DOCSLIB.ORG

My Comments in Green] in General, My Concern Is That If the Council Is Going to Enact Land Usage Restrictions, It Should Be Based on the Best Information Available

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
My Comments in Green] in General, My Concern Is That If the Council Is Going to Enact Land Usage Restrictions, It Should Be Based on the Best Information Available From: Andrew Wiser To: Don Easterbrook Cc: Cliff Strong; Council Subject: RE: Mt Baker volcanic hazards Date: Wednesday, February 01, 2017 10:16:03 AM Attachments: Porter_2013_Landslide_Risk_Evaluation.pdf Risk-based landslide safety assessments in Canada 12042016.pdf nhess-12-1277-2012-Meagerlandslide.pdf Hi Don, You certainly have identified the technical difficulties associated with crafting regulations for this particular geologic hazard. Staff is aware of, and is incorporating all of the nuanced issues you have mentioned in their presentation to the Council. In staff’s opinion best available science (BAS) would require that an updated hazard analysis be completed, which is presently in production at the USGS. I consider it unacceptable to rely on the 1995 Hazard map when we know updated BAS will be available in the next couple of years. In addition, I would add that the distinction between potential and probability is most appropriately addressed through completion of a Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA). I’ve attached a few research articles describing QRA’s for your review. I urge you to attend the presentation as Council may wish to address some of your concerns directly if not done so sufficiently during the Staff presentation. Sincerely, Andy Wiser, L.E.G. Geohazard Specialist, Planner Whatcom County Planning and Development Services [email protected] 360.778.5945 From: Don Easterbrook [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 9:42 PM Cc: Cliff Strong; Council Subject: Mt Baker volcanic hazards Hi Andy, [my comments in green] In general, my concern is that if the Council is going to enact land usage restrictions, it should be based on the best information available. By their own admission, the USGS map is based on their 1995 map that has not been updated in 22 years, does not include any of the new data accumulated since then, and contains flaws that could significantly affect restrictions placed on private property. To make this the basis for restricting land usage without considering the wealth of other data is unduly narrow and does not lead to the best possible decisions. If I understand what you are saying, the Council is only going to use obsolete, flawed USGS information and is not interested in any my of work (which includes 51 publications and a 2016 book with a chapter specifically on lahars). I find this difficult to understand. “The purpose of the presentations to Council is to provide them with information regarding areas that could be potentially affected by future lahars. The role of the USGS folks is to present recent lahar modeling work against a general background of Mt. Baker volcanic hazards so that the Council can better understand the geographic areas that might be affected by future events.” But how can they do this adequately using only obsolete and flawed information? My concern here is that some property owners may end up with serious, unjustified restrictions on their property. “If I understand correctly your concern would be that the USGS is inferring lahar deposits downstream of Nugent’s Corner, where your research has shown none exist? I’m not sure that the USGS would contest that observation.” I think we agree on this. The question then becomes, was the 6,800-year old lahar at Deming viscous enough that it just stopped there, or did a soupy phase extend far downstream? The USGS says they believe it extended all the way to Bellingham Bay, which, if true has serious implications for the populated Nooksack floodplain, including the town of Ferndale. Will severe restrictions be placed on construction in Ferndale and elsewhere on the floodplain according to the guidelines posted online? This would seem to be the case according to the posted guidelines. So this becomes a very important issue. Here is one of the major flaws in the USGS map. I have specific, well-dated, geologic evidence that no lahars have flowed downvalley from Everson in the past 10,000 years, which makes a huge difference in possible restrictive building codes. What about possible future lahars?