|
Re: Santa Barbara Channel - Parkfield, no Long Valley? |
The far southern California aftershocks off of the main fault that broke seem to have quieted down; it looks like the background seismicity the last day or more. At least lone of the 2 tiny Santa Barbara quakes are near where there was a larger, felt quake a month or 2 ago. Parfield, who knows if it was related. What seemed a bit surprising is that I did not notice any increase in seismicity by casual glance at the map at Long Valley California. Yellowstone had about a M3, but it has been having a lot of these before the quake. I recall that the Landers quake triggered a bunch of seismicity at Long Valley and Yellowstone (for the non-Californians, both have/are volcanic calderas with magma present). Follow Ups: ● Re: Santa Barbara Channel - Parkfield, no Long Valley? - Roger Hunter 07:50:13 - 4/9/2010 (76881) (1) ● Re: Santa Barbara Channel - Parkfield, no Long Valley? - PennyB 12:44:59 - 4/9/2010 (76883) (1) ● Re: Santa Barbara Channel - Parkfield, no Long Valley? - Roger Hunter 12:53:14 - 4/9/2010 (76884) (0) |
|