Geology Reports⌕ Search

USGS · 70199756

Intensities, aftershock sequences, and the location of the 1936 Milton‐Freewater earthquake near the Oregon–Washington border, U.S.A.

Abstract

The epicenter of the 16 July 1936 M "> M M 6 Milton‐Freewater earthquake, also known as the State Line earthquake and the largest historical earthquake in northeastern Oregon or southeastern Washington, is uncertain. Various studies place the epicenter of the earthquake, which was widely felt in eastern Washington, northeastern Oregon, and northern Idaho, within 30 km of the intersection of the Hite and Wallula faults. In the absence of reported coseismic surface rupture for the earthquake, we sought to determine which epicentral location is most consistent with the intensity observations and with its aftershock sequence, which lasted for at least 27 months. An epicenter between Umapine and Milton‐Freewater best matches the observations. This location falls within the region that experienced the highest intensities of VII and reported the largest number of aftershocks, compares favorably to the (2018) International Seismological Centre‐Global Earthquake Model (ISC‐GEM) epicenter, and is proximal to sites that experienced ground failure and groundwater effects. Modeling of aftershock rates is consistent with this suggested epicenter and with the estimated 10 km long subsurface rupture of the earthquake. This suggested epicenter lies at, or just west of, the intersection of the Hite and Wallula faults. The elongation of ground failure along the Wallula fault and the aftershock distribution appears more consistent with rupture of the Wallula fault or of a subparallel fault than with rupture of the Hite fault. Rupture on faults to the north or east of the Wallula‐Hite fault intersection is inconsistent with most observations, including the perceived impulsivity of the mainshock.

Explore related subjects

90° N90° S · 180° W ← longitude → 180° E
Source-reported bounding extent: 45.5° to 46.5° latitude; -119.25° to -118° longitude. This indicates report coverage, not an exact sampling location. View area on OpenStreetMap.

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas M. Brocher, Brian L. Sherrod. 2018-08-28. Intensities, aftershock sequences, and the location of the 1936 Milton‐Freewater earthquake near the Oregon–Washington border, U.S.A.. https://doi.org/10.1785/0120180111

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Re-evaluation of shaking, dynamic strain, and the source of the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake

As the largest historical event in the eastern United States, the 1886 Charleston, South Carolina, earthquake, plays a prominent role in our nation’s seismological and human history and an outsized role in our probabilistic ground‐motion hazard estimates, affecting building codes, insurance rates, and geophysical monitoring. Thus, constraining the characteristics of the 1886 earthquake source, as well as the nature of its shaking distribution and impacts to the extent possible, is essential. Given its vintage, however, societal, geological, and geophysical datasets are limited compared with those used in modern seismological analyses. Because of these limitations, some characteristics of the rupture model are fundamentally nonunique. Still, by re‐evaluating all available data, I can constrain several key aspects of this earthquake. I show that several interpretations in recent analyses are inconsistent regarding the inferred source; shaking; ground failure; and, particularly, railway impacts. Importantly, I have shown that although dynamic strain caused the ground failure that led to track deformation, without the intermediate liquefaction step, dynamic strain alone was unlikely to be the source of rail deformation, contrary to earlier studies. Had earlier pronouncements that dynamic strain is a real concern for bending railways held true, there would be serious ramifications for railway engineering as well as for other above‐ and below‐ground linear infrastructure.

South Carolina↗

ETAS-positive: Extracting unbiased epidemic-type aftershock models from incomplete earthquake catalogs

Earthquake catalogs are inherently incomplete, and short-term fluctuations in catalog completeness can strongly bias estimates of seismicity parameters. Here, we extend the positive statistics framework recently introduced for estimating Gutenberg–Richter a and b values to the Epidemic-Type Aftershock Sequence (ETAS) model. The approach focuses on complete magnitude–time intervals defined by pairs of earthquakes in which the second event is larger than the first. Comprehensive synthetic tests demonstrate that the proposed ETAS + method retrieves nearly unbiased parameter estimates even from highly incomplete catalogs, whereas parameters obtained using classical estimation approaches are strongly biased. Application to Southern California reveals a similar trend, with the productivity scaling parameter α approaching the b value, consistent with self-similar earthquake triggering within estimation uncertainties. Owing to its robustness against catalog incompleteness and computational efficiency, the ETAS + method provides a powerful new tool for seismicity analysis and earthquake forecasting.

California↗