DOCSLIB.ORG

EA for Cascadia Spring/Summer Survey 2020

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
EA for Cascadia Spring/Summer Survey 2020 Draft Environmental Assessment/Analysis of a Marine Geophysical Survey by R/V Marcus G. Langseth of the Cascadia Subduction Zone in the Northeast Pacific Ocean, Late Spring/Summer 2020 Prepared for Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory 61 Route 9W, P.O. Box 1000 Palisades, NY 10964-8000 and National Science Foundation Division of Ocean Sciences 4201 Wilson Blvd., Suite 725 Arlington, VA 22230 by LGL Ltd., environmental research associates 22 Fisher St., POB 280 King City, Ont. L7B 1A6 21 November 2019 LGL Report FA0186-01A Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................................................... iv LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................................................. v ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................................... vi LIST OF ACRONYMS ..................................................................................................................................... ix I PURPOSE AND NEED ................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Mission of NSF ................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Purpose of and Need for the Proposed Action ................................................................................. 1 1.3 Background of NSF-funded Marine Seismic Research ................................................................... 2 1.4 Regulatory Setting ........................................................................................................................... 2 II ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION ...................................................................................... 2 2.1 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................... 2 2.1.1 Project Objectives and Context ........................................................................................... 2 2.1.2 Proposed Activities ............................................................................................................. 5 2.1.3 Monitoring and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................. 7 2.2 Alternative 1: No Action Alternative ............................................................................................. 10 2.3 Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Further Analysis .................................................... 10 2.3.1 Alternative E1: Alternative Location ................................................................................ 10 2.3.2 Alternative E2: Use of Alternative Technologies ............................................................. 11 III AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ..................................................................................................................... 12 3.1 Oceanography ................................................................................................................................ 13 3.2.1 Protected Areas .............................................................................................................................. 14 3.2.1 Critical Habitat in the U.S. ................................................................................................ 14 3.2.2 Critical Habitat in Canada ................................................................................................. 15 3.2.3 Other Conservation Areas in U.S. Waters ........................................................................ 17 3.2.4 Other Conservation Areas in Canada ................................................................................ 18 3.3 Marine Mammals ........................................................................................................................... 20 3.3.1 Mysticetes ......................................................................................................................... 23 3.3.2 Odontocetes ...................................................................................................................... 33 3.3.3 Pinnipeds ........................................................................................................................... 44 3.3.4 Fissiped 50 3.4 Sea Turtles ..................................................................................................................................... 51 3.4.1 Leatherback Turtle (Dermochelys coriacea) .................................................................... 51 3.4.2 Green Turtle (Chelonia mydas) ........................................................................................ 53 3.5 Seabirds .......................................................................................................................................... 53 3.5.1 Short-tailed Albatross ....................................................................................................... 54 3.5.2 Hawaiian Petrel ................................................................................................................. 55 3.5.3 Marbled Murrelet .............................................................................................................. 55 3.5.4 Pink-footed Shearwater ..................................................................................................... 56 Draft Environmental Assessment/Analysis for L-DEO Cascadia Subduction Zone, 2020 Page ii Table of Contents 3.5.5 Tufted Puffin ..................................................................................................................... 56 3.6 Fish and Marine Invertebrates, Essential Fish Habitat, and Habitat Areas of Particular Concern 56 3.6.1 ESA-Listed Fish Species .................................................................................................. 56 3.6.2 Essential Fish Habitat ....................................................................................................... 59 3.6.3 Habitat Areas of Particular Concern ................................................................................. 61 3.6.4 SARA-Listed Fish and Marine Invertebrate Species ........................................................ 63 3.6.5 Rockfish Conservation Areas ........................................................................................... 65 3.7 Fisheries ......................................................................................................................................... 