USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Journal of Seismology”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

1,229 records · Page 3Linked to original sources
USGS2026

Landslide volume estimation from seismic waveform features using a global catalog of seismogenic events

Seismic waves generated by large, rapid landslides encode information about the source and can be analyzed rapidly following an event. Even remote landslides can pose hazards to downstream communities, so rapid detection and characterization using existing seismic monitoring networks could be beneficial. In this study, we expand on past regionally limited work by presenting a globally applicable method for estimating landslide volume from seismic features that could be integrated into future landslide seismic monitoring frameworks. We train the model using multivariable linear regression and five seismic features derived from recordings of 129 landslide events of a range of styles and locations with independently estimated volumes. We present two preferred models, one that combines long‐period (LP) and high‐frequency (HF) features and one for use on smaller landslides without observed long‐period signals. We find that our best‐performing model, applicable to landslides larger than 100,000 m 3 with signals containing observable long‐period energy, requires only two features: LP (20–100 s) absolute maximum amplitude and HF (1–5 Hz) rise time (time between the signal start and the maximum envelope amplitude) and has an R 2 score of 0.79. This model predicted volumes within one order of magnitude for 55 out of 58 events. We find that this combination mitigates the trade‐off between mass and acceleration and other variations of landslide style that limit methods based on amplitude alone.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Earthquake magnitude and source parameter estimation with a distributed acoustic sensing dataset in the Gorda subduction zone

Distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) systems offer a cost‐effective way to create large‐scale strainmeter arrays for seismological applications using fiber‐optic cables. DAS‐based strain measurements are known to be influenced by various factors, bringing into question their general reliability for accurate earthquake characterization. A 15‐km‐long DAS deployment in northern California was operational within 3 days of the 2022 M w 6.4 Ferndale earthquake and ran continuously throughout the aftershock sequence. We utilize these aftershock data to validate DAS‐based strain measurements in two ways. We first test the accuracy of DAS‐based magnitude estimates from peak dynamic strains by comparing them with magnitude and attenuation scaling relations derived independently from traditional borehole strainmeter (BSM) data. We demonstrate that DAS‐based magnitudes are comparable to BSM‐based magnitudes when corrections for variations in site response along the fiber‐optic cable are properly made. Magnitude errors are spatially correlated, potentially because of factors such as finite‐fault effects (e.g., stress drop) or more complex, unmodeled path attenuation or because of wave propagation effects in heterogeneous media. We then apply more advanced source characterization methodology to the DAS data using a time‐domain empirical Green’s function (EGF) deconvolution approach to measure details of the moment rate history. The EGF approach using DAS data depends on careful treatment of distorting factors such as anthropogenic sources of noise and optical phase wrapping but successfully isolates source spectra for moderate‐magnitude earthquakes: source spectral ratios obtained from DAS data, broadband seismometer data, and BSM data in the same region show consistent results, revealing differences in directivity and spectral shape among earthquakes. Although further research is needed to refine source‐time‐function estimation techniques for DAS data, particularly for larger magnitude events, these case studies demonstrate the clear potential of DAS for earthquake source characterization.

California↗
USGS2025

Examining the role of elevated and sustained strain in dynamically triggering earthquakes on the Anza section of the San Jacinto fault

Microearthquakes can be dynamically triggered in southern California by remote earthquakes. However, directly connecting dynamic triggering mechanisms with observational data remains challenging. One proposed failure mechanism suggests that both the amplitude and duration of cyclic fatigue caused by the passing seismic wave contribute to triggering occurrence. Here, we measure dynamic strains recorded by borehole strainmeters in the Anza section of the San Jacinto fault zone from 710 earthquakes that occurred over 300 km away between 2008 and 2017 to systematically investigate the role of elevated and sustained strain in controlling dynamic triggering. We design a suite of tests to evaluate whether specific amplitude thresholds and durations of strain can predict dynamic triggering cases. We further test whether the peak dynamic strain (PDS) can predict triggering occurrence in combination with the strain amplitude and duration. Based on these tests, there is no strain amplitude–duration threshold that can distinguish triggering occurrence in Anza. Dynamic triggering is more likely to occur if a remote earthquake causes a PDS above 100 nanostrain, though many cases were triggered at smaller PDSs. The lack of clear correlation between triggering and characteristics of the dynamic strain field suggests that the tested features of the incoming waves do not determine triggering occurrence and local fault conditions and slip processes are more important in controlling dynamic triggering in Anza.