—I have specific evidence that any future lahars would not likely extend downvalley from Everson. The implications of the differences between the USGS interpretations and mine are very significant. “The 1995 USGS Hazards Map depicts potential hazards from future volcanic activity. It is an interpretation of areas that may be subject to lahar impacts based on a future lahar of a inferred size and behavior. It is not a map of observed lahar deposits at Mt. Baker.” I realize that the 1995 USGS map is intended to be a potential hazard map, not a probability map. Potential hazard maps are, by necessity, subject to a wide range of interpretations. For example, the Nooksack North Fork has no record of ever having had a lahar from Mt. Baker flow down it, the probability is zero, but that doesn’t mean it might not happenin the future, depending on conditions on the flanks of the volcano. The probability of such a lahar is zero (never happened before), but the possibility is not zero (it could happen in the future). To get a more complete picture of volcanic hazards from Mt. Baker, having separate probability and possibility maps would be useful. As we discussed earlier, lahars can be generated without volcanic eruptions, simply by collapse of large rocks masses on the flanks of the volcano. However, these do not usually extend as far downvalley as lahars generated during eruption of lava, which generate large volumes of water from melting of glacial ice. As shown by my mapping and dating of lahars and lava near Baker Pass, the extensive 6800-year-old lahar that travelled as far as Deming was the result of a volcanic eruption. No non-eruptive lahars are known in the Nooksack Valley, which suggests that the most destructive future lahar hazard might be expected during a volcanic eruption and these can be monitored and predicted reasonably well. “Interestingly, the USGS has recently completed updated modeling (LaharZ) of potential lahar impac is based on newly acquired lidar for Mt. Baker.” I’d love to get my hands on this lidar—it is readily available? The results are preliminary in nature, but generally agree with the 1995 Potential Hazards Map, especially in the confined mountain valleys. The larger presumed lahars are shown to extend beyond Nugent’s Corner, but only for a modest distance; I’d sure like to see this.a result that may be corroborated by your field observations. Of course associated lahar impacts such as flooding, sedimentation, and frequent and continued avulsion, likely persisting for decades, would extend far beyond the front of the lahar deposit into the Sumas and lower Nooksack River Valleys. “I had concluded from our previous conversations that you would concur that the potential exists for a lahar to be generated at Mt. Baker that could travel down either the North or Middle Fork Valleys, and that siting large-density developments in these areas, if possible to avoid, would be advisable.” Yes, as we discussed, that seems advisable. The question is, how restrictive should such measures be and where they should apply. For example, since the towns of Glacier, Deming, Everson, Nooksack, Sumas, and Ferndale all lie within the potential lahar zone on the hazard map, what kind of restrictive codes will apply to them? Would a COSTCO or WalMart be prohibited in all of these towns? Would schools, fire halls, hospitals, city halls be restricted? This is the issue where I believe common ground can be found between you and the researchers at USGS, and for the purpose of our presentation to the Council I believe this is the important scientific message to be communicated. We will also be recommending that strides be taken to quantify the risks posed to existing and proposed development as a result of lahar (and other geologic) hazards known to exist in Whatcom County, and that a lahar monitoring and response plan be created. Such a risk assessment would consider all available data and would provide policy makers a more defensible basis for determining an acceptable level of risk to public safety. As I mentioned earlier, no amount of restrictive zoning can guarantee the safety of residents from volcanic hazards in the Nooksack Valley. The best approach to this is with a combined seismic monitoring program and a well developed evacuation plan. Don GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA OPEN FILE 7312 LANDSLIDE RISK EVALUATION Canadian Technical Guidelines and Best Practices related to Landslides: a national initiative for loss reduction M. Porter and N. Morgenstern 2013 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY OF CANADA OPEN FILE 7312 LANDSLIDE RISK EVALUATION Canadian Technical Guidelines and Best Practices related to Landslides: a national initiative for loss reduction M. Porter1 and N. Morgenstern2 1BGC Engineering, Suite 800 – 1045 Howe Street, Vancouver, BC V6Z 2A9 2Faculty of Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, T6G 