65 3.7.1 Commercial Fisheries ....................................................................................................... 65 3.7.2 Recreational Fisheries ....................................................................................................... 65 3.7.3 Subsistence Fisheries ........................................................................................................ 67 3.8 Aquaculture .................................................................................................................................... 67 3.9 Shipwrecks and SCUBA Diving .................................................................................................... 68 IV ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ....................................................................................................... 69 4.1 Proposed Action ............................................................................................................................. 69 4.1.1 Direct Effects on Marine Mammals and Sea Turtles and Their Significance ................... 69 4.1.2 Direct Effects on Marine Invertebrates, Fish, and Fisheries, and Their Significance....... 90 4.1.3 Direct Effects on Seabirds and Their Significance ........................................................... 97 4.1.4 Indirect Effects on Marine Mammals, Sea Turtles, Seabirds and Fish and Their Significance ...................................................................................................................... 98 4.1.5 Direct Effects on Cultural Resources and Their Significance .......................................... 98 4.1.6 Cumulative Effects ........................................................................................................... 98 4.1.7 Unavoidable Impacts ...................................................................................................... 103 4.1.8 Coordination with Other Agencies and Processes .......................................................... 103 4.2 No Action Alternative .................................................................................................................. 103 V LIST OF PREPARERS .............................................................................................................................. 105 VI LITERATURE CITED ............................................................................................................................. 106 LIST OF APPENDICES ................................................................................................................................. 163 APPENDIX A: DETERMINATION OF MITIGATION ZONES .........................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL
    An Independent Newspaper for the Pacific Northwest AUGUST 1997 VOL. 3 No. 3 Dear Reader early all the problems we face in Cascadia boil down to population. NAs Alan Durning and Christopher Crowther point out in their new book, Misplaced Blame: The Real Roots of Population Growth, the Pacific Northwest is growing nearly twice the North American rate and almost 50 percent faster than the global population. The Northwest population reached 15 million EDITORIAL in mid-1997 and is swelling by another 1 million every 40 months. Starting this month, with our cover story on growth pressures in the scenic Columbia River Gorge, Cascadia Times Boom Times The UnbearableRightness ot Breen will publish an occasional series on, Can the Columbia River Gorge survive the Life on the fault line of environmentally growth, growth management strategies demand for development? and what it all means. As senior editor correct energy Kathie Durbin reports from the Columbia by Kathie Durbin Page 9 Gorge, local politics threaten this national by Kevin Bell Page 7 treasure. This is true everywhere, because growth and land-use decisions are in varyingdegrees made at the local THE USUAL STUFF level. We aren't saying that local commu• FIELD NOTES: Green groups clash over Sierra REALITY CHECK: 16 nities cannot do a good job protecting places such as the Gorge, Snoqualmie logging. EPA fines big Alaska mine. toxic waste POINT OF VIEW: The ASARCO juggernaut and Pass, Whidbey Island, Lake Tahoe or the on crops. Oregon slams nuclear weapons plan 3 Muir Woods, to name just a few places of its proposed Rock Creek Mine.
    [Show full text]
  • PETITION to PROTECT the HUMBOLDT MARTEN (Martes Caurina Humboldtensis) UNDER OREGON’S ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
    Attachment 2 PETITION TO PROTECT THE HUMBOLDT MARTEN (Martes caurina humboldtensis) UNDER OREGON’S ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT Photo © Charlotte Eriksson Oregon State University June 26, 2018 PETITIONERS Cascadia Wildlands is a non‐profit, public interest environmental organization headquartered in Eugene, Oregon. Cascadia Wildlands educates, agitates, and inspires a movement to protect and restore Cascadia’s wild ecosystems, including the species therein. We envision vast old‐growth forests, rivers full of wild salmon, wolves howling in the backcountry, and vibrant communities sustained by the unique landscapes of the Cascadia bioregion. We have worked for over a decade on Pacific marten issues in the Pacific Northwest. The Center for Biological Diversity is a non‐profit conservation organization with more than 1 million members and supporters dedicated to the conservation of endangered species and wild places, including members throughout the Pacific Northwest. The Center has been working to protect the Humboldt marten and its habitat for more than a decade. Defenders of Wildlife is a national non‐profit conservation organization founded in 1947 to protect all native animals and plants in their natural communities. Defenders works on mesocarnivore conservation and habitat connectivity in the range of the Humboldt marten through our field offices in Oregon and California. Environmental Protection Information Center is a community based, non‐profit organization that advocates for science‐based protection and restoration of Northwest California’s Forests. EPIC was founded in 1977 when local residents came together to successfully end aerial applications of herbicides by industrial logging companies in Humboldt County. Klamath‐Siskiyou Wildlands Center is a non‐profit, public interest organization that protects and restores wild nature in the Klamath‐Siskiyou region of northern California and southern Oregon.
