Ventura SFSA Field Trip Depart from Lobby (Box Lunches Provided)

Southern California Earthquake Center (SCEC) Ventura Special Fault Study Area Workshop August 15-16, 2013 Ventura, California

Co-conveners: James Dolan (University of Southern California) Tom Rockwell (San Diego State University) John H. Shaw (Harvard University)

Thursday 15 August 2013 07:00-08:00 Continental Breakfast La Playa Room

08:00-17:00 Ventura SFSA Field Trip Depart from Lobby (box lunches provided)

18:00-21:00 Working Dinner Puerto Escondido Room Participants present (in 2 slides, 2 minutes) their research results and/or expertise pertinent to future research in the Ventura SFSA.

Friday 16 August 2013 07:00-08:00 Continental Breakfast Puerto Escondido Room

08:00-12:00 Meeting Session Puerto Escondido Room Develop a research strategy to better characterize these structures and the seismic hazards that they pose. The results of the workshop will be presented in a white paper to be finalized at the SCEC Annual Meeting.

12:00 Adjourn

SCEC Ventura Special Fault Study Area

The Ventura fault underlies the Ventura Avenue anticline, which is one of the fastest uplifting structures in southern California, rising at a rate of ∼5 mm/yr [Rockwell et al., 1988]. Holocene terraces on the anticline suggest that it deforms in discrete events with 5-10 m of uplift, with the latest event occurring ~800 years ago (Rockwell, 2011). Moreover, recent excavations across the Ventura fault scarp, which runs through the city of Ventura, show evidence for large- displacement (> X m) paleoearthquakes in the Holocene (McAuliffe et al., 2011; 2013). The amount of uplift recorded by the terraces and in the trenches would require large earthquakes (M7.5-8.0), suggesting that the Ventura fault ruptures in conjunction with other faults in the Transverse Ranges. Subsurface studies suggest that the Ventura fault is linked at seismogeneic depths with the San Cayetano fault to the east (Hubbard et al., 2011; 2013) and the Pitas Point and Red Mountain fault to the west (Figs. 1 and 2) (Sarna-Wojcicki et al., 1976, 1982; Yerkes and Lee, 1987; Yerkes et al., 1987; Kamerling et al., 1999; 2003; Hubbard et al., 2011; 2013). Thus, the Ventura fault represents an important linkage between some of the largest, fastest- slipping reverse faults in the Western Transverse Ranges. Given the availability of geological, geophysical, seismological, and geodetic data in the region, the Ventura fault offers an excellent natural laboratory to investigate the potential for multi-segment thrust fault earthquakes and the hazards that they pose (Figs. 1 and 2). These hazards include the prospect of severe ground shaking due to the extreme depth of the Ventura basin (> 10 km), as well as the potential for strong regional tsunamis when the ruptures extend offshore.

Goals for the Workshop

The Ventura Special Fault Study Area was established to promote interdisciplinary science that seeks to better understand the prospects for large multi-segment earthquakes in southern California, and to assess and address the hazards that these potentially devastating earthquakes may pose. At this initial workshop, we seek to:

1) introduce scientists to the geological expression of the Ventura fault and Ventura Avenue anticline 2) discuss our current state of knowledge about the fault systems, its geometry, tectonic history, activity, slip rate, and paleoearthquake history 3) have participants share their insights about the fault system and expertise that might contribute to interdisciplinary studies 4) develop an initial workplan to promote collaborative research by SCEC and other agencies

Figure 1: View of the SCEC Community Fault Model (CFM 4.0) showing location of the Ventura fault (dark blue) in relation to other structures in the Transverse Ranges. The Pitas Point fault and the southern San Cayetano faults (light blue) lie west and east of the Ventura fault, respectively. Together these faults comprise the Ventura - Pitas Point fault system. Together with the Ventura-Pitas Point faults system, a series of east-west-striking reverse faults (shown in red) form a nearly continuous trend across the Transverse Ranges.

