderate damage could be expected. Large earthquakes of magnitude 8 or greater, however, can be expected to occur from time to time along the Queen Charlotte Islands fault. Ground motion from these earthquakes, although attenuated with distance, may still be sufficiently strong at Ketchikan to cause substantial damage. Possible future earthquake effects include: (1) land-level changes caused by local faulting or by large-scale regional deformation, (2) ground shaking, (3) compaction, (4) liquefaction, (5) subaerial and submarine sliding, (6) water-sediment ejection and ground fracturing, (7) reaction of sensitive and quick clays, and (8) effects of tsunamis, seiches, and other abnormal water waves. Although land-level changes due to local faulting are unlikely, large-scale regional deformation may cause uplift or subsidence in Ketchikan. Adverse effects would be confined mainly to the waterfront area. This area also would be most heavily damaged if Ketchikan were strongly shaken by an earthquake. Nonengineered, loose, manmade fills and fan-delta deposits in this area probably would be subject to the strongest shaking. These deposits probably also are most subject to compaction, liquefaction, sliding, and water-sediment ejection. Earthquake effects expectably would be considerably fewer and less severe for the part of Ketchikan upslope from the harbor area because bedrock is at or near the surface in large parts of the area. No sensitive clays have been identified but, if present, they probably are confined to the till and other diamicton deposits in the northeastern part of the mapped area. Tsunami waves are not expected to have a local generation source. Those arriving from a distant source, although potentially highly destructive, probably would be greatly attenuated before arriving at Ketchikan. Seiche waves may develop on lakes near the mapped area and possibly cause failure of earth-fill dams. Destructive waves generated by earthquake-induced local submarine sliding appear to be unlikely in the Ketchikan area. Geologic hazards in the area that are not caused by earthquakes are believed to be relatively minor. They include: (1) landsliding and subaqueous sliding, and (2) flooding. Only minor landsliding has occurred in the mapped area, but the potential for sliding may increase as the city expands and heavily timbered areas are cleared, with attendant accelerated erosion and mass wasting. The greatest potential for subaqueous sliding is along the shoreline, where fairly thick fan-delta deposits rest on a sloping bedrock surface. Periodic flooding has occurred on some creeks in the mapped area and can be expected to occur from time to time in the future. In order that more accurate evaluations of geologic hazards can be made in the future, several recommendations are made for additional studies.

Alaska↗

Publications of the U.S. Geological Survey Branch of Atlantic Marine Geology: Calendar Year 1991

This [summary of] U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 92-585 contains a listing of publications authored or co-authored by members of the Branch of Atlantic Marine Geology during 1991. Results of Branch investigations are distributed in a variety of ways, including maps, journal articles, abstracts and U.S.G.S. publications. Copies of U.S.G.S. Open File Reports may generally be obtained from the author. Book publications can be obtained from U.S. Geological Survey, Books and Reports Sales, Federal Center, Box 25425, Denver, CO 80225. Copies of U.S.G.S. Maps may be obtained from the U.S. Geological Survey, Map Sales, Federal Center, Box 25286, Denver, CO 80225

Open-File Report↗