    [Show full text]
  • Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future
    Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington: Past, Present, and Future As more and more states are incorporating projections of sea-level rise into coastal planning efforts, the states of California, Oregon, and Washington asked the National Research Council to project sea-level rise along their coasts for the years 2030, 2050, and 2100, taking into account the many factors that affect sea-level rise on a local scale. The projections show a sharp distinction at Cape Mendocino in northern California. South of that point, sea-level rise is expected to be very close to global projections; north of that point, sea-level rise is projected to be less than global projections because seismic strain is pushing the land upward. ny significant sea-level In compliance with a rise will pose enor- 2008 executive order, mous risks to the California state agencies have A been incorporating projec- valuable infrastructure, devel- opment, and wetlands that line tions of sea-level rise into much of the 1,600 mile shore- their coastal planning. This line of California, Oregon, and study provides the first Washington. For example, in comprehensive regional San Francisco Bay, two inter- projections of the changes in national airports, the ports of sea level expected in San Francisco and Oakland, a California, Oregon, and naval air station, freeways, Washington. housing developments, and sports stadiums have been Global Sea-Level Rise built on fill that raised the land Following a few thousand level only a few feet above the years of relative stability, highest tides. The San Francisco International Airport (center) global sea level has been Sea-level change is linked and surrounding areas will begin to flood with as rising since the late 19th or to changes in the Earth’s little as 40 cm (16 inches) of sea-level rise, a early 20th century, when climate.
    [Show full text]
  • GREAT PACIFIC NORTHWEST Aboard the American Empress® PORTLAND/VANCOUVER to CLARKSTON/SPOKANE JULY 19 – 27, 2020
    GREAT PACIFIC NORTHWEST aboard the American Empress® PORTLAND/VANCOUVER to CLARKSTON/SPOKANE JULY 19 – 27, 2020 BOOK BY JAN 3, 2020 Act Now to Receive: • $300 EARLY BOOKING SAVINGS PER PERSON • INCLUDED 1-NIGHT HOTEL STAY IN VANCOUVER, WASHINGTON SPONSORED BY: RAZORBACKS ON TOUR PAID PRSRT STD U.S. POSTAGE PERMIT #32322 TWIN CITIES, MN FOLLOW GO NEXT TRAVEL: SPOKANE EL STAY IN VANCOUVER, WA VANCOUVER, IN STAY EL IDAHO Arkansas Alumni Association, Inc. P.O. Box 1070 Fayetteville, AR 72702 Co WASHINGTON CLARKSTON lumb ASTORIA RICHLAND Snake River ia Rive MT. ST. HELENS r NEZ PERCE SACAJAWEA STATE PARK RESERVATION MULTNOMAH FALLS THE DALLES r VANCOUVER ia Rive Columb RAZORBACKS ON TOUR PORTLAND STEVENSON on Pacic ny Ocean OREGON Cover Image: $300 EARLY BOOKING SAVINGS PER PERSON PER $300 SAVINGS BOOKING EARLY HOT INCLUDED 1-NIGHT MT. HOOD lls Ca Cruise Mt. Hood Willamette He River Coach/Bus RIVER CRUISING Vacation The OriginalAmerican 2020 3, TO JANUARY RECEIVE: BY BOOK • • V1 373-1 Great Pacific Northwest V1 Cruise routes are approximate DEAR RAZORBACKS ON TOUR, Discover the beauty of cruising the Columbia and Snake Rivers during the height of Cascadia’s summer bounty aboard the American Empress. Arrive in Portland and make your way to Vancouver, Washington to enjoy an included one-night hotel stay in this city that’s home to colorful gardens and boasts easy access to the great outdoors. Board the American Empress and sail to Astoria, the oldest city west of the Rockies, where the Columbia River meets the Pacific Ocean. This “Little San Francisco” showcases steep hillsides blanketed in Victorian homes and a chic downtown studded with cafés and shops.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Options for an Olympic Coast Ocean Acidification Sentinel Site (Oases)
    Exploring Options for an Olympic Coast Ocean Acidification Sentinel Site (OASeS) Workshop Proceedings September 2016 Contents Background ..................................................................................................................................... 1 Olympic Coast ............................................................................................................................ 1 Ocean Acidification .................................................................................................................... 1 Ocean Acidification Sentinel Site (OASeS) Workshop Background ......................................... 2 Workshop Goals.......................................................................................................................... 