Figure 2: Map of the Ventura region. Red lines are mapped faults; teeth denote thrust fault hanging wall. The Ventura-Pitas Point fault is called the Ventura fault onshore and the Pitas Point fault offshore. Blue circles show the locations of wells with evidence of an intersection with the Ventura fault. Black lines show seismic reflection profiles crossing the Ventura fault (left is industry line VB1, center is Evergreen/Hall Canyon, and right is Brookshire profile). Box with hash marks shows the location of the 3D seismic reflection volume across the Dos Cuadras structure. The anticline in the hanging wall of the Ventura-Pitas Point fault is marked with a dashed line; this also represents a chain of oil fields, marked with yellow squares: VOF=Ventura Oil Field; ROF=Rincon Oil Field; COF=Carpineteria Oil Field; DCOF=Dos Cuadras Oil Field. North of the Ventura fault, this is called the Ventura Avenue anticline. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 3: Geologic map and cross section of the Ventura basin, including the Ventura Avenue Anticline, from Huftile and Yeats (1995). Note that the Ventura Avenue anticline is interpreted to be detached above a decollement in the Miocene section (Sisar decollement), with numerous thrust faults in the core of the fold that are constrained by wells. The Ventura fault is not shown, but outcrops near the base of the southern limb of the fold.

Figure 4: Schematic cross sections showing alternate models for the Ventura Avenue anticline and Ventura fault. (a) Cross section after Yeats (1982a) and Huftile and Yeats (1995). The Ventura Avenue anticline is a north-vergent detachment fold lifting off of the Sisar Decollement; secondary faulting in the interior of the anticline is well constrained by well data. The Ventura fault is a minor bending-moment fault in the syncline at the southern edge of the anticline. (b) Interpretation of Hubbard et al., (2011; 2013), modeled in part after Sarna-Wojcicki and Yerkes (1982). The Ventura Avenue anticline is produced as a consequence of shortening on the Ventura fault, which is a steeply dipping thrust fault rising from the Sisar Decollement. Slip on the blind thrust ramp to the north is partitioned between the Lion backthrust and the Ventura fault. See Sarna-Wojcicki et al., (1982) and Yeats (1982) (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 5: There are several observations that suggest that the Ventura fault extends to depth beneath the Ventura Avenue anticline, supporting model B in Figure 4. This cross section of the Ventura Avenue anticline shows the locations of fault cuts in wells, stratigraphic picks, and dipmeter data that are consistent with the projection to depth of the Ventura fault at a dip of ≈ 45-55°N. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 6: Portion of industry seismic reflection profile VB1, which images the Ventura fault; (top) in two-way travel time and (bottom) depth-converted using the 1D velocity model of Brankman (2009). Arrows point to prominent reflector terminations; dashed line marks interpreted fault surface, with dipping reflectors in the hanging wall and nearly horizontal reflectors in the footwall. Line location shown in Figure 2. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 7: Perspective view of the Ventura fault from the ENE, with data constraints shown. Note that all of the fault constraints are consistent with a planer, 45-55°N dipping fault surface. Red lines mark 1 km depth contours. The fault pick from industry line VB1 is shown in purple. Blue balls show fault picks from wells. Seismic profiles collected August 2010 (Brookshire and Evergreen/Hall Canyon) are shown. Red line at surface is mapped surface trace of fold scarp. Thin blue line marks the coastline. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 9: Fault displacement on the Ventura Fault, as mapped on industry seismic line VB1. Displacement decreases towards the tip, and does not reach the surface. Note that in this image, line VB1 has been depth- converted and projected onto a line perpendicular to the structural trend, to correct for the fact that the line was originally acquired at a strong oblique angle.

