USGS Science⌕ Search

SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Offshore”

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.

At least 991 records · Page 55Linked to original sources

Sea-floor geology in northeastern Block Island Sound, Rhode Island

Multibeam-echosounder and sidescan-sonar data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in northeastern Block Island Sound, combined with sediment samples and bottom photography collected by the U.S. Geological Survey, are used to interpret sea-floor features and sedimentary environments in this 52-square-kilometer-area offshore Rhode Island. Boulders, which are often overgrown with sessile fauna and flora, are mostly in water depths shallower than 20 meters. They are probably part of the southern flank of the Harbor Hill-Roanoke Point-Charlestown-Buzzards Bay moraine, deposited about 18,000 years ago. Scour depressions, areas of the sea floor with a coarser grained, rippled surface lying about 0.5 meter below the finer grained, surrounding sea floor, along with erosional outliers within the depressions are in a band near shore and also offshore in deep parts of the study area. Textural and bathymetric differences between areas of scour depressions and the surrounding sea floor or erosional outliers stand out in the sidescan-sonar imagery with sharp tonal contrasts. Also visible in the sidescan-sonar imagery are broad, low-profile bedforms with coarser grained troughs and finer grained crests.

Rhode Island↗

Bathymetry and acoustic backscatter: outer mainland shelf and slope, Gulf of Santa Catalina, southern California

In 2010 and 2011, scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Coastal and Marine Geology Program, acquired bathymetry and acoustic-backscatter data from the outer shelf and slope region offshore of southern California. The surveys were conducted as part of the USGS Marine Geohazards Program. Assessment of the hazards posed by offshore faults, submarine landslides, and tsunamis are facilitated by accurate and detailed bathymetric data. The surveys were conducted using the USGS R/V Parke Snavely outfitted with a 100-kHz Reson 7111 multibeam-echosounder system. This report provides the bathymetry and backscatter data acquired during these surveys in several formats, a summary of the mapping mission, maps of bathymetry and backscatter, and Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) metadata.

California↗

Near-surface stratigraphy and morphology, Mississippi Inner Shelf, northern Gulf of Mexico

Over the past decade, the Mississippi Barrier Islands have been the focus of a comprehensive geologic investigation by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in collaboration with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and the National Park Service (NPS). The islands (Dauphin, Petite Bois, Horn, East Ship, West Ship, and Cat) are part of the Gulf Islands National Seashore (GUIS), and provide a diverse ecological habitat, protect the mainland from storm waves, and help maintain estuarine conditions within Mississippi Sound. Over the past century, the islands have been in a state of decline with respect to elevation and land-area loss. In 2005, the islands were severely impacted by Hurricane Katrina, which inundated them with a storm surge of 8 meters, causing severe shoreface erosion and widening breaches in Dauphin, West Ship, and Cat Islands. To evaluate the impact and fate of the islands, understanding their evolution and resiliency became a priority for the USGS under the Northern Gulf of Mexico Ecosystem Change and Hazard Susceptibility Project. The project formed the basis for collaboration with the USACE Mississippi Coastal Improvement Project, which is intended to restore portions of coastal Mississippi and GUIS affected by storm impact. Since then, many studies have contributed to our understanding of the islands’ morphology and nearshore stratigraphy. This report expands upon the nearshore component to provide a stratigraphic and morphologic assessment offshore of Petit Bois Island. In June 2013, as part of the MsCIP project, the USGS conducted a geophysical survey consisting of about 650 line-kilometers (km), encompassing an area of approximately 212 square kilometers (km 2 ). The survey area extended from 1 to 13 km offshore of Petite Bois Island. The geophysical investigation included interferometric swath bathymetry, sidescan sonar, and chirp subbottom profiling. The intent of the survey was to provide geologic information that would assist the USACE in developing a sediment sampling strategy for identifying deposits suitable for shoreline restoration operations. The data from the geophysical survey would also further our understanding of the geologic framework along the inner shelf. Numerous seafloor and subbottom features were identified. At the surface, shoals and shelf sand sheets of various sizes and orientations are the predominant morphology. In the subsurface, Holocene- and Pleistocene-age features include marine transgressive deposits infilling older fluvia distributary systems. These interpretations from the geophysical research were integrated with sediment cores collected by the USGS and USACE to provide textural and volumetric information.

Mississippi-Alabama shelf↗

Seismicity of the Earth 1900-2013, seismotectonics of South America (Nazca Plate Region)

The South American arc extends over 7,000 kilometers (km), from the Chilean margin triple junction offshore of southern Chile, to its intersection with the Panama fracture zone, offshore of the southern coast of Panama in Central America. It marks the plate boundary between the subducting Nazca plate and the South America plate, where the oceanic crust and lithosphere of the Nazca plate begin their descent into the mantle beneath South America. The convergence associated with this subduction process is responsible for the uplift of the Andes Mountains, and for the active volcanic chain present along much of this deformation front. Relative to a fixed South America plate, the Nazca plate moves slightly north of eastwards at a rate varying from approximately 80 millimeters/year (mm/yr) in the south, to approximately 65 mm/yr in the north. Although the rate of subduction varies little along the entire arc, there are complex changes in the geologic processes along the subduction zone that dramatically influence volcanic activity, crustal deformation, earthquake generation and occurrence all along the western edge of South America.