California↗
USGS2025

Long‐period ground motions from dynamic rupture simulations of large earthquakes on the creeping Hayward–Calaveras–Rodgers Creek fault system

he Hayward, Calaveras, and Rodgers Creek faults in the San Francisco Bay region of California have a high probability of producing a large earthquake in the next decades. Although these faults creep, the creep is insufficient to keep up with their relatively rapid slip rates on their deepest sections, so they have been storing tectonic strain since their last large earthquakes, with the Hayward’s and Rodgers Creek’s more than 150 yr ago. We do not know what the next large Hayward–Calaveras–Rodgers Creek earthquakes will look like or how strongly they will shake the San Francisco Bay region. Harris et al. (2021) used the 3D dynamic (spontaneous) rupture method to simulate large earthquakes on these creeping faults. In this article, we examine the resulting simulated long‐period ( T > 1 s) ground shaking from 0 to 50 km distance, for earthquakes nucleating on the Hayward fault and earthquakes nucleating on the Rodgers Creek fault. We compare these simulated long‐period ground motions with the Boore et al. (2014) well‐established empirically based ground‐motion model suitable for the slowest material velocity in our 3D velocity structure. We find that the simulated long‐period ground motions from the creeping‐fault earthquake scenarios produce a reasonable agreement with the empirical expectations if frictional cohesion is included only where it is appropriate.

California↗
USGS2026

Preface to the focus section on intraplate earthquakes

More than a half century after plate tectonics provided an overarching framework to explain earthquakes along active plate boundaries, numerous theories have been proposed to explain where, why, and how often earthquakes occur well away from active plate boundaries, but a paradigm remains elusive. Even the classification of earthquakes away from active plate boundaries as "intraplate" raises issues, with potentially important distinctions between Stable Continental Regions and more actively deforming regions including passive margins and failed rifts. Some of the largest known intraplate earthquakes themselves remain enigmatic, having occurred before the modern instrumental era. Hazard assessments are often data-limited: low fault-slip rates relative to landscape modification rates result in poor discoverability of fault sources, challenging the characterization of source zones and earthquake recurrence; the completeness and homogenization of instrumental earthquake catalogs using uncertain magnitude conversions can lead to uncertainties in earthquake recurrence; and, limited strong-motion observations for large-magnitude events at near-source distances leads to uncertainties in the selection and development of ground-motion models for seismic hazard studies. Data from recent intraplate earthquakes around the world—from the moment magnitude M 7.7 2001 Bhuj, India, earthquake 25 years ago to the 2024 M 4.8 Tewksbury, New Jersey earthquake—have yielded both new insights and new questions. The papers in this special focus discuss many of the long-standing challenges involved with intraplate earthquake investigations and provide a snapshot of the state of the art with current research to advance our understanding.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2026

Constraining source and path effects of large magnitude earthquakes using ground motion simulations

The purpose of this study is to use ground‐motion simulations to investigate ways in which source and path effects for large‐magnitude earthquakes can be represented in nonergodic ground‐motion models (GMMs). To achieve this, we designed a ground‐motion study in the San Francisco Bay Area that includes earthquakes with a broad range of magnitudes distributed uniformly on a fault plane, and sites covering a large range of rupture distances and azimuths. After running a large suite of kinematic simulations (magnitude 4–7), we then develop a nonergodic GMM with the simulated data. We find that trends in the within‐site residuals are affected significantly by the earthquake radiation pattern, rupture directivity, and slip patterns. Next, we modify an existing rupture directivity model to fit and remove the observed radiation pattern and rupture directivity from the residuals. We also minimize the contributions of slip patterns by averaging the within‐site residuals among multiple source realizations. Finally, after removing the source effects from the within‐site residuals, we compare the path effects computed with different magnitude groups using two approaches. The first approach only considers the small events that have the same shortest path to a site as the large events, whereas the second approach considers all small events on the fault plane. The results indicate that it is difficult to satisfactorily approximate the path effects of large events with those of small events using either approach, at least in the case of simulations.