We next explore a constant-thickness fault-propagation fold model (Suppe and Medwedeff, 1990) to assess whether the known geometry and timing of uplift across the Ventura Avenue anticline are consistent with this interpretation (Shaw et al., 2005; Hughes, 2012). Fault propagation folds form as faults propagate to the surface over time, accommodating shortening by a combination of fault displacement and folding. Propagating faults typically show increasing offset with depth because the fold consumes slip on the ramp, producing zero offset at the fault tip and the greatest offset at the ramp base. The constant-thickness model for fault-propagation folds is a kinematic model that assumes angular fold hinges and conservation of bed length (Figure 11a; Suppe and Medwedeff, 1990). In such a model, the fault propagates upwards from a fault bend. An active syncline develops at the fault tip; as Figure 8: (top) Enlargedthe fault version propagates of fLineorward, VB it folds1 showing material offset up into along the forelimb. the Ventura As the fault.fault propagates (bottom), an Fault offset vs. depthanticline bsl develops, on the Ventura with material fault. moving Depth up is the measured fault into the on backlimb. the footwall, The bifurcation in meters point below sea level. Theof the upwardbacklimb decreasingis at the same amount stratigraphic of displacementlevel as the tip onof the the propagating Ventura faul faultt (Figure is consistent with development11a). The backlimb of the Venturadevelops likeAvenue a fault anticline-bend fold, as but a withfault-propagation a limb width that fold is greater (Shaw than et al., 2005), modified by thrust faulting in its core. Legend shows source of offset measurements. Note that the measurements from wells 11105811 and 11104006 represent 150- 200 m and 245 m of vertical throw, converted to 173-23012 m and 299-346 m of slip on a 45-55° dipping fault, respectively. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 9: Kinematic model of the Ventura Avenue anticline, showing deformation over time. Uplift amounts are taken from terraces. Growth of the anticline began at 200-300 ka and continues at present. From 200-300 ka to 29.7 ka, the anticline is modeled as a constant- thickness fault-propagation fold generated by slip and propagation of the Ventura fault. From 29.7 ka to present, the Ventura fault breaks through the fault-propagation fold and extends toward the surface to the south of the anticline (this corresponds with the location of the scarp in the city of Ventura). Secondary faults within the anticline shown in the present-day cross section have been documented by drilling, and are interpreted to accommodate tightening of the fold. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 10: 3D perspective model looking to the east, showing continuity of the Pitas Point and North Channel faults, and folding in their hanging wall, with the Ventura Avenue anticline. (from Kamerling et al., 2003).

Figure 11: 3D perspective view, from the southeast, of the faults in the Ventura region. The cities of Ventura and Santa Barbara are identified. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 11: Contours showing connectivity of the north-dipping Red Mountain-blind thrust / Ventura / Pitas Point fault-San Cayetano fault system at depth. (a) Map showing projection to 7.5 and 15 km depth of the San Cayetano and Red Mountain faults, assuming that the faults dip 40°. A projection of the top of the blind thrust ramp north of the Ventura fault is also shown, assuming an axial surface dip of 70°. Based on this mapping, the faults appear disconnected from west to east. (b) Contours at 7.5 and 15 km depth including the Ventura fault, with uncertainties that reflect ±10° dips; in addition, the trace of the top of the axial surface is assumed to have a ±2 km uncertainty. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 12: Contour map of the faults in the Ventura region, showing inferred linkages at depth between the Ventura-Pitas Point, Red Mountain (upper and lower), and San Cayetano faults. Note two alternative interpretations for the Southern San Cayetano fault. (from Hubbard et al., 2013).

Figure 13: GoogleEarth screen capture (3X VE) showing our 2010 Day Road seismic reflection profile (red line), Holocene fan (gray), topographic scarp at the updip projection of the active synclinal axial surface (orange), and 2012 borehole transect (yellow dots represent proposed continuously cored boreholes; green dots are CPT locations). McAuliffe et al. (in prep.).

Figure 14: Seismic reflection profile along Day Road from 2010 SCEC-funded research showing location of active synclinal axial surface (note inflection in dip of strata at 100 m depth). Upper panel shows topography (5X VE) and boreholes (green) and CPTs (pink). Note that active axial surface does not project to surface at the prominent mountain front, but rather to a subtle scarp at m 2600. This reflects active alluvial fan deposition across the locus of active folding at the study site along the prominent topographic scarp crossing the active fan seen in figure 13. From McAuliffe et al. (in prep.).

Figure 15: Perspective view (GoogleEarth screen capture; 3X VE) of Ventura fault scarp and location of 2012 Day Road borehole transect. Red line denotes high-resolution seismic profiles acquired in 2010. Yellow dots show continuously cored boreholes; green dots are CPT locations. McAuliffe et al. (in prep.).

Figure 16: Borehole-CPT transect at 2012 Day Road site showing evidence for two discrete uplift events that we interpret as large earthquakes on the underlying Ventura – Pitas Point fault. On the basis of underlying strata that do not change thickness across the fold, we interpret the prominent topographic scarp as has having formed in the MRE on the Ventura fault; the absence of growth strata burying this fold scarp attests to the recent occurrence of the MRE. DY-1 through 4 are continuously cored, hollow-stem boreholes; CPT-1 through 11 are cone- pentrometer tests. From McAuliffe et al. (in prep.).

Figure 17: Perspective view (GoogleEarth screen capture; 3X VE) of Ventura fault scarp and location of proposed 2013 Brookshire Road borehole/CPT transect. Note how prominent the topographic scarp is at this location (compare with scarp at Day Road to the west shown in figure 15 [and visible in the background of this figure]). Red lines denote 2010 high-resolution seismic profiles. Green dots show continuously cored boreholes; yellow dots are CPT locations. Also note location of the 1981 N-S trench excavated along the reservoir just east of Brookshire Road. McAuliffe et al. (in prep.).

Figure 18: High-resolution seismic reflection profile acquired in 2010 across proposed Fall 2013 Brookshire Avenue borehole/CPT transect. Note synclinal axial surface (locus of active folding – dashed green line) projecting to surface just south of base of prominent surface fold scarp associated with recent activity on the Ventura fault. Pink lines are our proposed continuously cored boreholes; orange lines are proposed CPTs. McAuliffe et al. (in prep.). References

21 34°3O

— — — — VAATrefld 340201 — — — — A

Pitas Point fault 34°1 01

clANA1

0 5 10 22 ii9°50’ 119040l 1 9°30’ ii9°20’ -1 19°10’ -119° 118°50’ k mirjne terrar V. -

:fr •0 Punta Gorda .1:vIO

Holocene marine :kexpose terrace .VAA emergence Pitas Point (<6ka)

Pitas Pjt Fault a _ _ — _ — — a — Deformed Ventura 0 5 km Riverterraces

23 700

600 A:Holocene / B:19ka H - 500 C: 19-23 ka / D:—P23ka C 400 E:33 ka 0 F:40 ka G: — / hinge -60 ka

10:

Ventura River bed 10:1 vert. exaggeration Rockwell et al., 1988

24 60 ka

40 ka

flood plain -j 25 S Saugus / N San Pedro Fm Fernando Fm Santa Barbara member Pico member km 0 -O.2 Ma -0.3 Ma

-0.4Ma

0.7 Ma ‘-0.8 Ma

1.0 Ma’ 0 1km 2 1.2 M from Lajoie et al., 1979 26 8Oka marine terrace cut across Saugus, tilted to 12 degrees

0.5 K

-0.5

—1

-2 27 nJavon Cyn • lit-

-, , 9- r —i .

4 Explanation IM77 USGS fossil locality -P — GPS surveyed shoreline angle elevation (m) fossil locality in this study 4.7 GPS-surveyed platform elevation(m) 0 2 3km LiDAR profile from NOAA data — \ H 16.6 GPS-surveyed surface elevation (ml (7.5) surface elevation estimated by NOAA LiDAR or topographic map - iGorda N 28 -j I

Explanation IME21 USGS fossil locality • GPS surveyed shoreline angle elevation (m) fossil locality in this study 4.7 GPS-surveyed platform elevation(m) 9 2 3km H LiDAR profile from NOAA data 16.6 GPS-surveyed surface elevation (m) (7.5) surface elevation estimated by NOAA LIDAR or topographic map Gorda N 29 ______

lit liii III lit LIII II tIll Ii iii ii ill liiII ii lit liii ii Ii till 1111 1111 Ill II it Ill II liii iii II II II II II it 1111 1111 Ill Ill itt II II till II lit 1111 It ii II Ill lIt III 1111 ‘Ill Ill Ill 1111 lii IIIll Ill Ill 1111 II Ill I lilt 1111 ‘lii Ill I Ill Ill II

Ill I II lilt

It II Ill II I liii ii lilt 1111 ‘Ill II ill 1111 liii II liii II Iii ill Ill tIll ill 1111 tillill lii It I tilt ill Ill 1111 II Ill till ill II II LI Ill 1111 II lilt ttl It ill 1111 II lilt ii II 1111 lilt Ill tilt I lIltill II till ill it II II Ill lJ. liii ii 1111 It illIll II Ill Ill It Ill it 1111 It ill 1111 II Ill Ill II lit ill liii II ill Ill Ill liii tIll ill lit ill it ii II Ill liiIll liii Ill it II tIlt Ill till Ill ill 1111 Ill III Ill 1111 liii It 1111 liii liii Ill Ii Ill lilt It ill I Ill lilt II till1111 ill 1111 III liltIt t I II II Ill tiltIll Ill I Ill till liii Ii lit Illitt Ill II q I t I I I It I Ii Ill Ill II lilt II lilt tillill ii II Ill t II I II 1111 Ill t

1111 1111 Ill till I tilt lilt till Ill II I It Ill II II It it ill Ill tillIt It II lilt 1111 till lilt It I 1111 Ill 1111 It it I Ill I I it I 1111 1111 II liii ill III Ill II liltliii till II 1111 I •l I I 1111 ii liii Ill II gill It I 1111 ill lit ‘lii lilt II It I 1111 Ii it II lIlt It II 1111 liii ‘Ill II till1111 till II I 1111 ii II II Ill tilt It. I 1111 Lr II tillIt lilt II I 1111 II IllII Iii il 2 II It II it Ii tilt it “1 ii lii II ill lilt x Ill ii it Ill till ill lit I it liiill It ill liii illIll llt ill 0 iii 1111 Ill Ill ti II till It l lilt I i’l I ill 1111 0J itt 1111 lIlt lilt lIt III ‘ Ii liii liii Ill I Ill I III II ill ill Ill 0 lIlt till lii ill iii ill Ill till 1111 II it lIt lilt lIt ill ii tilt

lilt It I lilt lit III ill III lii Ill I I It till III lilt it tillill

I I I II lii Ii t Ill I I It tilt It lilt lilt Ill t 1111 till 1 I lilt ill liiiill lIt iii tilt Ill liii It Ill Ill Ill I liii tilt ill 1111 1111 it liii lit 1111 It lilt lilt III 1111 Ii itt Ill lilt liii ill tilt lit lIt It tilt 1111 1111 Ill 1111 1111 lIlt Ii till IIIIll Ill lilt1111 ill till ill I 1111 Ill 1111 1111 Ill 1111 till 1111 ii I till 1111 LIII iii 1111 1111 III Ii I till Illii

I I I I I till till I I t I It till ii Ill I 1111 1111 1111 I II t ill it 1111 ill tilliii 1111 tIll I It ill it 1111 1111 1111 I I ii ill It

I I 1111 ill illlii I I I I I I Ii liii II 1111 III 1111 1111 1111 I II lilt 1111 lilt 1111 1111 1111 it liii 1111 ill 1111 1111 1111 II I ill 1111 1111 Ill 1111 III I .1 till ill- Ill tIll 1111 Ill1111 II I Ill

i I ill It II III I I II ii till Ill ill itt ill 1111 II1.1 lit It III II

II I I I I I liii lit 1111 It IIII:1 hi It It III till III IIII l I lilt liii till III till

I lit till I I t II l I liii till till itt I 1111 1111 lit III ill liii 1111 till lilt1111 Ill till itt I 1111 1111 1111 1111 1111 ill I II lilt till Ill Ill Ill I — lilt Ill it 1111 1111 II Ii it II 1111 lilt lilt Ill II? Iii lit I I Iil i_I 1.1 — t1 ID U’ ID lPl ID U’ ID ID t m r rl r’i — — i (w) Y1S UPOLAJ aq. O aA!wIH )4!Idfl 30 1) çfl

1—I —-.‘--. /L-J \/

Punta Gorda Rincon Point Rincon Mtn Pitas Point

— — m separated Red Mountain fault 45 ka — — — (280 m) 29ka?

