USGS Science⌕ Search

USGS · 70026985

Revisiting the 23 February 1892 Laguna Salada earthquake

Abstract

According to some compilations, the Laguna Salada, Baja California, earthquake of 23 February 1892 ranks among the largest earthquakes in California and Baja California in historic times. Although surface rupture was not documented at the time of the earthquake, recent geologic investigations have identified and mapped a rupture on the Laguna Salada fault that can be associated with high probability with the 1892 event (Mueller and Rockwell, 1995). The only intensity-based magnitude estimate for the earthquake, M 7.8, was made by Strand (1980) based on an interpretation of macroseismic effects and a comparison of isoseismal areas with those from instrumentally recorded earthquakes. In this study we reinterpret original accounts of the Laguna Salada earthquake. We assign modified Mercalli intensity (MMI) values in keeping with current practice, focusing on objective descriptions of damage rather than subjective human response and not assigning MMI values to effects that are now known to be poor indicators of shaking level, such as liquefaction and rockfalls. The reinterpreted isoseismal contours and the estimated magnitude are both significantly smaller than those obtained earlier. Using the method of Bakun and Wentworth (1997) we obtain a magnitude estimate of M 7.2 and an optimal epicenter less than 15 km from the center of the mapped Laguna Salada rupture. The isoseismal contours are elongated toward the northwest, which is qualitatively consistent with a directivity effect, assuming that the fault ruptured from southeast to northwest. We suggest that the elongation may also thus reflect wave propagation effects, with more efficient propagation of crustal surface (Lg) waves in the direction of the overall regional tectonic fabric.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

S. E. Hough, A. Elliot. 2004-08-01. Revisiting the 23 February 1892 Laguna Salada earthquake. https://doi.org/10.1785/012003244

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↗