California↗
USGS2025

What 25+ years of "Did You Feel It" intensities tell us about shaking in California

“When will the Big One happen?” is a question that people often have for earthquake scientists. But while waiting for the “Big One” to occur, people will usually experience frightening or damaging shaking from multiple relatively smaller‐magnitude earthquakes. Given this context, it raises the question: “Where does most of the damage come from?” Could smaller, yet more frequent, earthquakes account for the majority of reported impactful shaking? To explore this question, we consider reports of earthquake damage and felt shaking experiences from a catalog of community‐collected intensity values from the U.S. Geological Survey’s “Did You Feel It?” system. Comparing these intensities to expectations from a ground‐motion model, we find that earthquakes of magnitudes smaller than expected are responsible for most reported intensities of community decimal intensities (CDI) 4.5 and above (moderate and higher shaking intensity levels). (Here “expected value” is meant in its mathematical sense of the mean or equivalently median shaking intensity.) We also present a regional analysis of observed earthquake shaking for specific areas, detailing the maximum intensity experienced within a predetermined area. We identify several instances of M < 4.5 events that generated maximum intensities of CDI > 5 in regions in California surrounding the cities of Eureka, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego. Our results motivate the need to include smaller‐magnitude earthquakes in communications about earthquake hazard and risk reduction.

California↗
USGS2025

Near-fault amplification and ground motion variability during the 2019 Ridgecrest, California sequence

We estimate ground-motion variability near the 2019 M 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence. Accurate seismic hazard estimation requires understanding ground-motion spatial correlations, yet many studies lack the dense station coverage needed to resolve small-scale variability. The 2019 M 7.1 Ridgecrest earthquake sequence presents a unique opportunity to examine ground motions and their spatial correlations at a range of interstation distances. The permanent seismic network was augmented with hundreds of temporary stations including several fault-crossing nodal arrays. We compute the event ( δE i ) and within-event ( δW ij ) residuals from the observed peak ground velocity and peak ground acceleration data to isolate potential sources of ground-motion variability. We then compare δW ij between station pairs that record an event to understand the semivariance of the ground motion versus interstation distance. By fitting an exponential model to the semivariances, we determine a correlation range of 25 km for the Ridgecrest region. Although the exponential model fits the broad-scale increase of semivariance with interstation distance, we also observe smaller-scale trends. We find that ground motions are less correlated for station pairs that are near or across faults that ruptured during the 2019 Ridgecrest sequence. We also find large, positive median δW ij with relative values 2–3 times larger than nearby stations for individual stations’ near-fault traces. Near-fault amplification and greater ground-motion variability can delineate fault zones and may locally increase the seismic hazard.

California↗
USGS2026

Ground motions from finite faults with unknown geometry

Earthquake emergency response and loss modeling require accurate models of ground‐motion intensity metrics (IMs), such as those produced by ShakeMap. In the critical minutes and hours after an earthquake, however, knowledge of the earthquake source geometry limits the accuracy of these models, especially in areas where seismic instrumentation is insufficient to constrain the shaking intensity pattern. Previous attempts to overcome this limitation have centered on computing the mean distance metrics from a suite of assumed source geometries. That approach is inadequate with modern ground‐motion models (GMMs) because they typically include terms for the hanging wall effect, depth to top of rupture, and other nonlinear terms. Such approaches also propagate the distance uncertainty through the GMMs and may not properly allocate the additional uncertainty into the between‐ and within‐event components. Here we present Finite‐Fault SIMulation with Mixed Effects Regression (FFSIMMER), a method to address these limitations by computing IM distributions from a suite of rupture realizations that fully accounts for all geometry‐related GMM terms and allows for the separation of the between‐ and within‐event components of the total uncertainty. The accuracy of this method is limited by the available constraints on the source parameters. To address this, FFSIMMER can incorporate constraints based on knowledge of the source, such as the approximate strike and dip based on knowledge of the plate tectonics and focal mechanism of the earthquake. We demonstrate the improvement in accuracy that can be achieved with the 2025 M 7.7 Mandalay, Burma (Myanmar), earthquake by incorporating constraints on the range of plausible source parameters.

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America↗
USGS2025

Updating regional‐scale geospatial liquefaction models with locally available geotechnical data

