|
Santa Barbara faults |
Trying a new name since this is not a small town...I got an email from someone in Santa Barbara who asked about local earthquakes....so since my reply has information in it, thought it would be of interest here. As usual, I depend on memory and am not looking up all of this, but it will be basically accurate: Santa Barbara and Goleta are at risk for various types of earthquakes. There was a M>6 earthquake in 1925 (I think M6.6...depends on magnitude scale..?). This destroyed buildings on lower state street and killed, I think, 15 people. There were also quakes in 1941 (?) and 1978...these were, I think, between M5 and 6. The largest magnitude quake was in 1812, and was larger than M7. It caused a small tsunami, so was thought to be centered beneath Santa Barbara Channel. However, recent research (Dolan, Rockwell, others) trenched the San Cayetano fault near Fillmore...and there was a large fault slip in it that was 17th century or more recent...so they propose it is the source of 1812 and the tsunami was caused by a known underwater landslide. I tend to still think the quake was out towards Santa Rosa Island OK...that is history. GPS geodetic data show the Islands are closing with the mountains above Santa Barbara-Ventura at about 6 or 7 mm/yr. You can do the math to see how long it would take to build up 1 meter of slip...5 mm/yr would = 200 years. You might get 1 m of average slip in a M6.5 or so. But, a M6.5 might only break 15 km or so of the fault system...so if the strain is released in smaller quakes (M6 or 6.5) you might expect one every few decades along the Ventura to Goleta coast. If instead it is released in M7 quakes, the quakes would be less frequent. You also expect large quakes on the same fault systems east of Ventura...to Fillmore and beyond...the 1994 Northridge quake is part of that trend. Also, the San Andreas fault opposite Santa Barbara last broke in 1857 in a M8 quake, and that did some (minor?) damage to Santa Barbara. The interval between quakes on that part of the fault can be as much as 300 years, but other parts are due or overdue. OK, geology: I have been involved in using oil industry acoustic (seismic reflection) data to map faults beneath the northern part of Santa Barbara Channel. These faults dip north and underlie Santa Barbara and Goleta. These are thrust faults and would be expected to cause high ground motion of the coast. These are the most dangerous faults (Red Mountain, Pitas Point-North Channel). The Oak Ridge fault dips the other was...cuts through Ventura and through the middle of Santa Barbara Channel. This is active but since it dips away from the mainland and is farther away, is less dangerous. There is a very large buried fault proposed beneath the islands that dips north beneath Santa Barbara Channel. How dangerous this is to the coast depends on how far north it breaks. Quakes on this might only be every couple thousand years. Other S-dipping faults run along the Carpinteria-Goleta coast...the Mission Ridge-More Ranch fault being the most important. These can be seen in the topography. They dip south so would intersect the N-dipping offshore faults. My feeling is that the S-dipping onshore faults would not makes as large quakes unless they broke together with the N-dipping faults. Follow Ups: ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Roger Hunter 11:04:57 - 4/8/2006 (36010) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Russell 13:12:45 - 4/8/2006 (36070) (2) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 13:29:32 - 4/9/2006 (36127) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Russell 22:34:57 - 4/9/2006 (36183) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 11:26:34 - 4/10/2006 (36197) (2) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Skywise 14:00:22 - 4/10/2006 (36212) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 15:06:24 - 4/10/2006 (36224) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Skywise 16:53:10 - 4/10/2006 (36238) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 17:08:10 - 4/10/2006 (36248) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Skywise 18:51:14 - 4/10/2006 (36276) (0) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Russell 13:06:21 - 4/10/2006 (36206) (1) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 14:02:37 - 4/10/2006 (36214) (0) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Roger Hunter 13:46:31 - 4/8/2006 (36095) (2) ● Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Mike Williams in Arroyo Grande 06:32:18 - 4/10/2006 (36192) (2) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Cathryn 11:44:09 - 4/10/2006 (36201) (1) ● inverse square law - John Vidale 11:56:30 - 4/10/2006 (36204) (2) ● Re: inverse square law - Russell 13:29:42 - 4/10/2006 (36208) (1) ● reasonable - John Vidale 13:54:44 - 4/10/2006 (36210) (0) ● Re: inverse square law - Cathryn 13:16:54 - 4/10/2006 (36207) (1) ● ratio - John Vidale 13:56:31 - 4/10/2006 (36211) (1) ● Re: ratio - Cathryn 14:59:45 - 4/10/2006 (36223) (0) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Roger Hunter 08:03:19 - 4/10/2006 (36194) (1) ● working undercover - John Vidale 11:41:44 - 4/10/2006 (36200) (1) ● Re: working undercover - Roger Hunter 12:09:04 - 4/10/2006 (36205) (0) ● Re: Ear Tone Story now on store shelves "Over There" - Russell 22:48:30 - 4/9/2006 (36184) (0) |
|