Hi All,

I was thinking about how it might be possible to redefine earthquake probabilities. Today the public only receives "long term probabilities" which are defined as up to 30 years for a known fault to possibly have a given magnitude earthquake.

It seems to me that these could be reassessed and broken down into "interim probabilities" of ten year time span and "short term" could be placed at less than ten years. Neither of these would be alarming to the public, but perhaps provide them with a greater urgency to prepare.

I believe most of the people in the San Francisco Bay Area already expect a major earthquake from any of the known faults in the area. The only problem is that "long term probabilities" give a sense of a time frame way off into the future. Though I know they are not intended to deliver that message, they do.

Are we not at a point in time yet where greater confidence can be placed upon the public and its ability to cope with shorter term probabilities? Or is it sheer economics that drives the wheel in regard to giving warnings in general? Could it be these kinds of warnings might not get issued because of a fear of people not moving into an area that has a shorter term probability or an exodus?

Generally speaking about California lifestyles, we tend to live more in the here and now, than planning for long term needs. For instance, in comparing lifestyles between Washington State and California in regard to education, there is a vast difference in attitude. Washington State for instance has very up to date schools, they still offer transportation to schools for all levels and yet in California almost every school needs funding and very little transportation is provided. In another area such as life insurance, in Washington, most consider having this coverage a necessity and are far more likely to buy policies than in CA where everyone thinks they are going to live forever.

When the Nisqually earthquake occurred the word was that they fared out well because they were well prepared. Apparently during the past ten years a real effort was made not only in structure improvement, but public information education for preparedness was strong as well. So is it regional? If it is, then what can be expected for the folks who live in the New Madrid Zone?

I do recall when it looked like Mammoth Lakes was about to volcanically come to life again it did create an economic hardship on the area. But one good thing did come out of this warning. Another road was built as a secondary route, so the local citizens would not be trapped with only one route out of town. The problem here is that it had to come to a warning status before this road could be built.

Therefore, I ask, is it sheer economics that drives the wheel in public earthquake warnings?

Petra