We present a method to update the geospatial liquefaction model used by the U.S. Geological Survey’s near‐real‐time ground failure product with subsurface geotechnical data. The geospatial model estimates liquefaction probability from peak ground velocity (via ShakeMap) and geospatial susceptibility proxies. In many regions, additional information relevant to constraining liquefaction likelihood is also available, including surface geology maps and subsurface geotechnical measurements. There is currently no mechanism to use these data in the ground failure product liquefaction model, even though these data could provide more precise constraints on spatial variations in the lithologic character of the soil (surface geology) and direct measurements of the subsurface mechanical properties that affect liquefaction occurrence and severity (geotechnical measurements). In this study, we develop a method to integrate these data with the geospatial model and assess how these data can improve regional‐scale predictions. We develop a Bayesian updating framework and apply it to the 1989 magnitude 6.9 Loma Prieta, California, earthquake, for which mapped observations are available to evaluate performance. We constrain the Bayesian framework with 373 Northern California cone penetration tests and liquefaction susceptibility classes based on the mapped surface geology. This Bayesian model incorporates geotechnical information into the geospatial model and more accurately predicts liquefaction occurrences than the geospatial model, while sacrificing less accuracy in terms of predicting the absence of liquefaction than the geotechnical model. In future applications, this approach could be adapted to update other geospatial models using locally available subsurface data.

California↗
USGS2025

Generalized Bancroft algorithm for locating earthquakes with P- and S-wave arrival times

Because of similarities between locating an earthquake with seismic stations and locating a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver from satellites, the Bancroft algorithm developed for GPS processing can be used to locate earthquakes. Such an approach to earthquake location differs from the conventional method of choosing an initial or trial solution and then iteratively improving the solution until convergence. The Bancroft algorithm has the advantage of being a direct, noniterative solution but with the disadvantage of only being able to accommodate a homogeneous velocity model. An additional limitation of the standard Bancroft algorithm is that it considers arrival times in a medium with a single propagation velocity. This poses no problem for GPS processing because electromagnetic waves travel at the speed of light; however, for seismic waves it means the algorithm can be applied to collections of either P ‐ or S ‐wave arrival times. Here, I show how the Bancroft algorithm can be generalized to handle both P ‐ and S ‐wave arrival‐time measurements simultaneously. I also show how to accommodate depth‐varying P ‐ and S ‐wave velocity models. I apply the generalized Bancroft algorithm to microearthquakes beneath Tanaga Volcano in Alaska and compare standard locations from the widely used HYPOINVERSE location code to Bancroft locations and to the output of HYPOINVERSE when setting the trial location to the Bancroft location. I find the Bancroft locations outperform the results from the other methods for shallow earthquakes near sea level, where a quantity known as the geometric dilution of precision is large and linearized approaches such as HYPOINVERSE are expected to struggle.

Alaska↗
USGS2024

Are field observations of surface rupture useful? An example from the 2023 Mw 7.8 Pazarcık, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake

Field investigations have long been an important component of the scientific response to surface‐faulting earthquakes. However, in light of advances in remote data and models, the question arises whether field‐based observations of surface rupture remain useful for understanding rupture processes and seismic hazards. We approach this question using a field‐based study of the central 2023 M w 7.8 Pazarcık, Turkey (Türkiye), earthquake rupture, at the intersection of the east Anatolian fault (EAF) and Narlı fault. Our field observations include the surface rupture expression and extent of the central EAF and northernmost Narlı fault in generally forested and steep terrain and 68 measurements of left‐lateral surface displacement. These data improve our understanding of the Pazarcık rupture complexity, resolve the surface geometry of the Narlı fault–EAF connection, and exhibit a clear (>2 m) change in surface displacement across this intersection zone that confirms remote‐based coseismic slip models. Our study shows that focusing field efforts in areas of obscured or low‐resolution remote data can yield essential data for refining rupture extent, documenting perishable on‐fault displacement, and improving postearthquake situational awareness. A comparison of similarly large‐magnitude continental surface‐rupturing earthquakes indicates that displacement uncertainties relate to a complex set of factors, including measurement methods, rupture complexity, and displacement magnitude. Our study validates the need for postearthquake field observations, which, when driven by clear motivating questions and knowledge of methodological strengths and limitations, provide high‐resolution rupture data that complement remote‐based models.

Pazarcık↗
USGS2026

Magnitude conversion relations create substantial differences in seismic hazard models