Open-File Report↗

Analysis of bathymetric surveys to identify coastal vulnerabilities at Cape Canaveral, Florida

Cape Canaveral, Florida, is a prominent feature along the Southeast U.S. coastline. The region includes Merritt Island National Wildlife Refuge, Cape Canaveral Air Force Station, NASA’s Kennedy Space Center, and a large portion of Canaveral National Seashore. The actual promontory of the modern Cape falls within the jurisdictional boundaries of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. Erosion hazards result from winter and tropical storms, changes in sand resources, sediment budgets, and sea-level rise. Previous work by the USGS has focused on the vulnerability of the dunes to storms, where updated bathymetry and topography have been used for modeling efforts. Existing research indicates that submerged shoals, ridges, and sandbars affect patterns of wave refraction and height, coastal currents, and control sediment transport. These seabed anomalies indicate the availability and movement of sand within the nearshore environment, which may be directly related to the stability of the Cape Canaveral shoreline. Understanding the complex dynamics of the offshore bathymetry and associated sediment pathways can help identify current and future erosion vulnerabilities due to short-term (for example, hurricane and other extreme storms) and long-term (for example, sea-level rise) hazards. The purpose of this work is to describe an updated bathymetric dataset collected in 2014 and compare it to previous datasets. The updated data focus on the bathymetric features and sediment transport pathways that connect the offshore regions to the shoreline and, therefore, are related to the protection of other portions of the coastal environment, such as dunes, that support infrastructure and ecosystems. Previous survey data include National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS) hydrographic survey from 1956 and a USGS survey from 2010 that is augmented with NOS surveys from 2006 and 2007. The primary result of this analysis is documentation and quantification of the nature and rates of bathymetric changes that are near (within about 2.5 km) the current Cape Canaveral shoreline and interpretation of the impact of these changes on future erosion vulnerability.

Florida↗

Analysis of seafloor change at Breton Island, Gosier Shoals, and surrounding waters, 1869–2014, Breton National Wildlife Refuge, Louisiana

Characterizing bathymetric change in coastal environments is an important component in understanding shoreline evolution, especially along barrier island platforms. Bathymetric change is a function of the regional sediment budget, long-term wave and current patterns, and episodic impact from high-energy events such as storms. Human modifications may also cause changes in seafloor elevation. This study, conducted by the U.S. Geological Survey in collaboration with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, evaluates bathymetric and volumetric change and sediment characteristics around Breton Island and Gosier Shoals located offshore of the Mississippi River Delta in Louisiana. This area has been affected by significant storm events such as Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Sedimentation patterns at Breton Island and offshore have also been modified by the excavation of a shipping channel north of the island. Four time periods are considered that encompass these episodes and include long-term change and short-term storm recovery: 1869–2014, 1869–1920, 1920–2014, and 2007–2014. Finally, sediment characteristics are reported in the context of seafloor elevation.

Louisana↗

Geologic assessment of undiscovered oil and gas resources—Lower Cretaceous Albian to Upper Cretaceous Cenomanian carbonate rocks of the Fredericksburg and Washita Groups, United States Gulf of Mexico Coastal Plain and State Waters

In 2010, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) assessed Lower Cretaceous Albian to Upper Cretaceous Cenomanian carbonate rocks of the Fredericksburg and Washita Groups and their equivalent units for technically recoverable, undiscovered hydrocarbon resources underlying onshore lands and State Waters of the Gulf Coast region of the United States. This assessment was based on a geologic model that incorporates the Upper Jurassic-Cretaceous-Tertiary Composite Total Petroleum System (TPS) of the Gulf of Mexico basin; the TPS was defined previously by the USGS assessment team in the assessment of undiscovered hydrocarbon resources in Tertiary strata of the Gulf Coast region in 2007. One conventional assessment unit (AU), which extends from south Texas to the Florida panhandle, was defined: the Fredericksburg-Buda Carbonate Platform-Reef Gas and Oil AU. The assessed stratigraphic interval includes the Edwards Limestone of the Fredericksburg Group and the Georgetown and Buda Limestones of the Washita Group. The following factors were evaluated to define the AU and estimate oil and gas resources: potential source rocks, hydrocarbon migration, reservoir porosity and permeability, traps and seals, structural features, paleoenvironments (back-reef lagoon, reef, and fore-reef environments), and the potential for water washing of hydrocarbons near outcrop areas. In Texas and Louisiana, the downdip boundary of the AU was defined as a line that extends 10 miles downdip of the Lower Cretaceous shelf margin to include potential reef-talus hydrocarbon reservoirs. In Mississippi, Alabama, and the panhandle area of Florida, where the Lower Cretaceous shelf margin extends offshore, the downdip boundary was defined by the offshore boundary of State Waters. Updip boundaries of the AU were drawn based on the updip extent of carbonate rocks within the assessed interval, the presence of basin-margin fault zones, and the presence of producing wells. Other factors evaluated were the middle Cenomanian sea-level fall and erosion that removed large portions of platform and platform-margin carbonate sediments in the Washita Group of central Louisiana. The production history of discovered reservoirs and well data within the AU were examined to estimate the number and size of undiscovered oil and gas reservoirs within the AU. Using the USGS National Oil and Gas Assessment resource assessment methodology, mean volumes of 40 million barrels of oil, 622 billion cubic feet of gas, and 14 million barrels of natural gas liquids are the estimated technically recoverable undiscovered resources for the Fredericksburg-Buda Carbonate Platform-Reef Gas and Oil AU.

Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi↗

Expected warning times from the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system for earthquakes in the Pacific Northwest

The ShakeAlert® earthquake early warning system has been live since October 2019 for the testing of public alerting to mobile devices in California and will soon begin testing this modality in Oregon and Washington. The Pacific Northwest presents new challenges and opportunities for ShakeAlert owing to the different types of earthquakes that occur in the Cascadia subduction zone. Many locations in the Pacific Northwest are expected to experience shaking from shallow crustal earthquakes (similar to those in California), earthquakes that occur deep within the subducted slab, and large megathrust earthquakes that occur primarily offshore. The different geometries and maximum magnitudes associated with these types of earthquakes lead to a range of warning times that are possible between when the initial ShakeAlert Message is issued and when a user experiences strong shaking. After an earthquake begins, the strategy of the ShakeAlert system for public alerting is to warn people who are located close enough to the fault that the system estimates they will experience at least weak to moderate shaking. By alerting the public at these low levels of expected shaking, it is possible to provide sufficient warning times for some users to take protective actions before strong shaking begins. In this study, we present an analysis of past ShakeAlert Messages as well as simulations of historical earthquakes and potential future Cascadia earthquakes to quantify the range of warning times that users who experience strong or worse shaking are likely to receive. Additional applications for ShakeAlert involve initiation of automatic protective actions prior to the onset of shaking, such as slowing trains, shutting water supplies, and opening firehouse doors, which are beyond the scope of this paper. Users in the Pacific Northwest should expect that the majority of alerts they receive will be from shallow crustal and intraslab earthquakes. In these cases, users will only have a few seconds of warning before strong shaking begins. This remains true even during infrequent, offshore great (magnitude ≥8) megathrust earthquakes, where warning times will generally range from seconds to tens of seconds, depending on the user’s location and the intensity of predicted shaking that a user chooses to be alerted for, with the longest warning times of 50–80 seconds possible only for users located at considerable distance from the epicenter. ShakeAlert thus requires short, readily understood alerts stating that earthquake shaking is imminent and suggesting protective actions users should take. Extensive education and outreach efforts that emphasize the need to take actions quickly will be required for ShakeAlert to successfully reduce injuries and losses.

California, Oregon, Washington↗

Inventory of eelgrass (Zostera marina) and seaweeds at the end of the Alaska Peninsula, August–September 2012:

Coastal communities in Alaska are undergoing rapid environmental change from increasing temperatures and baseline data are needed to monitor potential impacts. We conducted the first surveys of the abundance and distribution of eelgrass ( Zostera marina ) and seaweeds in the western part of Izembek National Wildlife Refuge at the end of the Alaska Peninsula. Six embayments and two offshore islands were surveyed in August–September of 2012. Biotic (percent cover of eelgrass/seaweeds, presence/absences of five sessile invertebrates), and abiotic (water temperature, salinity, and depth) data were recorded at 257 survey points (range =9–74 points per site) across all sites. Twenty-two genera/species of seaweeds were identified at the six embayments. New seaweed species for the offshore islands of Sanak and Caton were added to an existing seaweed collection accessioned at the University of British Columbia Herbarium. We also collected samples of eelgrass to be accessioned at U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center-Molecular Ecology Laboratory, for future genetic analyses. Fifty-three species of birds and 13 species of mammals were observed and recorded during the survey period.

Alaska↗

Rigorously valuing the coastal hazard risks reduction provided by potential coral reef restoration in Florida and Puerto Rico

