OK, Jane.

I know of no strong correlation between length of existence in a location and competence in a field of geophysics. ("The head earthquake guy of ARK. has been down there awhile"). Nor is the fellow's frustration evidence of anything.

The whole subject of Arkansas and New Madrid seismic danger/risk/hazard is very murky. Generally, new engineering and construction requirements (VERY EXPENSIVE ones), have been proposed based on some highly dubious assessments of seismic risk. Extremely long recurrence intervals have been virtually ignored in order to require expensive building improvements. This for buildings with expected lifetimes of 50 years or less, and recurrence intervals of as much as 3000 years.

Your friend in Little Rock's experience is not only anecdotal, it is exceptionally suspect even for anecdotal evidence. Certainly there have been no seismic events there that would produce "tiny 'ground waves'" Indeed, even the largest earthquakes do not actually produce visible "ground waves". Reports of such are pretty much due to perceptual phenomena, such as inner ear and emotional inputs.

In short, the Director of the Arkansas Earthquake Center at the University of Arkansas, Little Rock was being exceptionally irresponsible in his statements. Nothing about the supposed "new fault" will turn out to have produced any significant increase in the already very low yearly risk of a damaging earthquake in the region.

Disclaimer: I am not a professional in any Earth science.

Mike Williams
Arroyo Grande, CA U.S.