Recent major earthquakes have encouraged better ways to predict and warn of coming quakes in California. This includes non-ordinary and less costly methods than the Parkfield Prediction Studies carried out since 1985.

For years people in California have worried about the "Big One." When asked, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) usually responded that there will probably be a 6.7 magnitude earthquake in the next 30 years. Millions of Southern Californians thought the Easter Sunday quake was it (April 4, 2010). The 7.2 temblor was felt by people all over California and in some parts of Arizona, but the epicenter was 30 miles south of Mexicali, Mexico-not in California. I was just another reminder of what is yet to come.

The Easter Sunday quake did get many thinking about this constant threat, and in new ways. The recent Haiti, Chile and Baja California earthquakes have more scientists studying preparedness and warnings. There has been more activity this year along the Ring of Fire including California¹. The Los Angeles Times reported a 6.5 quake off the coast about 33 miles southwest of Eureka in Northern California (January 13, 2010), and the fear of a tsunami from this temblor. The Times reported that it was "centered offshore about 13 miles deep." People living in this area were reminded of the 9.2 magnitude earthquake off the Alaskan coast that set off a tsunami which reached Crescent City, north of Eureka, killing 11 people (1964).

Local to Southern California was the recent 4.4 temblor in Pico Rivera (March 16, 2010). There was no major damage but it is a "warning about a fault that runs through a large swath of densely populated Los Angeles County and is capable of producing a devastating magnitude 7.5 quake."². Magnitude of 4 is common to the region and occurs every month or so. The "Puente Hills thrust is the same one that triggered the magnitude 5.9 Whittier Narrows earthquake in 1987 that killed eight people and $358 million in damage."³.

******************************************

In February 1988 New Perspectives' (back then we were known as just Perspectives) Nadine Elmer wrote about Parkfield, an unpretentious little town with a population of 34, located 25 miles northeast of Paso Robles, California approximately halfway between San Francisco and Los Angeles. Earthquakes occur in a recognizable pattern regularly in Parkfield which is located on the San Andreas Fault. Elmer interviewed Edna King of the Western Region Office of Public Affairs, U. S. Geological Survey at Menlo Park, California. King told her:

Parkfield is the best-understood earthquake source region in the world. Small Quakes rattle the region frequently as the San Andreas fault releases pressure from the moving tectonic plates beneath the earth's surface. Moderate size earthquakes in the magnitude of 6 range have struck the Parkfield fault segment on an average of every 22 years from 1857. These factors provide natural focus for earthquake studies. Extensive earthquake prediction studies and strong motion studies of interest to earth-quake engineers are operated at Parkfield.

Earthquake scientists have a unique opportunity to study earthquakes, here in Parkfield, in a laboratory consisting of earth, granite, and moving plates. Elmer continues with the story of Parkfield:

Because of this unique scenario, this 19 mile section on the San Andreas fault around Parkfield has become the most extensively studied and analyzed piece of ground in the world. Since the great Fort Tejon earthquake of 1857, with a magnitude of 7, this 22 year cycle has repeated itself in 1881, 1901, 1922, 1934, and 1966. The only break in the cycle occurred with the 1934 quake which was 12 years early, however, with the 1966 quake occurring 44 years from the 1922 quake the pattern again resumed.

Considering the 22 year period of continuing quakes the next one was expected in 1988. A five year window was given to make a prediction for 1993 by Dr. William H. Bakun, Geophysicist and Chief Scientist of the Parkfield Prediction Experiment for the next quake. But another quake didn't occur until 2004.

Because of the predictable characteristics of the Parkfield earthquakes Bakun and his colleagues have been able to monitor the area with sophisticated geophysical equipment to study the earth's behavior at Parkfield including: creepmeters, tiltmeters, strainmeters, water wells, magnetometers and seismometers as well as networks of precisely measured geodetic lines spanning the region. Also a two color laser range finder has been installed which aims its pulses toward reflectors up to five miles away in 18 directions to measure the slightest ground distortion near the fault. From these highly technical and sensitive monitoring devices they have identified a pattern of foreshocks that occur before the main shock occurs.

It is thought until the 2004 earthquake that there was a pattern of magnitude of approximately magnitude 3 foreshocks that precede the main shock by three days. This meant a possibility of predicting an earthquake occurring within a 72 hour period and issue an early warning. The foreshocks didn't occur with the 2004 earthquake and their theory had to be re-evaluated.

Building on the 15 years of experience of the Parkfield Prediction Experiment the emphasis has been on the San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth or SAFOD under the auspices of the USGS and the National Science Foundation (NSF). After the 1993 prediction window closed without an earthquake occurrence, an independent evaluation of the Parkfield Prediction Experiment by the National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council was done and it was recommended that "monitoring be continued as a long term effort to record the next earthquake at Parkfield."

A 2.2-km deep vertical pilot hole was drilled adjacent to the San Andreas fault at Parkfield in the summer of 2002. The Pilot project was to provide engineering and scientific data to guide the later SAFOD project. "In June of 2004, drilling the hole for SAFOD began west of the San Andreas Fault and used advanced directional-drilling technology developed by the petroleum industry to angle the hole through the entire fault zone until relatively undisturbed rock was reached on the east side. SAFOD's long term monitoring activities include detailed observations of small to moderate earthquakes and continuous measurement of rock deformation and other parameters during the earthquake cycle."¹ The National Science Foundation (NSF) expands the Parkfield Experiment by installing instruments at the actual depths of where earthquakes are initiated thus a San Andreas Fault Observatory at Depth (SAFOD).

The Parkfield Experiment was continued by the Observatory at Depth bore hole in June of 2004 (3.2km) and during the summer of 2005 it passed through the entire fault zone at about 3 km. John Langbein of USGS in Menlo Park says that, "In 2007, in the deep hole that crossed the fault, we were able to re-enter the hole to do 'side-borings' to obtain intact rock samples from the fault zone. (Given the effort to obtain these 'exotic' rocks, one can think of these as 'moon rocks.') Samples from these rocks are now being analyzed by a number of scientists; importantly, these samples are providing some clues as to why certain sections of the fault 'creep' (fault-slip is accomplished without large earthquakes).

"Obtaining high quality measurements close to a large earthquake is not easy: one has to be in the right place at the right time with the right instruments. Such convergence happened, for the first time, when the 28 September 2004 Parkfield, California earthquake occurred on the San Andreas Fault in the middle of a dense network of instruments designed to record it. The resulting data reveal aspects of the earthquake process never before seen. The 2004 Parkfield earthquake, with its lack of obvious precursors, demonstrates that reliable short-term earthquake prediction still is not achievable. To reduce the societal impact of earthquakes now, we should focus on developing the next generation of models that provide better predictions of the strength and location of damaging ground shaking."²

Specifically, "The magnitude and rupture extent of the 2004 Parkfield earthquake were correctly anticipated, but its time of occurrence clearly was not. This suggests that long-term earthquake forecasts require models that include higher degrees of variability. Although the 2004 Parkfield earthquake was ideally located with a dense monitoring network specifically designed to detect foreshocks and other possible short-term precursors, no significant signals were detected. … These experiences demonstrate that reliable short term earthquake predictions will be very difficult at best."³ This is a change from our interview with USGS in 1987 when they suggested a three day warning might be possible from foreshocks. Recently earthquakes like the Parkfield 2004 earthquake didn't have foreshocks.

The result of 40 years of study of the Parkfield earthquake area based on the expenditure of millions of dollars, over 100 scientists that came from all over the world, sensitive instruments placed in the earth, and deep bore holes drilled across the fault still can't give us a warning before a 6 magnitude earthquake. The scientists believe that Parkfield demonstrates how valuable perseverance can be for advancing understanding of earthquakes. We must now use this knowledge and perseverance to find a way to warn others for the protection of human life and property. Although the scientists working at Parkfield have acquired a large knowledge of earthquakes that is used around the world, e need to look to other ways for the short term and interim methods of warning for future earthquakes.

******************************************

The concern for warning and preparedness has led officials, scientists, and educators to consider new methods, Some are seemingly open to other ways of predicting that have not been considered scientific. Just recently there have been a number of ways that are helpful that have not been considered before and others that have been totally ignored because they run contrary to the scientific. This is so serious to California and especially the highly populated areas that it is important to look at anything no matter how out of the ordinary they might seem.

Jim Berkland, the first county geologist for Santa Clara County in Northern California (1973-1994) has been making earthquake predictions since 1974. His most famous successful prediction was the "World Series" San Francisco earthquake or the Loma Prieta. He made a prediction "in the Gilroy Dispatch on October 13, that a major (World Series) earthquake would happen in four days. It happened."