The restoration of coastal habitats, particularly coral reefs, can reduce risks by decreasing the exposure of coastal communities to flooding hazards. In the United States, the protective services provided by coral reefs were recently assessed in social and economic terms, with the annual protection provided by U.S. coral reefs off the coasts of the State of Florida and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico estimated to be more than 9,800 people and $859 million (2010 U.S. dollars). Hurricanes Irma and Maria in 2017 caused widespread damage to coral reefs in the State of Florida and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. Here we combine engineering, ecologic, geospatial, social, and economic data and tools to provide a rigorous valuation of where potential coral reef restoration could decrease the hazard faced by Florida and Puerto Rico’s reef-fronted coastal communities. The three restoration scenarios considered: (1) Ecological restoration, ‘E25’, which assumes planting 0.25-meter (m)-high corals on a (cross-shore) 25-m-wide reef; (2) Structural plus ecological, ‘S25’, which assumes emplacing a 1.00-m high structure with 0.25-m high corals on top on a 25 m wide reef; and (3) structural plus ecological, ‘S05’, which assumes emplacing a 1.00-m high structure with 0.25-m high corals on top on a 5 m wide reef. Planted corals are assumed to increase hydrodynamic roughness, thereby dissipating incident wave energy and decreasing flooding potential. We used a standardized approach to ‘place’ potential restoration projects throughout the whole (linear) extent of reefs bordering Florida and Puerto Rico to identify where coral reef restoration could be useful for meeting flood reduction benefits. We always sited potential restoration projects within the existing distribution of reefs even though many sites were far (kilometers [km]) offshore and some sites were relatively deep (up to 7 m depth). We followed risk-based valuation approaches to map flood zones at 10-square-meter resolution along all 980 km of Florida and Puerto’s Rico reef-lined shorelines for the three potential coral reef restoration scenarios and compare them to the flood zones without coral reef restoration. We quantified the potential coastal flood risk reduction provided by coral reef restoration using the latest information from the U.S. Census Bureau, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and Bureau of Economic Analysis for return-interval storm events. Using the damages associated with each storm probability, we also calculate the change in annual expected damages, a measure of the annual protection gained because of coral reef restoration. We found that the benefits of reef restoration off Florida and Puerto Rico are spatially highly variable. In most areas, we found little or no benefit from reef restoration (for example, restoration sites were far offshore or deep). However, there were a number of key areas where reef restoration could have substantial benefits for flood risk reduction. In particular, we estimated the protection gained by Florida and Puerto Rico’s coral reefs from coral reef restoration to result in: Avoided flooding to more than 5.6 square kilometers (2.16 square miles) of land annually; Avoided flooding affecting more than 3,100 people annually; Avoided direct damages of more than $124.2 million to more than 890 buildings annually; and Avoided indirect damages to more $148.7 million in economic activity owing to housing and business damage annually. Thus, the annual value of flood risk reduction provided by potential coral reef restoration in Florida and Puerto Rico is more than 3,100 people and $272.9 million (2010 U.S. dollars) in economic activity. These data provide stakeholders and decision makers with a spatially explicit, rigorous valuation of how, where, and when potential coral reef restoration in Florida and Puerto Rico can increase critical coastal storm flood reduction benefits. These results help identify areas where reef management, recovery, and restoration could potentially help reduce the risk to, and increase the resiliency of, Florida and Puerto Rico’s coastal communities.

Florida↗

Monitoring of wave, current, and sediment dynamics along the Fog Point Living Shoreline, Glenn Martin National Wildlife Refuge, Maryland

Living shorelines with salt marsh species, rock breakwaters, and sand nourishment were built along the coastal areas in the Glenn Martin National Wildlife Refuge, Maryland, in 2016 in response to Hurricane Sandy (2012). The Fog Point living shoreline at Glenn Martin National Wildlife Refuge was designed with the “headland - breakwater - embayment” pattern. Scientists from the U.S. Geological Survey, Northeastern University, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and Louisiana State University studied wave, current, and sediment dynamics to assess the effectiveness of the Fog Point living shoreline structures in terms of wave attenuation and erosion reduction. Wave gages, current meters, sediment traps, sediment tiles, and lateral erosion pins were deployed along the Fog Point shoreline during February 10–14, 2020. Because of COVID-19 pandemic travel restrictions, sensors were not retrieved until August 25, 2021, which was 18 months after field deployment, resulting in tremendous loss or damage of sensors and sediment measurements. Monitoring data indicated that wave heights were substantially reduced at locations behind the breakwater (headland) compared to the wave heights in the offshore location, but not at the location in the control area (the embayment). Current patterns and current velocities at the location behind the breakwater were complex and changed dramatically compared to the current patterns and current velocities offshore. Sediments were blocked by the breakwater most of the time except during periods of storms with wave heights larger than 0.9 meter, when waves overtopped the breakwater and brought sediments to the tidal flat and salt marshes behind the breakwater. Behind the breakwater, both sediment deposition and erosion were observed during the 18 months of monitoring. Continued low elevation marsh edge erosion from wave undercutting along the embayment was observed, especially at the existing wave-cut gullies. Monitoring results indicate that the “breakwater + marsh planting” structure along the Fog Point shoreline has limited shoreline protection capacity. Marsh edge erosion behind the breakwater was likely caused by the limited sediment supply from marine sources for transport and delivery, as well as the effects of circulation and current velocity on the settling and deposition of suspended sediments from eroded marshes. Marsh edge erosion continued in the embayment or control area where no shoreline restoration structures were implemented. Long-term (decadal scale) monitoring and adaptive management of living shoreline structures could help to assess the effectiveness of wave attenuation for reducing shoreline erosion and enhancing vegetation growth for trapping sediments and the effectiveness of marsh surface elevation growth for keeping pace with sea level rise.