2V4 2013 ©Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada 2013 doi: 10.4095/292234 This publication is available for free download through GEOSCAN (http://geoscan.ess.nrcan.gc.ca/). Recommended citation Porter, M., and Morgenstern, N., 2013. Landslide Risk Evaluation – Canadian Technical Guidelines and Best Practices related to Landslides: a national initiative for loss reduction; Geological Survey of Canada, Open File 7312, 21 p. doi:10.4095/292234 Publications in this series have not been edited; they are released as submitted by the author. Canadian Technical Guidelines and Best Practices related to Landslides: a national initiative for loss reduction LANDSLIDE RISK EVALUATION Note to Reader This is the seventh in a series of Geological Survey of Canada Open Files that will be published over the next several months.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Community Risk Assessment
    COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT Squamish-Lillooet Regional District Abstract This Community Risk Assessment is a component of the SLRD Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan. A Community Risk Assessment is the foundation for any local authority emergency management program. It informs risk reduction strategies, emergency response and recovery plans, and other elements of the SLRD emergency program. Evaluating risks is a requirement mandated by the Local Authority Emergency Management Regulation. Section 2(1) of this regulation requires local authorities to prepare emergency plans that reflects their assessment of the relative risk of occurrence, and the potential impact, of emergencies or disasters on people and property. SLRD Emergency Program [email protected] Version: 1.0 Published: January, 2021 SLRD Community Risk Assessment SLRD Emergency Management Program Executive Summary This Community Risk Assessment (CRA) is a component of the Squamish-Lillooet Regional District (SLRD) Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and presents a survey and analysis of known hazards, risks and related community vulnerabilities in the SLRD. The purpose of a CRA is to: • Consider all known hazards that may trigger a risk event and impact communities of the SLRD; • Identify what would trigger a risk event to occur; and • Determine what the potential impact would be if the risk event did occur. The results of the CRA inform risk reduction strategies, emergency response and recovery plans, and other elements of the SLRD emergency program. Evaluating risks is a requirement mandated by the Local Authority Emergency Management Regulation. Section 2(1) of this regulation requires local authorities to prepare emergency plans that reflect their assessment of the relative risk of occurrence, and the potential impact, of emergencies or disasters on people and property.
    [Show full text]
  • Area Earthquake Hazards Mapping Project: Seismic and Liquefaction Hazard Maps by Chris H
    St. Louis Area Earthquake Hazards Mapping Project: Seismic and Liquefaction Hazard Maps by Chris H. Cramer, Robert A. Bauer, Jae-won Chung, J. David Rogers, Larry Pierce, Vicki Voigt, Brad Mitchell, David Gaunt, Robert A. Wil- liams, David Hoffman, Gregory L. Hempen, Phyllis J. Steckel, Oliver S. Boyd, Connor M. Watkins, Kathleen Tucker, and Natasha S. McCallister ABSTRACT We present probabilistic and deterministic seismic and liquefac- (NMSZ) earthquake sequence. This sequence produced modi- tion hazard maps for the densely populated St. Louis metropolitan fied Mercalli intensity (MMI) for locations in the St. Louis area area that account for the expected effects of surficial geology on that ranged from VI to VIII (Nuttli, 1973; Bakun et al.,2002; earthquake ground shaking. Hazard calculations were based on a Hough and Page, 2011). The region has experienced strong map grid of 0.005°, or about every 500 m, and are thus higher in ground shaking (∼0:1g peak ground acceleration [PGA]) as a resolution than any earlier studies. To estimate ground motions at result of prehistoric and contemporary seismicity associated with the surface of the model (e.g., site amplification), we used a new the major neighboring seismic source areas, including the Wa- detailed near-surface shear-wave velocity model in a 1D equiva- bashValley seismic zone (WVSZ) and NMSZ (Fig. 1), as well as lent-linear response analysis. When compared with the 2014 U.S. a possible paleoseismic earthquake near Shoal Creek, Illinois, Geological Survey (USGS) National Seismic Hazard Model, about 30 km east of St. Louis (McNulty and Obermeier, 1997). which uses a uniform firm-rock-site condition, the new probabi- Another contributing factor to seismic hazard in the St.