MARINE TERRACES OF RINCON MOUNTAIN 31 Redrawn from Palmer, 1961 3km ——-—-a

32 :,rflfl rr—-’

33 ‘ 32)rn rn CrW

P — TItPt,.bb [t

Gouge cores

• Group 1 • Group 2

Group 3

Group 4

A other cores Sediment samples 4 ,j Cutbank faces .S ‘ 7

34 35 Brankman, C. M. (2009). Three-dimensional structure of the Western Los Angeles and Ventura Basins, and implications for regional earthquake hazard, Ph.D. thesis, Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA.

Hubbard, J., J.H. Shaw, J.F. Dolan, and T. Rockwell (2011). Structure and seismic hazard of the Ventura Avenue anticline and Ventura fault, California: Prospect for large, multisegment ruptures in the Western Transverse Ranges, Plenary talk, SCEC Annual Meeting, 12 Sept.

Hubbard, J., J.H. Shaw, J.F. Dolan, T. Rockwell, and L. McAuliffe (2013). Structure and seismic hazard of the Ventura Avenue anticline and Ventura fault, California: Prospect for large, multisegment ruptures in the Western Transverse Ranges, BSSA (accepted).

Huftile, G. J., and R. S. Yeats (1995). Convergence rates across a displacement transfer zone in the western Transverse Ranges, Ventura Basin, California, J. Geophys. Res. 100 (B2), 2043– 2067.

Kamerling, M. J. and C. C. Sorlien (1999). Quaternary slip and geometry of the Red Mountain and Pitas Point-North Channel faults, California (abstract). Eos. Trans. AGU 80 46 (1003).

Kamerling, M. J., C. C. Sorlien, and C. Nicholson (2003). 3D development of an active, oblique fault system: Northern Santa Barbara Channel, CA (poster). SSA Annual Meeting.

McAuliffe, L., J. Dolan, T. Pratt, J. Hubbard, and J. H. Shaw (2011). Characterizing the recent behavior and earthquake potential of the blind western San Cayetano and Ventura fault systems (abstract). Fall Meeting AGU (Abstract T11A-2279).

Rockwell, T. K. (2011). Large co-seismic uplift of coastal terraces across the Ventura Avenue anticline: Implications for the size of earthquakes and the potential for tsunami generation, Plenary talk, SCEC Annual Meeting, 12 Sept.

Rockwell, T. K., E. A. Keller, and G. R. Dembroff (1988). Quaternary rate of folding of the Ventura Avenue anticline, western Transverse Ranges, southern California, GSA Bull. 100, 850– 858.

Sarna-Wojcicki, A. M., K. M. Williams, and R. F. Yerkes (1976). Geology of the Ventura Fault, Ventura County, California. U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies, map MF-781, 3 sheets, scale 1:6,000.

Sarna-Wojcicki, A. M., and R. F. Yerkes (1982). Comment on article by R. S. Yeats entitled “Low-shake faults of the Ventura Basin, California”. In: Cooper, J. D. (Ed.), Neotectonics in Southern California. Geological Society of America, 78th Cordilleran Section Annual Meeting, Guidebook, pp. 17–19.

Shaw, J. H., C. Connors, and J. Suppe (2005). Seismic Interpretation of Contractional Fault- related Folds: An AAPG Seismic Atlas. AAPG, Tulsa, Oklahoma.

Yeats, R. S. (1982b). Reply to Sarna-Wojcicki, A. M. and R. F. Yerkes. In: Cooper, J. D. (Ed.), Neotectonics in Southern California. Geological Society of America, 78th Cordilleran Section Annual Meeting, Guidebook, pp. 21–23.

Yeats, R. S. (1983). Large-scale Quaternary detachments in Ventura basin, Southern California, J. Geophys. Res. 88 (B1), 569–583.

Yerkes, R. F., and W. H. K. Lee (1987). Late Quaternary deformation in the western Transverse Ranges. In: Recent Reverse Faulting in the Transverse Ranges. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1339, pp. 71–82.

Yerkes, R. F., A. M. Sarna-Wojcicki, and K. R. Lajoie (1987). Geology and Quaternary deformation of the Ventura area. In: Recent Reverse Faulting in the Transverse Ranges. U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1339, pp. 169–178.