3 Panel Discussion Summaries .......................................................................................................... 3 Science in National Marine Sanctuaries and OCNMS ............................................................... 3 i. i.Panelists: Steve Giddings, Liam Atrim, Scott Noakes, Lee Whitford Partners and Activities ................................................................................................................ 5 i. Panelists: Libby Jewett, Jan Newton, Richard Feely, Steve Fradkin, Paul McElhany, Joe Shumacker Education and Communication ................................................................................................... 7 i. Panelists: Laura Francis, Christopher Krembs, Jacqueline Laverdure, Angie
    [Show full text]
  • Policy-Driven Autonomous Split and Federal Breakaway: Northern Colorado and Cascadia
    Policy-Driven Autonomous Split and Federal Breakaway: Northern Colorado and Cascadia Colorado image via Wikimedia CommonsSecession movements, whether focused on a split with the federal government of the United States or on a regional split to become the “51st” state, are as old as the federal republic. These days, active secessionist and autonomous groups often represent frustrations with policy priorities in either the state or federal government. While secession is a constitutionally valid form of proclaiming independence from the state or federal government, it is not a threat in its present form to the integrity of the Union. A successful secession from either state or federal government is an unlikely outcome to a call for greater independence. In two examples, one based in discontent over Colorado’s policy directives and the other in broader philosophy, secession is used in two distinct ways to highlight specific grievances, showing exactly the way in which secession can be used to promote an alternative identity. A secessionist and autonomous region in Northern Colorado, based in Weld County and proposed by a total of 11 counties in 2013, failed to get a majority vote from its citizens by a close margin of 5 counties for secession and 6 against it. The Weld plan, formed in response to a “dictatorial government”, was founded on the principle that the progressive state capitol inadequately represented the conservative county. What was the tension that gave rise to Colorado’s internal divisions? National data, as well as differences between Democratic and Republican policy priorities, may explain the oddity of Northern Colorado, as well as other autonomy-seeking regions.
    [Show full text]
  • Resilient Washington State Final Report
    Resilient Washington State A Framework for Minimizing Loss and Improving Statewide Recovery after an Earthquake November 2012 Also published as Information Circular 114 by the Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Washington State Department of Natural Resources Front cover photos: U.S. Route 12 through Aberdeen (photo by Kéryn); Tacoma Narrows Bridge (photo by Kevin Madden); MV Puyallup ferry in Puget Sound (photo by Joe Mabel); Cadillac Hotel building in Seattle’s Pioneer Square—restored after the Nisqually earthquake in 2001 (photo by Joe Mabel); Port of Tacoma and Mount Rainier (photo: public domain); truck carrying grain along the Columbia River (photo courtesy of Washington State University); River Front Park in Spokane (photo by Mark Wagner); Grand Coulee Dam (Farwestern photo by Gregg M. Erickson); Seattle at dusk (photo by Cacophony) Back cover photos: Damage caused by the Nisqually earthquake in 2001: Highway 101 (photo courtesy of the University of Washington, Nisqually Earthquake Information Clearinghouse); broken pathway at Capitol Lake in Olympia (Photo by Karl Wegmann, Washington State Department of Natural Resources); the remains of the parapet from the Washington Federal building in downtown Olympia (Photo courtesy of the University of Washington, Nisqually Earthquake Clearinghouse) RESILIENT WASHINGTON STATE A Framework for Minimizing Loss and Improving Statewide Recovery after an Earthquake FINAL REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS NOVEMBER 2012 Washington State Emergency Management Council: Seismic Safety Committee WASHINGTON S TATE S EIS MIC S AFETY COMMITTEE 1111 Washington Street SE P.O. Box 47007 Olympia, WA 98504-7007 Also published as Information Circular 114 by the Division of Geology and Earth Resources, Washington State Department of Natural Resources Acknowledgments This report was prepared by the Resilient Washington State (RWS) Subcommittee of the Washington State Emergency Management Council’s Seismic Safety Committee.
