USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70000308

Complex faulting associated with the 22 December 2003 M w 6.5 San Simeon California, earthquake, aftershocks and postseismic surface deformation

Abstract

We use data from two seismic networks and satellite interferometric synthetic aperture radar (InSAR) imagery to characterize the 22 December 2003 M w 6.5 San Simeon earthquake sequence. Absolute locations for the mainshock and nearly 10,000 aftershocks were determined using a new three-dimensional (3D) seismic velocity model; relative locations were obtained using double difference. The mainshock location found using the 3D velocity model is 35.704° N, 121.096° W at a depth of 9.7±0.7 km. The aftershocks concentrate at the northwest and southeast parts of the aftershock zone, between the mapped traces of the Oceanic and Nacimiento fault zones. The northwest end of the mainshock rupture, as defined by the aftershocks, projects from the mainshock hypocenter to the surface a few kilometers west of the mapped trace of the Oceanic fault, near the Santa Lucia Range front and the >5 mm postseismic InSAR imagery contour. The Oceanic fault in this area, as mapped by Hall (1991) , is therefore probably a second-order synthetic thrust or reverse fault that splays upward from the main seismogenic fault at depth. The southeast end of the rupture projects closer to the mapped Oceanic fault trace, suggesting much of the slip was along this fault, or at a minimum is accommodating much of the postseismic deformation. InSAR imagery shows ∼72 mm of postseismic uplift in the vicinity of maximum coseismic slip in the central section of the rupture, and ∼48 and ∼45 mm at the northwest and southeast end of the aftershock zone, respectively. From these observations, we model a ∼30-km-long northwest-trending northeast-dipping mainshock rupture surface—called the mainthrust—which is likely the Oceanic fault at depth, a ∼10-km-long southwest-dipping backthrust parallel to the mainthrust near the hypocenter, several smaller southwest-dipping structures in the southeast, and perhaps additional northeast-dipping or subvertical structures southeast of the mainshock plane. Discontinuous backthrust features opposite the mainthrust in the southeast part of the aftershock zone may offset the relic Nacimiento fault zone at depth. The InSAR data image surface deformation associated with both aseismic slip and aftershock production on the mainthrust and the backthrusts at the northwest and southeast ends of the aftershock zone. The well-defined mainthrust at the latitude of the epicenter and antithetic backthrust illuminated by the aftershock zone indicate uplift of the Santa Lucia Range as a popup block; aftershocks in the southeast part of the zone also indicate a popup block, but it is less well defined. The absence of backthrust features in the central part of the zone suggests range-front uplift by fault-propagation folding, or backthrusts in the central part were not activated during the mainshock.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34° to 36.5° latitude; -122° to -120° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Marcia K. McLaren, Jeanne L. Hardebeck, Nicholas J. van der Elst, Jeffrey R. Unruh, Gerald W. Bawden, J. Luke Blair. 2008. Complex faulting associated with the 22 December 2003 M w 6.5 San Simeon California, earthquake, aftershocks and postseismic surface deformation. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120070088

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