Maryland↗

Numerical modeling of circulation and wave dynamics along the shoreline of Shinnecock Indian Nation in Long Island, New York

The Shinnecock Indian Nation on Long Island, New York, faces challenges of shoreline retreat, saltwater intrusion, and flooding of the Tribal lands under changing climate and rising sea level. However, understanding of the dynamics of tidal circulation and waves and their impacts on the Shinnecock Indian Nation’s shoreline remains limited. This numerical study employs the integrated modeling capabilities of the hydrodynamic model Delft3D-FLOW and the spectral-wave model Simulating WAves Nearshore (SWAN) to investigate the circulation and wave dynamics along the shoreline of Shinnecock Indian Nation. The results of the 1-year long simulation indicate the majority of wind waves approach the Shinnecock Nation shorelines at normal wave angles, with yearly averaged offshore wave height of around 0.2 meter, maximum wave height reaching 0.65 meter, and yearly averaged offshore wave power of approximately 50 watts per meter. Boulders, acting as natural barriers, have been placed along the shoreline to reduce erosive wave forcing. Simulation results indicate the boulders to the north end effectively attenuate wave energy and reduce annual wave power, while the boulders near the two tidal ponds adjacent to the Tribal cemetery only have a slight influence on wave energy. There are large spatial variabilities in wave attenuation and current velocity reduction by the boulders. The model framework developed in this study can be utilized for the optimal design of nature-based solutions, guiding decisions on the placement of living shoreline structures and determining their optimal size. This study further identifies data and knowledge gaps as well as future research opportunities that can enhance the performance of numerical models and contribute to the scientific understanding of coastal processes and facilitate the optimal design of hybrid living shorelines in the future to achieve the maximum protective efficacy. This research can help to inform strategies for safeguarding vulnerable coastal communities and promoting resilience and sustainability of shoreline along the Shinnecock Indian Nation.

New York↗

Regional and other general factors bearing on evaluation of earthquake and other geologic hazards to coastal communities of southeastern Alaska