    [Show full text]
  • Distribution and Sedimentary Characteristics of Tsunami Deposits
    Sedimentary Geology 200 (2007) 372–386 www.elsevier.com/locate/sedgeo Distribution and sedimentary characteristics of tsunami deposits along the Cascadia margin of western North America ⁎ Robert Peters a, , Bruce Jaffe a, Guy Gelfenbaum b a USGS Pacific Science Center, 400 Natural Bridges Drive, Santa Cruz, CA 95060, United States b USGS 345 Middlefield Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025, United States Abstract Tsunami deposits have been found at more than 60 sites along the Cascadia margin of Western North America, and here we review and synthesize their distribution and sedimentary characteristics based on the published record. Cascadia tsunami deposits are best preserved, and most easily identified, in low-energy coastal environments such as tidal marshes, back-barrier marshes and coastal lakes where they occur as anomalous layers of sand within peat and mud. They extend up to a kilometer inland in open coastal settings and several kilometers up river valleys. They are distinguished from other sediments by a combination of sedimentary character and stratigraphic context. Recurrence intervals range from 300–1000 years with an average of 500–600 years. The tsunami deposits have been used to help evaluate and mitigate tsunami hazards in Cascadia. They show that the Cascadia subduction zone is prone to great earthquakes that generate large tsunamis. The inclusion of tsunami deposits on inundation maps, used in conjunction with results from inundation models, allows a more accurate assessment of areas subject to tsunami inundation. The application of sediment transport models can help estimate tsunami flow velocity and wave height, parameters which are necessary to help establish evacuation routes and plan development in tsunami prone areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Imagining Cascadia
    Imagining Cascadia: Bioregionalism as Environmental Culture in the Pacific Northwest Ingeborg Husbyn Aarsand A thesis presented to The Department of Literature, Area Studies, and European Languages North American Area Studies Faculty of Humanities Advisor: Mark Luccarelli In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the MA degree UNIVERSITY OF OSLO Fall 2013 Author: Ingeborg Husbyn Aarsand Title: Imagining Cascadia: Bioregionalism as Environmental Culture in the Pacific Northwest 2013 http://www.duo.uio.no/ Print: Reprosentralen, University of Oslo II Abstract This thesis discusses the usefulness of the concept of bioregionalism as a social and cultural environmental practice, and as a response to the environmental crisis of our time. The thesis addresses an important issue in environmental discourse by considering whether bioregionalism’s place-based approach with its ethic of “reinhabitation” could challenge mainstream environmentalism. The thesis raises a critique of today’s professionalized and technocratic environmental movement. This thesis will argue that bioregional thinking evokes agrarianism and is indeed useful, because it can offer a “practical utopian” answer to the current environmental catastrophe. It is pragmatic, regionally specific, and reinforces the concept of place as central to the environmental discourse and debate. Ecological utopias have a role to play in environmental thinking because of their transformational power and pragmatic aspects. This thesis will show how the imagined bioregion of “Cascadia” is being constituted in different cultural representations of place, such as narratives about imagined places in music, film, and literature, and how this in turn is “placemaking.” This thesis argues that cultural representations of “place,” such as narratives about imagined recovery of places, can bring about both desperately needed inspiration for us humans to find local solutions to a global environmental crisis.
    [Show full text]
  • States Vulnerable to Ocean Acidification
    PACIFIC NORTHWEST IS AT HIGH RISK FOR ECONOMIC HARM DUE TO OCEAN ACIDIFICATION According to a new assessment of the U.S. communities most vul- nerable to ocean acidification, the Date Water Pacific Northwest is at high risk of Unfavorable Economic Sensitivity To Shellfish Score Other Factors economic harm. Communities and 2006 - 2030 High Algae Blooms 2031 - 2050 Medium High River Inputs governments can still take action, 2051 - 2070 Medium Upwelling 2071 - 2099 Medium Low researchers say. 2099 + Low MAP LEFT: The long-term economic impacts of ocean acidification are expected to be most severe in regions where ocean areas are acidifying soonest (black) and where the residents rely most on local shellfish for their livelihood (red). Local factors such as algae blooms from nutrient pollu- tion, local upwelling currents, and poorly buffered rivers (green, purple, blue) can amplify acidification locally. adapted by NRDC from Ekstrom et al., 2015 adapted by NRDC from Ekstrom et al., 2015 WHY IS THE PACIFIC NORTHWEST A HOTSPOT? ECONOMIC DEPENDENCE OCEAN VULNERABILITY A SALTY GOLDMINE. Shelled Some believe Puget Sound is the greatest oyster-growing mollusk fisheries in Washington region on the planet. Cold, clean and Oregon produce slightly water from deep currents off the more than $100 million annu- coast, a winding coastline with ally in direct sales. Though the thousands of inlets with sheltered economic benefits extend well water, and an abundant supply of beyond the value of the harvest. The estimated mountain-fed rivers all contribute to this perception. But this same formula has also total annual economic impact of aquaculture in put the region at risk from ocean acidification.