    [Show full text]
  • Relative Earthquake Hazard Map for the Vancouver, Washington, Urban Region
    Relative Earthquake Hazard Map for the Vancouver, Washington, Urban Region by Matthew A. Mabey, Ian P. Madin, and Stephen P. Palmer WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Geologic Map GM-42 December 1994 The information provided in this map cannot be substituted for a site-specific geotechnica/ investi­ gation, which must be performed by qualified prac­ titioners and is required to assess the potential for and consequent damage from soil liquefaction, am­ plified ground shaking, landsliding, or any other earthquake hazard. Location of quadrangles WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF ~~ Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher- Commissioner of Public Lands ... Kaleen Cott ingham- Supervisor Relative Earthquake Hazard Map for the Vancouver, Washington, Urban Region by Matthew A. Mabey, Ian P. Madin, and Stephen P. Palmer WASHINGTON DIVISION OF GEOLOGY AND EARTH RESOURCES Geologic Map GM-42 December 1994 The information provided in this map cannot be substituted for a site-specific geotechnical investi­ gation, which must be performed by qualified prac­ titioners and is required to assess the potential for and consequent damage from soil liquefaction, am­ plified ground shaking, landsliding, or any other earthquake hazard. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENTOF Natural Resources Jennifer M. Belcher- Commissioner of Public Lands Kaleen Cottingham - Supervisor Division of Geology and Earth Resources DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.
    [Show full text]
  • Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps for Selected Urban Areas in Western Oregon
    Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps for selected urban areas in western Oregon Canby-Barlow-Canby-Barlow- AuroraAurora LebanonLebanon Silverton-Silverton- MountMount AngelAngel Stayton-Stayton- Sublimity-Sublimity- AumsvilleAumsville SweetSweet HomeHome Woodburn-Woodburn- Molalla High School was condemned after the 1993 Scotts Mills earthquake (magnitude 5.6). A new high school was built on HubbardHubbard another site. Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries Interpretive Map Series IMS-8 Ian P. Madin and Zhenming Wang 1999 STATE OF OREGON DEPARTMENT OF GEOLOGY AND MINERAL INDUSTRIES Suite 965, 800 NE Oregon St., #28 Portland, Oregon 97232 Interpretive Map Series IMS–8 Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps for Selected Urban Areas in Western Oregon Canby-Barlow-Aurora, Lebanon, Silverton-Mount Angel, Stayton-Sublimity-Aumsville, Sweet Home, Woodburn-Hubbard By Ian P. Madin and Zhenming Wang Oregon Department of Geology and Mineral Industries 1999 Funded by the State of Oregon and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Department of the Interior, under USGS award number 1434–97–GR–03118 CONTENTS Page Introduction . .1 Earthquake Hazard . .2 Earthquake Effects . .2 Hazard Map Methodology . .3 Selection of Map Areas . .3 Geologic Model . .3 Hazard Analysis . .4 Ground Shaking Amplification . .4 Liquefaction . .4 Earthquake-Induced Landslides . .5 Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps . .5 Use of the Relative Earthquake Hazard Maps . .6 Emergency Response and Hazard Mitigation . .6 Land Use Planning and Seismic Retrofit . .6 Lifelines . .6 Engineering . .6 Relative Hazard . .6 Urban Area Summaries . .8 Canby-Barlow-Aurora . .9 Lebanon . .10 Silverton-Mount Angel . .11 Stayton-Sublimity-Aumsville . .12 Sweet Home . .13 Woodburn-Hubbard . .14 Acknowledgments . .15 Bibliography . .15 Appendix . .17 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Shallow-Landslide Hazard Map of Seattle, Washington