The great Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, brought into sharp focus the need for engineering geologic studies in seismically active regions. As a result, nine communities in southeastern Alaska were selected for reconnaissance investigations as an integral part of an overall program to evaluate earthquake and other geologic hazards in most of the larger Alaska coastal communities. This report gives background information on the regional and other general factors that bear on these evaluations. Southeastern Alaska, about 525 miles long and averaging about 125 miles in width, consists of a narrow mainland strip and numerous islands. For the most part, it is a region of rugged relief with numerous glaciers capping many of the higher mountainous areas and with long linear fiords forming the inland waterways. A maritime climate prevails with mild winters and cool summers. The southeastern part of the region receives the highest precipitation in the continental United States. Ketchikan, with a population of 6,994 in 1970, is the largest city. Geology and structure of the area are complex. Igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks crop out and range in age from Paleozoic to Tertiary. Surficial deposits of Pleistocene and Holocene age mantle many areas. All of southeastern Alaska, except probably the highest peaks, was covered by glacier ice advances of late Pleistocene age. Major deglaciation was well advanced by 10,000 years ago--a time which approximately marks the end of the Pleistocene and the beginning of the Holocene. There followed a period of warm climate called the Hypsithermal, which in southeastern Alaska began 7,000-8,000 years ago and ended about 4,800-3,500 years ago. Glaciers in most places receded back of their present positions. The Hypsithermal was followed by an interval (termed Neoglaciation) of cooler climate and resurgence of glacier ice which continues to the present, although most glaciers are now rapidly receding. During the past 10,000 years worldwide sea level has risen about 100 feet, but during the past 4,000 years it has risen only about 10 feet or about 0.03 inch per year. With sea level used as a datum, the amount of sea-level rise must be added to the apparent uplift of land for the time under consideration to determine the actual amount of land uplift. The widespread presence of emergent marine deposits, several hundred feet above sea level, demonstrates that the land in southeastern Alaska has been uplifted since the last major deglaciation. The greatest known has been uplifted since the last major deglaciation. The greatest known uplift is in the vicinity of Juneau where glaciomarine deposits are present 750 feet above present sea level. Part of southeastern Alaska is presently undergoing one of the most rapid rates of uplift of any place in the world. The fastest emergence is occurring in the Glacier Bay area where the land is being uplifted relative to sea level approximately 3.9 cm per year. Most or all of the uplift appears to be due to rebound as a result of deglaciation. Southeastern Alaska lies within the circum-Pacific earthquake belt, one of the world's greatest zones of seismic activity. During historic time, there have been five earthquakes in the region with magnitudes of 8 or greater, three with magnitudes of 7 to 8, eight with magnitudes of 6 to 7, more than 15 with magnitudes of 5 to 6, and about 140 recorded earthquakes with magnitudes smaller than 5 or of unassigned magnitudes. All of the earthquakes with magnitudes 8 or greater, and a large proportion of the others, appear to be related to the active Fairweather- Queen Charlotte Islands fault system or its western extension, the Chugach-St. Elias fault. Earthquake epicenters on the Denali fault system, the other major fault system in southeastern Alaska, are few in comparison. However, because high microearthquake activity has been recorded recently on this system and earthquakes of moderate size have occurred on some of its segments, the Denali fault system probably should not be dismissed as a relict fault system of no current tectonic importance. There are numerous other known faults, as well as lineaments that may be faults of varying degrees of tectonic activity in southeastern Alaska, adjacent Canada, and eastern Alaska. One of these elements is the Totschunda fault system, which connects with the Denali fault system in eastern Alaska; it has been very active during Holocene time but few historical earthquake epicenters appear to be related to it. Both historical seismicity and geologic conditions, such as frequency and recency of faulting, must be considered together to permit an assessment of the future earthquake probability of an area. Data are too few for both factors for an accurate evaluation to be made of earthquake probability in southeastern Alaska. However, information compiled in the form of strain-release and seismic-zone maps permit some generalizations. Thus, it is tentatively concluded that most, if not all, of southeastern Alaska should be placed in seismic zone 3, a zone in which earthquakes of magnitude greater than 6 will occur from time to time and where there may be major damage to manmade structures. Inferred effects from future earthquakes in southeastern Alaska include: (1) surface displacement along faults and other tectonic land-level changes, (2) ground shaking, (3) compaction, (4) liquefaction in cohesionless materials, (5) reaction of sensitive and quick clays, (6) water-sediment ejection and associated subsidence and ground fracturing, (7) earthquake-induced sub aerial slides and slumps, (8) earthquake induced subaqueous slides, (9) effects on glaciers and related features, (10) effects on ground water and stream flow, and (11) tsunamis, seiches, and other abnormal water waves. Because of the reconnaissance nature of our studies in the coastal communities and the sparsity of laboratory data on physical properties of geologic units in each area studied, the inferred effects must be largely empirical and generalized. Therefore, the inferences are based in large part upon the effects of past major earthquakes in Alaska and elsewhere, particularly upon the well-documented effects of the Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964. Buildings, highways, bridges, tunnels, harbor facilities, pipelines, canals, and other manmade structures may be severely damaged or destroyed by fault displacement or related tectonic land-level changes in southeastern Alaska. Direct damage from fault rupture would be restricted virtually to structures built directly athwart the fault. In California and Nevada, fault rupture almost always accompanies shocks of magnitude 6.5 or greater. The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964, and the Chilean earthquake of May 22, 1960, dramatically illustrated the severe adverse effects that can result from uplift or subsidence over a wide area. The variable most responsible for the degree of shaking at any epicentral distance is the type of ground. Generally, shaking is considerably greater in poorly consolidated deposits than in hard bedrock, particularly if the deposits are water saturated. Severe shaking of alluvial deposits and manmade fill, with resultant heavy damage, is well documented from the records of many past earthquakes. Damage commonly has been heavy as a result of ground settlement caused by compaction of loose sediments by shaking during an earthquake. This has been especially true where compaction was accompanied by tectonic downdrop of land, such as occurred during the Chilean earthquake of 1960 and the Alaska earthquake of 1964. Loosely emplaced manmade fill, deltaic deposits, beach deposits, and alluvial deposits may be susceptible to compaction in southeastern Alaska during a severe earthquake. Liquefaction of sand and silt is a fairly common effect of large earthquakes. It was well illustrated at Niigata, Japan, during the earthquake of June 16, 1964, and resulted in extensive damage. When part of a sloping soil mass liquefies, the entire mass can undergo catastrophic failure and can flow as a high-density liquid. In southeastern Alaska, deltaic deposits probably would be most susceptible to liquefaction. Sensitive and quick clays, which lose a considerable part of their strength when shaken, commonly fail during an earthquake and become rapid earthflows. Extensive studies were made of the sensitivity of the Bootlegger Cove Clay at Anchorage because of the marked loss of shear strength and dramatic failures of the deposits during the Alaska earthquake of 1964. If similar sensitive clays are present in some places in southeastern Alaska, they most likely are in some of the emergent fine-grained marine deposits; supporting data to confirm their presence, however, are largely lacking. Records of some 50 major earthquakes show that in at least half of the instances water and sediment have been ejected from surficial deposits Water-sediment ejection and associated subsidence and ground fracturing commonly cause extensive damage to the works of man. Ejecta may fill basements and other low-lying parts of buildings. Agricultural land can be covered with a blanket of infertile soils, and small ponds can be filled or made shallow. In southeastern Alaska these phenomena are most likely to occur on valley floors, deltas, tidal flats, alluvial fans, swamps, and lakeshores. Earthquake-induced sliding on land generally is confined to steep slopes but may take place in fine-grained deposits on moderately to nearly flat surfaces if the deposits are subject to liquefaction. A large rockslide triggered by the Lituya Bay, Alaska, earthquake of July 10, 1958, generated a wave that surged up the opposite wall of the inlet to a record height of 1,740 feet. During the Hebgen Lake, Montana, earthquake of August 17, 1959, a spectacular rockslide plunged into the Madison River canyon, buried 28 people, dammed the river, and created a large lake. Earthquake-records are replete with accounts of sliding of surficial deposits during moderate to large earthquakes. Most or all of the general factors that favor subaerial landsliding are present in southeastern Alaska. Earthquake-induced subaqueous slides can produce adverse effects both nearshore and some distance offshore. Nearshore sliding may progress shoreward and destroy harbor facilities and other structures, commonly with substantial loss of life. Disastrous large submarine slides occurred along the fronts of deltas in Seward and Valdez during the Alaska earthquake of 1964. In similar fashion, the largest submarine slides in southeastern Alaska likely will be triggered along the larger delta fronts. Sliding farther offshore can constitute a threat to navigation because of changes in water depths. Also underwater sliding can break communication cables. Glaciers were not greatly affected by the Alaska earthquake of 1964 despite the fact that about 20 percent of the area that underwent strong shaking is covered by ice. In contrast, the cataclysmic avalanche of ice and rock that fell from a high glacier-covered peak in Peru during the earthquake of May 31, 1970, produced devastating effects downvalley on man and his works in the form of mudflows. Most towns in southeastern Alaska are sufficiently distant from glaciers so as not be to directly affected. Both the Alaska earthquake of 1964 and the Hebgen Lake, Montana, earthquake of 1959 significantly affected ground- and surface-water regimens. Water levels in some wells declined whereas in others flow increased. Some springs discharged at a rate three times as much as normal; flow of others decreased or stopped. Discharge of many streams increased markedly. Most or all of the effects described above could occur in parts of southeastern Alaska during future large earthquakes. Tsunamis, seiches, and other abnormal water waves associated with large earthquakes commonly cause vast property damage and heavy loss of life. Tsunami effects can be devastating to coastal areas as far as many thousands of miles from their generation source. Seiche effects generally are confined to inland bodies of water or to relatively enclosed coastal bodies of water. Abnormal waves generated by submarine sliding or by subaerial sliding into water generally produce only local effects but may be highly devastating. Tsunami waves resulting from the Chilean earthquake of 1960 inflicted extensive damage and loss of life on coastal communities throughout a large part of southern Chile, and significant runups and damage were recorded in many places throughout the Pacific Ocean area. The tsunami waves generated by the Alaska earthquake of 1964 struck with devastating force along a broad stretch of the Alaska coast and produced heavy property damage and loss of life as far away as Crescent City, Calif. Seiche waves generated by that earthquake reached runup heights of 20-30 feet on some lakes in Alaska, and water-level fluctuations were recorded on streams, reservoirs, lakes, and swimming pools in States bordering the Gulf of Mexico. Waves generated by submarine sliding struck violently at a number of places during or immediately after the quake and were the major cause of loss of life and damage to property. Slide-generated waves probably would have a higher destructive potential in southeastern Alaska than either tsunami waves or seiche waves because of their possibly higher local runups and because they can hit the shores almost without warning during or immediately after an earthquake. Nonearthquake-related geologic hazards, although generally far less dramatic than those related to earthquakes, tend to occur so much more frequently or persistently that their aggregate effects can be significant. Three kinds of geologic hazards of this type are discussed: (1) nonearthquake-induced landsliding and subaqueous sliding, (2) flooding, and (3) land uplift. The potential for nonearthquake-triggered landsliding in southeastern Alaska ranges widely from place to place. Past sliding generally furnishes the clue in the prediction of where and in what materials future sliding will occur. Fast-moving rockslides, debris slides, and mudflows can be expected to occur from time to time on steep slopes and be highly destructive to highways, power plants, pipelines, buildings, and other facilities located on a slope or at its base. Present slow downslope movement of talus can be expected to continue at the same general rate unless conditions are changed by man or there are climatic changes. Snow and debris avalanches can be especially hazardous during winter months. Long-inactive landslides may be triggered into renewed activity or new slides may be created by man-induced modifications. Accelerated slope erosion and debris flows may follow large-scale clearing and cutting of timber. Subaqueous sliding can be expected to occur periodically along fronts of deltas and on other oversteepened underwater slopes. Floods have been common in parts of southeastern Alaska because of heavy precipitation and rapid runoff from steep slopes with resulting heavy damage to roads and other facilities. Continued damage can be expected in the future unless more remedial measures are taken. Current uplift of land in southeastern Alaska, although probably not affecting man significantly in a short period of time, may have some adverse long-term effects. These long-term effects should be borne in mind when facilities such as docks and boat harbors are constructed on or near the shore, where there is a critical relation between height of land and water.

