Page images
[blocks in formation]

10 - 20

20 - 40%

40. 60%

80% plus

[subsumed][merged small][graphic]

Mr. YATES. Well, your chart shows California as having a really deep color.

Dr. MORGAN. That's correct. It is the major area.

Mr. Yates. The depth of the color is equal, presumably, to the possibility of the earthquake, right?

As that color depth increasesDr. PECK. The intensity of thatDr. MORGAN. The intensity of the ground movement. Mr. Yates. What should this Committee be doing for the people of California?

Dr. PECK. Well, continuing to support our earthquake program.

Mr. Yates. Should we stick by the budget that we have? I'm very serious about this.

Are we being retrograde in not providing the funds for California? You know, we're local legislators, but we're still very conscious of the needs of the nation, or of any part of the nation.

You know, periodically I get kind of concerned about this, be cause I have friends out there. As a matter of fact, my family was out near Santa Barbara when the last quake shook them up and woke them up. That can happen anytime you're travelling in the country.

Apart from that, I don't know why the California delegationis beating our doors down.

Dr. PECK. Now, well, see, the-

Mr. YATES. Unless I am paying too much attention-expressie too much worry about this.

Dr. PECK. Well, I don't think you're expressing too much about it. I think it really is a hazard.

Mr. YATES. Now, also

Dr. PECK. One would expect California itself to support some tivities, and indeed they did vote $1 million to help our eart prediction experiment at Parkfield. And we're hoping that per next few years they'll also contribute to a more intense earin monitoring and prediction effort in Southern California

Mr. YATES. What kind of an earthquake are you talling
Exceeding eight on the Richter scale?

Dr. PECK. Yes. That's what I was talking about. But
Mr. YATES. That's a big one, isn't it?
Dr. PECK. Yes.

Mr. YATES. Is this about the equivalent of San Frame
big was San Francisco?
Dr. PECK. Yes. It was about a magnitude eight

And in 1857, along the San Andreas Fault big one. That was 7.9.

Now, there's also the threat of smaller est Beach earthquake, which caused a great se early 1930's, was only a magnitude seven een ing ground, a magnitude seven earthquas damage.

Whittier Narrows earthquake, last fa faults are more extensive under Los Ane earlier. One concludes from that eart

magnitude six and seven earthquakes throughout the Los Angeles area is greater than we found earlier.

Our present knowledge of earthquake hazards in Southern California is that it's worse than we thought.

Mr. YATES. What should your program be, then? How much more money do you need to do what?

Dr. PECK. Well, we need to do more intensive monitoring in Southern California.

Mr. YATES. What do you have to do? What does this require?
Dr. PECK. We--
Mr. Yates. What do you have to spend?

Dr. PECK. I don't think we're prepared to say, Mr. Chairman. As part of our

Mr. YATES. Is your brother petrologist in a position to say?

Dr. MORGAN. We would like to increase the monitoring in that area, and increase our clustered instrumentation, such as the Park field experiment, in the Southern California area.

We would like to increase the amount of detailed mappingMr. YATES. How much would your cluster cost? Dr. MORGAN. The present cluster cost about $2 million. Mr. YATES. How much more do you need? Dr. MORGAN. I mean, clusters you would put in. That's the cost of the present cluster.

Mr. YATES. How many clusters do you think that you'd have to

put in?

Dr. MORGAN. We're not sure.
Dr. PECK. Mr. Chairman-
Mr. YATES. When would you be sure?

Dr. MORGAN. Well, we're developing a series of programs and committees to look at that and take details to the National Acade my.

Mr. YATES. How long will it take?
Dr. PECK. What do you mean?
Dr. Morgan. The National Academy is helping us.
Mr. Yates. Do you mean that they're doing it?

Dr. MORGAN. No, they're consulting with people on the Committee for Seismology and also our Review Committee.

Mr. YATES. How long will that study take? Will it take beyond the time when we mark up our bill?

Dr. MORGAN. I would think.

Mr. YATES. Well, does this have sufficient importance that your program is expedited?

Dr. PECK. Mr. Chairman, if you work with this program, and are familiar with it, you become extremely involved with it and concerned with it. There is no one who is not aware that it is a very grave problem.

Mr. Yates. Well then, what you're telling me is that as of right now and into the foreseeable future, there's nothing that you could tell the Committee to justify the Committee putting more money in. Isn't that what you're saying?

Dr. PECK. We'd be pleased to supply some of our thoughts--
Mr. YATES. That isn't what you're saying, gentlemen.


You're saying that in consultation with the appropriate committees of the National Academy of Science, you're trying to work this out, apparently to give information to some other committee.

Dr. PECK. No, no, no.
That's not it.
Mr. YATES. No? What's that for?

Dr. MORGAN. Just to provide guidance for us in the design of the Southern California clusters.

Mr. YATES. Well, how long will it take then? In other words, you've hired the National Academy of Sciences to provide certain information for you.

Dr. PECK. We have a standing advisory committee from the-several standing advisory committees from the National Academy.

Mr. YATES. Well, why is it taking so long?

Is it that you don't have enough money to attach to this program, to do the research, or is this just in the nature of things to take so long?

Dr. PECK. Because of the constrained budgets of the last couple of years, we didn't expedite our planning.

Mr. YATES. So you don't have any money with which to expedite your planning right now, and you won't have any until we have our bill, right?

Dr. PECK. We can-

Mr. YATES. You don't want to transfer any money from something else, because you don't have any money to transfer.

Dr. PECK. I'd be loathe to cut some other programs which are already fairly tight. Mr. YATES. So what do you want us to do?

EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION PROGRAM Dr. PECK. Well, the immediate problem is that $2.5 million cut in-

Mr. YATES. Well, that's for the next bill.

That doesn't take care of your present problem. Is this of sufficient importance to be in a supplemental?

Dr. Peck. No, I don't think so.
Mr. YATES. Does your colleague think so?
Are you worried about it?

Dr. MORGAN. Of course we're worried about the probability of an earthquake in Southern California. We would

Mr. YATES. But you think you have enough information detection on the ground so that you're in a position to

Dr. PECK. Yes. And we don't have in hand a plan for improving that. I don't have one in hand.

Mr. Yates. Is there something that you should have in hand?
Dr. MORGAN. It's a plan that we're developing, that's correct.
Mr. YATES. Why don't you have it now?

Dr. MORGAN. We're trying to learn from the Parkfield experiment, first of all. We're trying to do this as a staged effort. The Parkfield experiment has been set up and it's a clustered experiment with many strain gages and other instruments.

Mr. YaTEs. When will you have the information from the Parkfield experiment?

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »