The probable location for a big tsunami on the West Coast is in Oregon or Washington State, and also in Alaska. They have major fault lines that are subduction zones located under the ocean, and relatively close to the coast. Those are the cities that need to implement a Japan-style tsunami system. But will they?
other Pete
I was on Santa Rosa Island, doing some volunteer work for Channel Islands National Park, when the quake struck. The next day we got the tsunami prediction which indicated a two to three foot wave arriving at the island about 8:15 AM. At that time we were along the south coast of the island at an elevation of about fifty feet, with the ability to get much higher very quickly, if necessary. We saw nothing out of the ordinary, the elephant seals on the beach didn't even rouse themselves, but it was great to have the info from the tsunami warning center. It allowed us to get in a normal work day.
Interestingly, I understand the funds for the Tsunami Warning Center have been cut in current congressional action. Doesn't sound like a good idea to me.
I think Lucy Jones, USGS, has the best take. She said she would be happy to live in Seattle and wouldn't be "Sleepless in Seattle," but would be "Sentient in Seattle." She has forgotten more about earthquakes than I will ever know, and I am comfortable with her conclusions.
Just a point of info. SoCal is riddled with faults (many of which are geological in nature) and quite a few of them are submerged. In 1812, one of them in the Santa Barbara Channel let go, triggering a tsunami which flooded Santa Barbara up to the steps of the mission. Coastal landslides, unrelated to earthquakes, can generate big waves that have been able to sink fairly large vessels at anchor in the islands. There is no substitute for advance, thoughtful, preparation.
Previous Topic
Index