    Shallow-Landslide Hazard Map of Seattle, Washington By Edwin L. Harp1, John A. Michael1, and William T. Laprade2 1 U.S. Geological Survey, Golden, Colorado 80401 2 Shannon and Wilson, Inc., Seattle, Washington 98103 U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006–1139 U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Geological Survey U.S. Department of the Interior Dirk Kempthorne, Secretary U.S. Geological Survey P. Patrick Leahy, Acting Director U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia 2006 For product and ordering information: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living resources, natural hazards, and the environment: World Wide Web: http://www.usgs.gov Telephone: 1-888-ASK-USGS Harp, Edwin L., Michael, John A., and Laprade, William T., 2006, Shallow-Landslide Hazard Map of Seattle, Washington: U.S. Geological Survey Open- File Report 2006–1139, 18 p., 2 plates, map scale 1:25,000. Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. Although this report is in the public domain, permission must be secured from the individual copyright owners to reproduce any copyrighted material contained within this report. Cover photograph: Slopes along Puget Sound north of Carkeek Park where numerous debris flows have traveled downslope and across the tracks of the Burlington-Northern-Santa Fe Railroad. ii Contents Abstract ...................................................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]
  • 4.3.3 Hazard Mapping
    4.3 Hazard mapping roads have untreated faces of slopes after being cut, on which rock falls and minor slope collapses frequently occur. Some of the bridges are prone to dangers of scouring. For the flood control and water quality, the catchment area management is important. Guatemala is a well-developed agricultural country that uses a large part of slopes as farmland. A slope with an inclination of 15 degrees or more tends to have significant washout of soil, causing debris flows and floods. The development on the mountainside of Agua volcano is considered to be one of the causes for the debris flow disaster that occurred in Ciudad Vieja in June 2002. Some major tasks to be completed remain such as assistance for tree planting in the upper reaches, restrictions on land use based on land use evaluation along rivers, setup of planned flood discharges, and planning for constructing revetments and embankments. 4.3.3 Hazard mapping (1) Methods of hazard mapping Two approaches to the estimation of hazardous areas are available, namely by evaluating the accumulation of events in which the past disasters occurred and by estimating the range of influence through a simulation based on certain conditions. The empirical methods which allows to relatively rank the potential hazard of a point or area, may be adopted to establish land use plans. This approach has also the merit to avoid getting a wrong hazard estimation being itself concerned with cumulative hazard levels. The simulation also allows estimating the hazardous areas with various disaster types, disaster scales, and occurrence locations by changing the disaster occurrence conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • The 1985 Nevado Del Ruiz Volcano Catastrophe: Anatomy and Retrospection
    Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research, 42 (1990) 151-188 151 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam--Printed in the Netherlands The 1985 Nevado del Ruiz volcano catastrophe: anatomy and retrospection BARRY VOIGHT Penn State University, University Park, PA 16802, U.S.A. (Received December 1, 1989) Abstract Voight, B., 1990. The 1985 Nevado del Ruiz volcano catastrophe: anatomy and retrospection. In: S.N. Williams (Editor), Nevado del Ruiz Volcano, Colombia, II. J. Volcanol. Geotherm. Res., 42: 151-188. This paper seeks to analyze in an objective way the circumstances and events that contributed to the 1985 Nevado del Ruiz catastrophe, in order to provide useful guidelines for future emergencies. The paper is organized into two principal parts. In the first part, an Anatomy of the catastrophe is developed as a step-by-step chronicle of events and actions taken by individuals and organizations during the period November 1984 through November 1985. This chronicle provides the essential background for the crucial events of November 13. This year-long period is broken down further to emphasize essential chapters: the gradual awareness of the awakening of the volcano; a long period of institutional skepticism reflecting an absence of credibility; the closure of the credibility gap with the September 11 phreatic eruption, followed by an intensive effort to gird for the worst; and a detailed account of the day of reckoning. The second part of the paper, Retrospection, examines the numerous complicated factors that influenced the catastrophic outcome, and attempts to cull a few "lessons from Armero" in order to avoid similar occur- rences in the future.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Program
