USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70003378

Seismotectonics and fault structure of the California Central Coast

Abstract

I present and interpret new earthquake relocations and focal mechanisms for the California Central Coast. The relocations improve upon catalog locations by using 3D seismic velocity models to account for lateral variations in structure and by using relative arrival times from waveform cross-correlation and double-difference methods to image seismicity features more sharply. Focal mechanisms are computed using ray tracing in the 3D velocity models. Seismicity alignments on the Hosgri fault confirm that it is vertical down to at least 12 km depth, and the focal mechanisms are consistent with right-lateral strike-slip motion on a vertical fault. A prominent, newly observed feature is an ~25 km long linear trend of seismicity running just offshore and parallel to the coastline in the region of Point Buchon, informally named the Shoreline fault. This seismicity trend is accompanied by a linear magnetic anomaly, and both the seismicity and the magnetic anomaly end where they obliquely meet the Hosgri fault. Focal mechanisms indicate that the Shoreline fault is a vertical strike-slip fault. Several seismicity lineations with vertical strike-slip mechanisms are observed in Estero Bay. Events greater than about 10 km depth in Estero Bay, however, exhibit reverse-faulting mechanisms, perhaps reflecting slip at the top of the remnant subducted slab. Strike-slip mechanisms are observed offshore along the Hosgri–San Simeon fault system and onshore along the West Huasna and Rinconada faults, while reverse mechanisms are generally confined to the region between these two systems. This suggests a model in which the reverse faulting is primarily due to restraining left-transfer of right-lateral slip.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 34.37673583827396° to 36.66552588248179° latitude; -121.6751223157153° to -120° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Jeanne L. Hardebeck. 2010-05-14. Seismotectonics and fault structure of the California Central Coast. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120090307

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↗