    [Show full text]
  • Long Term Care/Skilled Nursing Facility
    Long Term Care/Skilled Nursing Facility THE STATE OF IDAHO 07/02/2020 The Statewide Listing Facility Standards Idaho Department of Health and Welfare 3232 Elder Street Boise, Idaho P.O. Box 83720 83705 (208) 334-6626 [email protected] Facilities Beds Licensed Only:0 0 Medicare Only: 7 226 Medicare/Medicaid: 75 5964 Total Facilities: 82 6190 Under Idaho Code 74-120, this list may not be distributed, sold, or used as a telephone or mailing list. Under Idaho Code 74-120, this list may not be distributed, sold, or used as a telephone or mailing list Bureau of Facility Standards Facility List Facilities: LONG TERM CARE (LTC) / SKILLED NURSING FACILITY (SNF) Sorted Alphabetically Medicare / Medicare Facility Address City State Zip Code Phone # Fax # Administrator Beds County Region Medicaid only Advanced Health Care of Lewiston 2852 Juniper Dr. Lewiston Idaho 83501 (208) 748-7700 (208)748-7750 Mr. J.R. Burt 34 Y Nez Perce II Advanced Health Care of Coeur d'Alene 1578 W. Riverstone Dr. Coeur d'Alene Idaho 83814 (208) 769-0400 (208) 769-0450 Ms. Emily Engberson 34 Y Kootenai I Arbor Valley of Cascadia 8211 Ustick Rd Boise Idaho 83704-5756 (208) 375-3700 (208) 375-3760 Ms. Sherrie Nunez 148 Y Ada IV Ashton Memorial Living Center 700 N Second St Ashton Idaho 83420-0838 (208) 652-7461 (208) 652-7595 Mr. Shon L. Shuldberg 38 Y Fremont VII Aspen Park of Cascadia 420 Rowe St Moscow Idaho 83843-9319 (208) 882-4576 (208) 892-8776 Ms. Rachel Zimmerman 70 Y Latah II Aspen Transitional Rehabilitation 2867 E Copper Point Dr Meridian Idaho 83642-1716 (208) 401-9100 (208) 401-9150 Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Deep-Water Turbidites As Holocene Earthquake Proxies: the Cascadia Subduction Zone and Northern San Andreas Fault Systems
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository Faculty Publications 10-1-2003 Deep-water turbidites as Holocene earthquake proxies: the Cascadia subduction zone and Northern San Andreas Fault systems Chris Goldfinger Oregon State University C. Hans Nelson Universidad de Granada Joel E. Johnson University of New Hampshire, Durham, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/faculty_pubs Recommended Citation Goldfinger, C. Nelson, C.H., and Johnson, J.E., 2003, Deep-Water Turbidites as Holocene Earthquake Proxies: The Cascadia Subduction Zone and Northern San Andreas Fault Systems. Annals of Geophysics, 46(5), 1169-1194. http://dx.doi.org/10.4401%2Fag-3452 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ANNALS OF GEOPHYSICS, VOL. 46, N. 5, October 2003 Deep-water turbidites as Holocene earthquake proxies: the Cascadia subduction zone and Northern San Andreas Fault systems Chris Goldfinger (1),C. Hans Nelson (2) (*), Joel E. Johnson (1)and the Shipboard Scientific Party (1) College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, U.S.A. (2) Department of Oceanography, Texas A & M University, College Station, Texas, U.S.A. Abstract New stratigraphic evidence from the Cascadia margin demonstrates that 13 earthquakes ruptured the margin from Vancouver Island to at least the California border following the catastrophic eruption of Mount Mazama. These 13 events have occurred with an average repeat time of ¾ 600 years since the first post-Mazama event ¾ 7500 years ago.
    [Show full text]