Earthquake catalogs are essential data inputs for seismic hazard modeling. Because earthquake magnitudes are reported in a variety of types (e.g., local magnitudes and moment magnitudes), magnitude conversion relationships must be used to convert the different magnitude types present in a catalog to a uniform magnitude type to avoid biases in the hazard computation. However, these conversion relationships are often uncertain and have been shown to sometimes perform poorly. Here, we investigate the sensitivity of the gridded seismicity component of the National Seismic Hazard Model (NSHM) to the catalog conversion equations in the Eastern United States. In the 2023 NSHM, magnitudes of various types were converted to moment magnitudes using equations developed by the Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities (CEUS‐SSCn), based on least‐squares (LS) regressions made using data from a catalog containing events up through 2008. We recompute these equations using events in the Advanced National Seismic System Comprehensive Earthquake Catalog with multiple magnitudes from 2000 to 2023. Although we prefer the use of orthogonal regressions for our datasets, LS regressions produce broadly similar results, with both approaches exhibiting large deviations from the CEUS‐SSCn conversions, especially at smaller magnitudes. We compare the spatial distribution of annual rates using three different models: (1) the 2023 NSHM conversions, (2) our updated conversions, and (3) no conversions. We find that the choice of conversions leads to substantial differences in the rate forecasts, which can greatly impact the seismic hazard model, particularly in regions with low‐seismicity rates such as the Eastern United States, where the hazard is dominated by gridded seismicity rather than a fault model.

Seismological Research Letters↗
USGS2025

Searching for seismic precursors - The Barry Landslide hazard clean up

The Barry Landslide, located in Barry Arm of Prince William Sound, Alaska, poses a major hazard due to its steep, unstable slopes and the potential for a massive landslide-generated tsunami. With an estimated volume of 500–700 million cubic meters, the Barry Landslide could trigger highly destructive waves. In this study, we focus on seismic signals from the Barry Landslide, which are critical for providing timely tsunami warnings. Since the summer of 2020, the region has been instrumented to monitor the landslide, but the seismic record is complicated by the presence of nearby glaciers and frequent regional earthquakes. Among these signals, we analyze a specific class of short-duration, high-frequency seismic events that exhibit strong seasonal variability, increasing in rate from late summer to mid-winter before ceasing abruptly in late winter or early spring. Our analysis suggests that the source of these signals is likely near or beneath Cascade Glacier, adjacent to the landslide, rather than within the landslide mass itself. We apply detection algorithms to construct a time history for this signal type, which we then compare with environmental factors like precipitation, temperature, and slope displacement data from ground-based radar and remote sensing. Correlations indicate that these seismic events may be driven by seasonal hydrological changes, particularly the freeze-up of subglacial water pathways. While these events are not directly linked to landslide motion, they serve as indirect markers of subsurface hydrological conditions that influence slope stability. Our findings highlight the complex interplay between glaciers, groundwater, and landslide dynamics, emphasizing the need for multi-parameter monitoring to assess evolving geohazards in the region.

Alaska↗
USGS2026

Making many out of one: Synthetic geologic deformation model distributions for use in USGS NSHM25‐PRVI Puerto Rico-U.S. Virgin Island update

A key use‐case of geologic slip rates is within deformation models used in probabilistic seismic hazard analyses. Field‐derived geologic slip rates have formed the cornerstone of deformation models in such applications for decades. Recent advancements in seismic hazard analyses have expanded the use of faults for which geologic slip rates are not well constrained using categorical slip rate estimates. Because of these advancements, application of a geologic deformation model for use in 2025 U.S. Geological Survey National Seismic Hazard Model Puerto Rico‐U.S. Virgin Islands (NSHM25‐PRVI) proved challenging due to: (1) a lack of field‐based geologic slip rates, and (2) a lack of epistemic uncertainty distributions within a broad range of estimated slip rates. Preliminary versions of the NSHM25‐PRVI model sampled these slip rate bins in a coincident manner along preferred and extreme value branches, which yielded untenable correlations in mean hazard results. To minimize the influence of correlated uncertainties amid these challenges, we develop a synthetic epistemic uncertainty distribution for deformation rate on each crustal fault. Each fault has a weighting schema across four possible distribution shapes: uniform, normal, triangular favoring local minima, and triangular favoring local maxima. The synthetic distributions are then sampled several times for each logic tree branch. The results provide a more realistic distribution of rates across the study region as compared with using correlated extrema sampling. This exploration of our method in a small region like PRVI can pave the way for larger‐scale, more complicated applications (e.g., western United States).