    Shimabara Fukko Arena Gamadas Dome (Mt. Unzen Disaster Memorial Hall) Conference Office Hall N Internet / B Ready Room Sub Arena Sub Arena: Meeting Room Simultaneous Translation Hall Main Arena: Meeting Room Provided Hall E C Gamadas Dome Hall Main Arena Registration Simultaneous Translation Desk A Provided Posters and Exhibition Hall Shimabara Fukko Arena D CITIES ON VOLCANOES 5 Gamadas Dome: Meeting Room CONFERENCE Simultaneous Translation Provided VENUE MEETING PROGRAM CITIES ON VOLCANOES 5 CONFERENCE SHIMABARA (JAPAN) Hosted by Volcanological Society of Japan and The City of Shimabara 2007 Co-hosted by International Association of Volcanology and Chemistry of the Earth’s Interior (IAVCEI) Faculty of Sciences, Kyushu University Earthquake Research Institute, the University of Tokyo Kyushu Regional Development Bureau, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport Nagasaki Prefecture The City of Unzen The City of Minamishimabara Mount Unzen Disaster Memorial Foundation Supported by Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) The Commemorative Organization for the Japan World Exposition ('70) Tokyo Geographical Society COMMITTEES Advisory Committee Members Genjiro Kaneko (Governor of Nagasaki Prefecture) Teijiro Yoshioka (City Mayor of Shimabara) Fumio Kyuma (Member of the House of Representatives) Noriaki Miyoshi (Speaker of Nagasaki Prefectural Assembly) Morikane Kitaura (Chairman of Shimabara Municipal Assembly) Kazuya Ohta (Emeritus Professor of Kyushu University) Shigeo Aramaki (Yamanashi Institute of Environmental Science)
    [Show full text]
  • Difficulties in Explaining Complex Issues with Maps. Evaluating
    https://doi.org/10.5194/nhess-2019-112 Preprint. Discussion started: 4 July 2019 c Author(s) 2019. CC BY 4.0 License. Difficulties in explaining complex issues with maps. Evaluating seismic hazard communication – the Swiss case Michèle Marti1, Michael Stauffacher2, Stefan Wiemer1 1Swiss Seismological Service, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8092, Switzerland 5 2USYS TdLab, ETH Zurich, Zurich, 8092, Switzerland Correspondence to: Michèle Marti ([email protected]) Abstract 2.7 billion people live in areas where earthquakes causing at least slight damage have to be expected regularly. Providing 10 information can potentially save lives and improve the resilience of a society. Maps are an established way to illustrate natural hazard. Despite of being mainly tailored to the requirements of professional users, they are often the only accessible information to help the public deciding about mitigation measures. There is evidence that hazard maps are frequently misconceived. Visual and textual characteristics as well as the manner of presentation have been shown to influence their comprehensibility. Using a real case, the material to communicate the updated seismic hazard model for Switzerland was 15 analyzed in a representative online survey of the population (N = 491) and in two workshops involving architects and engineers not specializing in seismic retrofitting (N = 23). Although many best practice recommendations have been followed, the understanding of seismic hazard information remains challenging. Whereas most participants were able to distinguish hazardous from less hazardous areas, correctly interpreting detailed results and identifying the most suitable set of information for answering a given question proved demanding. We suggest scrutinizing current natural hazard communication strategies 20 and empirically testing new products.