Alaska↗

Structure of the continental shelf west of San Francisco, California

The continental shelf west of San Francisco, California is divided into two structural provinces along the offshore extension of the Seal Cove fault, the Farallon and Golden Gate platforms. The Farallon platform lies west of the Seal Cove fault and is characterized by a thick sequence of Tertiary sediments with a maximum thickness of 3.5 km. These sediments are bounded at the edge of the continental shelf by a ridge of Cretaceous granitic rock which crops out at the Farallon Islands. The granitic basement is vertically displaced along the eastern flank of the granitic ridge and along two high angle reverse faults located near Point Reyes. The Point Reyes fault trends east-west and has possibly offset the granitic basement 1500 meters since late Pliocene time. Two northwest trending anticlines lie south of the Point Reyes fault. The eastern boundary of the Tertiary basin is delineated by a structural high composed of deformed basin sediments. This structural high is truncated at the Seal Cove fault. On the Golden Gate platform, the San Andreas fault zone is marked by a near surface graben, showing a maximum vertical displacement of 20 meters, and by a wider linear depression observed to a depth of 700 meters. The Pilarcitos fault continues offshore and joins the San Andreas fault south of Bolinas. The development of the present Tertiary basin under the continental shelf commenced in late Miocene time with. the initial uplift of the Farallon ridge and the compression of the eastern basin margin. Strike-slip faulting on the seal Cove fault in Pliocene time truncated middle Tertiary sediments at the fault and thus formed a distinct structural boundary between the Farallon and Golden Gate platforms. Surface extensional features observed within the San Andreas fault zone are suggestive of strike-slip faulting in late Tertiary time. The compressional high angle reverse faulting at Point Reyes occurred during the late Pliocene orogenic period of the California Coast Ranges.

