Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Earthquake Hazards Program

The USGS monitors and reports on earthquakes, assesses earthquake impacts and hazards, and conducts targeted research on the causes and effects of earthquakes. We undertake these activities as part of the larger National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP), a four-agency partnership established by Congress.

News

USGS Seeks Earthquake Hazards Research Proposals

USGS Seeks Earthquake Hazards Research Proposals

The Night the Earth Shook

The Night the Earth Shook

(Some) Assembly Required: How to sign your organization up for the Great ShakeOut

(Some) Assembly Required: How to sign your organization up for the Great ShakeOut

Publications

Phase 1 technical implementation plan for the expansion of the ShakeAlert earthquake early warning system to Alaska

Executive SummaryThe conference report accompanying the fiscal year (FY) 2022 Consolidated Appropriations Act (Public Law 117–103) for the U.S. Department of the Interior and related agencies directed the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to “work with the State of Alaska to develop an implementation plan to be completed within two years in order to put ShakeAlert/Earthquake Early Warning in...
Authors
Cecily J. Wolfe, Natalia A. Ruppert, Douglas D. Given, Michael E. West, Valerie I. Thomas, Jessica R. Murray, Ronni Grapenthin

Migration of seismicity from the mantle to the upper crust beneath Harrat Lunayyir volcanic field, Saudi Arabia

Harrat Lunayyir is a volcanic field in Saudi Arabia that experienced a Mw~5.4 earthquake driven by an upper-crustal dike intrusion in May 2009. This volcanic field has exhibited numerous forms of volcanic seismicity both prior to and since the 2009 dike intrusion. Significantly, earthquakes within the lithospheric mantle and, rarely, the lower crust are present in the two-decade long...
Authors
Alexander R. Blanchette, Simon L. Klemperer, Walter D. Mooney, Turki A. Sehli

Implications of physics-based M9 ground motions on liquefaction-induced damage in the Cascadia Subduction Zone: Looking forward and backward

Given the likelihood of future M9 Cascadia Subduction Zone (CSZ) earthquakes, various estimates of the resulting, regional ground motions have been made, including a suite of 30 physics-based simulations that reflect key modeling uncertainties. However, because the last CSZ interface rupture occurred in 1700 CE, the shaking expected in such an event is especially uncertain, as are the...
Authors
Ryan A. Rasanen, Alex R.R. Grant, Andrew James Makdisi, Brett W. Maurer, Erin Wirth

Science

2029 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model

Posted in 2025: The updates for the conterminous U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii will follow the schedule below.
link

2029 50-State National Seismic Hazard Model

Posted in 2025: The updates for the conterminous U.S., Alaska, and Hawaii will follow the schedule below.
Learn More

2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands Long-term National Seismic Hazard Model

We anticipate the final 2025 PRVI NSHM to be available by December 21st 2025.
link

2025 Puerto Rico and U.S. Virgin Islands Long-term National Seismic Hazard Model

We anticipate the final 2025 PRVI NSHM to be available by December 21st 2025.
Learn More
link

Public kickoff webinar: 2026 National Seismic Hazard Models for Guam & Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa

Monday, February 24, 2025 2:00-4:00 pm MST A Virtual Meeting
Learn More

Multimedia

Screenshot of the Aftershock Forecast for an earthquake in California, showing the information box at the top of the forecast and the four tabs of forecast information.
Mendocino_headerinfo-2.jpg
Mendocino_headerinfo-2.jpg
Aftershock Forecast Sequence-Specific Model Parameters
AftershockForecastSequence-SpecificModelParameters.png
AftershockForecastSequence-SpecificModelParameters.png
An example of Bayesian updating of productivity parameter (a-value) for the 2010 Mw 8.8 Maule, Chile, earthquake. Immediately following the earthquake, the SZ-GENERIC region-specific a-value distribution can be used. As the aftershock sequence progresses and additional data are collected, this distribution can be treated as a prior distribution and updated using Bayes’ rule. Posterior distributions at subsequent time intervals are shown. Figure from Page et al. (2016).
AftershockForecastfig6.gif
AftershockForecastfig6.gif
Equation 2 for the Aftershock Forecast probability distribution to compute the forecast
AftershockEquation2Screenshot.png
AftershockEquation2Screenshot.png
Icon for ShakeMap
ShakeMap icon
ShakeMap icon
Two example aftershock sequences, from southern California, that illustrate the three general rules of aftershocks. A circle shows each aftershock's time of occurrence (horizontal axis) and magnitude (vertical axis). The larger-magnitude M6.7 Northridge earthquake is followed by many more aftershocks than the smaller M5.1 La Habra earthquake. The rate of aftershocks in both sequences decreases as time passes. The magnitudes of the aftershocks don't change with time, meaning that large aftershocks are still
fig4.gif
fig4.gif
Screenshot of the Aftershock Forecast for an earthquake in California, with the “Summary” tab selected, and “M4+” and “Show All” selections for magnitude and forecast duration.
Mendocino_M4all.jpg
Mendocino_M4all.jpg
Screenshot of the Aftershock Forecast for an earthquake in California, with the “Summary” tab selected, and “M4+” and “Show All” selections for magnitude and forecast duration.
Mendocino_M41month.jpg
Mendocino_M41month.jpg
Screenshot of the Aftershock Forecast for an earthquake in California, with the “Summary” tab selected, scrolled to the bottom of the page. The mainshock is shown with a yellow star on top of its circle; other earthquakes in the forecasting region are also shown colored by time of occurrence.
Mendocino_map copy.jpg
Mendocino_map copy.jpg
Was this page helpful?