Berkland has an unconventional approach to arrive at his predictions, in which he has been criticized by his fellow geologists, and yet makes a lot of sense. It can also be used by almost anyone interested with just a few tools. "For more than 25 years, Berkland has performed daily tallies of the number of missing felines and canines listed in the lost and found sections of the San Jose Mercury News, San Francisco Examiner/Chronicle, and the Los Angeles Examiner. He applies this missing cat and dog approach to a combination method of predicating earthquakes, which is based on the height of the Pacific tides. … he observes the alignment of the Sun, Earth, and Moon, plus the proximity of the Moon and Sun to Earth. He then considers the seismic windows. The tides tell him when. The animals tell him where with an indication of how big."¹

Jim Berkland, in an email to New Perspectives on April 8, 2010, predicted: This July 11th will be another high potential time for a major earthquake along the Ring of Fire, as there will be the longest solar eclipse of the century. There will be a high tide of 8.4 feet on the 12 th. He gives a window of from July 10 to 17 for an occurrence. He doesn't pinpoint his predictions until it is closer to the date given, but he did mention Tahiti and Easter Island because they are within the Path of Totality.²

He also told about the attitude of Peruvian culture regarding earthquake prediction. In 1994, "I saw the total eclipse near Machu Picchu, only to hear the Peruvian guide tell us that in their culture, they watched the eclipse and then waited for the earthquake. A 6.2 hit central Peru the next day."

Berkland looks for other potential triggers that Orey's book points out: "I never considered quakes to be random events despite assurance by many experts of high science that they were unpredictable, says Berkland, who points out that many scientific papers have been published that show possible correlations to short-term signals of earthquakes. These earthquake precursory effects include large new reservoirs, pumping in deep wells, heavy rainfall, time of the year, time of day, patterns of small tremors, seismic velocity changes, atmospheric pressure changes, seismic gaps in time and/or space, tectonic creep rates, strain rates, earthquake lights, earthquake sounds, sensitive people, etc. Keep in mind, adds Berkland, most have been totally rejected by the keepers of high wisdom."

Geologist Jim Berkland, was asked if an earthquake could trigger others to occur. He said, "No doubt about it!" He explains further, "But it used to be very controversial. The USGS (United States Geological Survey) would always say no, an earthquake is a random event and one doesn't have anything to do with another except for after shocks. The Landers earthquake triggered quakes at Mammoth Lakes-then there were quakes in Yellowstone, and even 5.5 in western Utah. Then came the 5.5 right next to the nuclear disposal site where everybody had been assured there would be no quake with 20 miles (of Yucca Mountain) and don't worry about any ground water, it will never affect these tunnels here. All of a sudden the ground water began rising up. There is no question about it. They now call it the 'trigger effect.'"

The trigger effect was confirmed by Ramon Arrowsmith, a geology professor at Arizona State University: "The passage of the seismic waves through the crust can momentarily load up other faults, and volcanic systems, even at large distances from the event" Arrowsmith claims that because of the increase in population we are moving into more hazardous areas and with our increasingly connected world we hear about these events more. The question, then, Is there an increase in quake activity or is it just a common thing for our ever moving earth? After all, the USGS tells us that there are millions of earthquakes every year around the world-many undetected because they are too small to register. In any one year there are an average of 17 major earthquakes (7.0 to 7.9) and one big (8.0 or higher) one. They say that our recent earthquakes are only par with an average year. And yet, officials and scientists are concerned more than ever before.⁴

******************************************

Elizabeth Cochran, an earth scientist at UC Riverside, California has actually put into place a system to detect earthquakes using PC and Mac computers. She wants everyone that uses a computer to be a warning system. "When your laptop rumbles" she claims that, "Such a network could dramatically boost our understanding of earthquakes-and bring researchers a step closer to an earthquake early-warning system that could give emergency officials vital seconds of preparation as a catastrophic tremblor moved through the region."¹

It appears that Elizabeth Cochran and her colleagues at UCR and Stanford have come upon a cheaper and easier way to monitor earthquake activity using computers. Some of the new laptops have accelerometers built in and there is a MacBook program called Seismac which can get readings by merely shaking the computer. This is what gave Cochran the idea to develop a computerized warning system. "So they created a program that would record quake movements and feed the data to a network." They already have over a thousand volunteers for their "Quake Catchers" to track earth movements using their own computers.

The Quake Catchers Network is far less sensitive than the official California network of a collection of about 450 machines thoughout the state that includes some monitors buried below ground. Cochran wants to expand her network so that the computers will "only upload the information if many computers in the same geographic area record 'dramatic shaking.'" The Los Angeles Times reported that "Last month, Quake Catchers captured the magnitude 8.8 quake in Chile and a rare 3.8 quake northwest of Chicago."

What seems interesting is that both the unconventional method of using the tides, new and full moon, and missing cats and dogs, and the use of personal computers can be done by the average person. We may finally have a warning system that is done by the people that are at risk. What a magnificent way to approach a problem which has baffled scientists and left people in the region feeling helpless. They need more, than, "In the next 30 years there will probably be a big 6.7 earthquake."

******************************************