Hi Don & Cathryn,

I think like the two of you I have been awaiting this event for so long, at least a year for sure. But now there is another element added to this which I think a note should be made about it. In the past few weeks after Pacifica would have a small quake it would be mirrored across the bay in Alameda with another one, but usually at a slightly lower magnitude. So it makes me want to wait and see if Alameda is going to have a quake since this one.

In general the normal seismic pattern we had up until 2000 seemed to disappear. The old standard of having a 3.0 in the immediate Bay Area every 18 days on average stopped. I frequently ask myself why, but nothing comes to me. However, in the past week and a half I began to see small signs of the reemergence of this pattern, in the micro quakes up and down the Hayward Fault. I also noted during the same time period the quakes on the eastern side of the Pacific slowed down and now we are seeing more activity in South America, which makes me ask, has something changed? If so, what is it?

Then yesterday morning while driving to work I noticed the road kill was up to five. This is the first time in nearly a year. I recalled Daniel Karnes posts of the past and how he would comment on this aspect. I wondered if it was a sign or just a bad night for the animals. So many questions.

But Cathryn, I do believe you are onto something about there being a 7.0 quake, but the one I believe is coming will be on the San Gregario Fault at exactly a 7.0, but as to when, it could be close at hand or another year away, but I do think it will occur.

Since the AGU I have been fervently making efforts to get some folks who should already be taking care of business to get earthquake preparedness materials out to the public. I feel driven in this effort. I have also been addressing the "long term probability" language with those who have the power to change this. I doubt it will do much good, but you have to make an effort. I want to see a change in this language to avoid public complacency and to make it perfectly clear that scientists have no better idea as to when an earthquake on a given fault will occur, so why not simply release one's findings and say, "this fault has the potential of having a 7.0 quake, sometime in the future." Even recurrence rates are not sufficient to use as time frames. The SAF in Southern CA is 100 years past its expectancy and may go another 100 before it goes.

Cathryn, I like the contest idea and I was wondering if you could make a separate post for it and lay out the parameters and then it could be followed a little easier. Meanwhile, I'll give a think on my 3 pick places.

Petra