    [Show full text]
  • Landslide Hazard Mapping and Its Evaluation Using Gis: an Investigation of Sampling Schemes for a Grid-Cell Based Quantitative Method
    Landslide Hazard Mapping and its Evaluation Using GIs: An Investigation of Sampling Schemes for a Grid-Cell Based Quantitative Method Amod Sagar Dhakal, Takaaki Amada, and Masamu Aniya Abstract hazards for a large area is critical to the mitigation of these loses. An application of GIs for landslide hazard assessment using Such an assessment is also essential for activities associated multivariate statistical analysis, mapping, and the evaluation with watershed management. This study describes a method of the hazard maps is presented. The study area is the for large area landslide hazard assessment, mapping, and eval- Kulekhani watershed (124 km2)located in the central region uation methods and provides an example of a study area from of Nepal. A distribution map of landslides was produced from Nepal. aerial photo interpretation and field checking. To determine Nepal is a country comprised of 83 percent hills and moun- the factors and classes influencing landsliding, layers of tains, and steep terrain, fragile geology, and seasonal monsoon topographic factors derived from a digital elevation model, rainfall contribute to the landslide potential. Every year, sedi- geology, and land use/land cover were analyzed by quanti- ment-related disasters in Nepal result in an average loss of 400 fication scaling type Il (discriminant) analysis, and the results lives and property losses amounting to US $17 million (Disas- were used for hazard mapping. The effects of different samples ter Prevention Technical Center [DPTC], 1994). of landslide and non-landslide groups on the critical factors Geographic information systems (GIS) (Burrough, 1986; and classes and subsequently on hazard maps were evaluated.
    [Show full text]
  • NATURAL HAZARD DATA a Practical Guide
    NATURAL HAZARD DATA A Practical Guide ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK NATURAL HAZARD DATA A Practical Guide NOVEMBER 2017 ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) © 2017 Asian Development Bank 6 ADB Avenue, Mandaluyong City, 1550 Metro Manila, Philippines Tel +63 2 632 4444; Fax +63 2 636 2444 www.adb.org Some rights reserved. Published in 2017. ISBN 978-92-9261-012-8 (Print), 978-92-9261-013-5 (PDF) Publication Stock No. TIM178692-2 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22617/TIM178692-2 The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) or its Board of Governors or the governments they represent. ADB does not guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this publication and accepts no responsibility for any consequence of their use. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by ADB in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. By making any designation of or reference to a particular territory or geographic area, or by using the term “country” in this document, ADB does not intend to make any judgments as to the legal or other status of any territory or area. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license (CC BY 3.0 IGO) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/. By using the content of this publication, you agree to be bound by the terms of this license.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Dokumentation Tsunami Hazard Map Cilacap.Pdf
    Technical Documentation Tsunami Hazard Maps for Kabupaten Cilacap MultiMulti----scescescescenarionario Tsunami Hazard Map for KabupKabupatenaten Cilacap, 1:100,0001:100,000 MultiMulti----scenarioscenario Tsunami Hazard Map for the City of CilacapCilacap,, 1:301:30,000,000 with zoning based on wave height at coast (in line with the InaTEWS warning levels) as well as probability of areas being affected by a tsunami. Presented by Cilacap Working Group for Tsunami Hazard Mapping compiled by DLR / GTZ June 2010 1 Table of Contents 1. Executive Summary 3 2. Background Information on the Tsunami Hazard Map for Kabupaten Cilacap 5 3. Background Information on the Mapping Process 9 3.1. German-Indonesian Cooperation in the Framework of InaTEWS 9 3.2. Indonesian-German Working Group on Vulnerability Modelling and Risk Assessment 10 3.3. Tsunami Hazard Mapping within the Framework of GITEWS 11 3.4. The Tsunami Hazard Mapping Process in Cilacap 11 4. Methodology 15 5. The Maps 22 6. Definitions 25 8. Abbreviations 27 9. Bibliography 29 2 1. Executive Summary Cilacap district (Kabupaten) is considered as one of the high risk areas regarding tsunami hazard in Indonesia because a large tsunami within range of Cilacap would have a severe impact on its densely populated coastlines. Many of Cilacap’s major development areas and especially the oil-mining industry is located directly on the shorelines facing the Indian Ocean. Below the same ocean, a couple of hundred kilometres south of Cilacap, lies one of the Earth’s major tectonic collision zones, which is a major source of tsunamigenic earthquakes. Thus, geologists and tsunami scientists consider Cilacap a high risk tsunami area.
    [Show full text]