Open-File Report↗

Interim report on petroleum resource potential and geologic hazards in the outer continental shelf of the Gulf of Alaska Tertiary province

The potential for discovering large accumulations of petroleum on the Outer Continental Shelf of the Gulf of Alaska Tertiary Province cannot be evaluated with much confidence at present because of the inadequacies of the available offshore geological and geophysical data. The 22 deep test wells that have been drilled since 1954 have been unsuccessful because structure is complex and because suitable reservoir rocks have not been found in favorable structural positions. Although it is possible that the factors controlling accumulation of petroleum may improve offshore, regional stratigraphic and structural considerations together with the limited geophysical data suggest that this is not necessarily the case. Extrapolation of onshore geology together with the limited amount of marine geophysical data, indicate that the eastern Gulf of Alaska Outer Continental Shelf is geologically complex and consists of several areas with markedly differing structural styles and petroleum potential.

Alaska↗

Geotechnical description of four Mississippi Delta soil borings

The submerged portion of the Mississippi Delta complex forms an ideal natural laboratory to study the effects of rapid deposition. One of the most obvious of these effects is the mass movements of sediments. Slump and slide signatures, mudflow characteristics, and evidence for creep are all found in abundance on the delta platform. These types of features have been studied by Colemen and Wright (1974) with regard to form and by Garrison (1974) with regard to their spatial distribution. Assembling these authors' findings, it is clear that the entire offshore zone contiguous with the Mississippi River is a myriad of geological action. This situation is indeed stimulating to the sedimentologist, yet it represents a nightmare to the foundation engineer. Emplacing offshore structures in such an environment is a most difficult task, particularly since the high degree of local variability dictates that each case must be handled separately. It is under these circumstances that a marriage between geology and engineering is most fruitful, for determining the relationships between the sedimentological processes and the engineering properties is satisfying to parties from both disciplines. This, then, is the underlying objective of the Mississippi Delta research project. By investigating the instability in a geologic sense, it is hoped that many of the engineering problems will become more soluble and that extrapolation and prediction will become more realistic.

Mississippi Delta↗

Surface sedimentary units of the Gulf of Alaska continental shelf: Montague Island to Yakutat Bay

Four major sedimentary units occur on the sea floor of the continental shelf in the northern Gulf of Alaska. These units, defined on the basis of seismic and sedimentologic data, are: (1) Holocene sediments, (2) Holocene mind moraines, C3) Quaternary glacial marine sediments, and (4) Tertiary and Pleistocene lithified deposits. A wedge of Holocene fine sand to clayey silt covers most of the inner shelf, reaching maximum thicknesses of about 350 m seaward of the Copper River and about 200 m seaward of Icy Bay. Holocene end moraines are found at the mouth of Icy Bay, south of Bering Glacier, and at the mouth of Yakutat Bay. Quaternary glacial marine sediments are found in a narrow arc that borders, on the north and west side of Tart Bank and in a large arc 20 km or more offshore that parallels the shoreline between Kayak Island and Yakutat Bay. Tertiary or Pleistocene stratified sedimentary rocks, which in profile commonly are folded, faulted, and truncated, crop out on Tarr Bank, offshore of Montague Island, and in several localities southeast and southwest of Cape Yakataga. The lack of Holocene cover on Tarr Bank and Middleton, Kayak and Montague Island platforms may be due to the scouring action of swift bottom currents and large storm waves. West of Kayak Island the Copper River is the primary source of Holocene sediment. East of Kayak Island the major sediment sources are streams draining the larger ice fields, notably, the Malaspina and Bering Glaciers. Transport of bottom and suspended sediment is predominantly to the west. If deglaciation of the shelf was completed by 10,000 years B.P., maximum rates of accumulation of Holocene sediment on the inner shelf may be as high as 10-35 m per 1,000 years.

Open-File Report↗

Federal onshore oil and gas lease bonus bids, 1972-1977: Statistical studies

We studied the statistical behavior of Federal onshore oil and gas lease bonus bids. Like offshore bids, these bids exhibited (a) occasional occurrences of low, noise bids, (b) apparent lognormality, (c) standard deviations (using natural logarithms) close to one, (d) apparent disparities between money left on the table given random lognormal bids consistent with flinching, and (e) wide ranges of aggressive and conservative biases of bidders in individual sales. In fact, the only substantive difference found was a far lesser proportion of joint bidding and larger company bidders bidding for these onshore leases which tended to receive lower bids than offshore bids.

Open-File Report↗