Puerto Rico, US Virgin Islands↗
USGS2026

Earthquake ground-motion model adjustments for the San Francisco Bay area

We develop adjustments to ergodic ground‐motion models (GMMs) to improve their performance in the San Francisco Bay Area (SFBA). GMMs are widely used in hazard assessments to estimate characteristics of ground shaking based on known properties of the source, path, and site. Such models are often developed using datasets containing records from various regions, resulting in models that represent median ground‐motion behavior, which may not adequately represent ground motions within subregions. This is true for the SFBA, where ground motions attenuate more rapidly with distance than in many other parts of California that dominate GMM databases. To support improved seismic hazard estimates in the SFBA, we calculate regional constants and anelastic attenuation coefficient adjustments relative to two commonly used ergodic GMMs: BSSA14 ( Boore et al. , 2014 ) and ASK14 ( Abrahamson et al. , 2014 ). These adjustments are obtained for a suite of ground‐motion intensity measures (peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and 5%‐damped pseudospectral acceleration at oscillator periods ranging from 0.075 to 10 s) using mixed‐effects regression. Use of the regionally adjusted models reduces the overall bias by up to 0.5 natural log units for BSSA14 and up to 0.6 natural log units for ASK14. We demonstrate one application of our attenuation adjustments and their implications in an earthquake early warning case study of the 2014 M 6.0 South Napa earthquake. The predicted extent of shaking using the adjusted models better matches observed shaking at large source‐to‐site distances, especially for lower shaking intensities, thus potentially reducing overalerting. We encourage the use of our model adjustments when ergodic models are considered for seismic hazard studies in the SFBA.

California↗
USGS2025

High frequency and region-scale simulations of large (Mw7+) earthquakes on the southern Whidbey Island fault, Washington, USA

We simulate ground shaking in western Washington State from hypothetical M w 7.0–7.5 earthquakes on the southern Whidbey Island fault (SWIF). Ground motions are modeled considering kinematic source distributions on a complex fault plane, a 3D seismic velocity model, and region‐specific soil velocity models. We run simulations with varying model resolutions, including regional‐scale simulations with a maximum‐modeled frequency of ∼1 Hz and local‐scale simulations with a maximum‐modeled frequency of ∼2.5 Hz. Additional local‐scale simulations are run considering high‐resolution surface topography. We explore how source parameters (i.e., magnitude, hypocenter location, and dip direction) and 3D velocity structure impact peak shaking intensity and its variability. In particular, we find that earthquakes on the SWIF would likely produce strong shaking throughout the populated Puget Lowland, including in the cities of Everett, Seattle, Bellevue, and Tacoma, Washington. Simulated short‐period ( T ≤ 2 s) spectral accelerations are strong throughout the Puget Lowland, and long‐period shaking ( T ≥ 5 s) is strong in the deep regional sedimentary basins, especially the Everett and Seattle basins. Source parameters strongly influence intra‐ and interevent variability in response, primarily through changes in source and site geometry, as well as rupture directivity. We also note a potential coupling between rupture directivity and basin effects, wherein directivity pulses are seemingly guided through the region’s deep, interconnected sedimentary basins. Overall, this work highlights the impacts of 3D source, path, and site effects on seismic hazard in the U.S. Pacific Northwest and substantially expands the catalog of simulated ground motions for Puget Sound area crustal faults.

Washington↗
USGS2025

Reflections on a trio of North American earthquakes in 1925

In 1925, three moderately large damaging earthquakes occurred in North America over four months: the 28 February (local time; LT) M 6.2 Charlevoix, 27 June (LT) M 6.6 Montana, and 29 June M 6.5 Santa Barbara earthquakes. The centennial anniversaries of these events motivated this retrospective consideration focused on the ground motions generated by the three events, including a reconsideration of early intensity assignments for the Montana earthquake. At the time, these three earthquakes appeared to support the arguments of some geologists who downplayed the severity of seismic hazard in southern California relative to other parts of the country. Some of the arguments advanced at that time, for example that Los Angeles “has the least to fear from ‘Acts of God’ of any city under the American flag,” ( Hill, 1928 ) sound naïve if not laughable now, but a comparison of well‐constrained shaking distributions for the three earthquakes reveals the dramatic difference in wave propagation efficiency in western versus eastern North America (ENAM), which leads to moderate ENAM events being felt to much larger distances. At M 6.2, the 1925 Charlevoix earthquake was a notably large event in ENAM. This earthquake was the largest event in eastern Canada since 1870 and caused damage in the epicentral region in addition to towns as far away as 200 km, with felt shaking extending over 1000 km. In contrast, felt shaking from the Santa Barbara earthquake barely extended beyond ∼200 km. Compiling published intensity distributions for larger ENAM earthquakes, we show that perceptible earthquake shaking is not uncommon in ENAM over century time scales, but experience with weakly felt shaking may incline people to downplay potential earthquake risk.

California, Montana, Quebec↗