Something Stirring at Mount Saint Helens - 2/14/1011

reply to post by westcoast


OH it's just the magma plume beginning to pressure up to a point of stability again. No biggie.

So I haven't seen this posted anywhere else yet, some very interesting comments. This is the current update from PNSN on todays activities. Apparently today is the anniversary date of the 5.1 quake.

An M4.3 earthquake struck the Mount St. Helens region this morning, 14 February 2011, at 10:35 a.m. PST (18:35 UTC) and was felt widely through southwestern Washington and Northwestern Oregon (earthquake.usgs.gov...). Its exact magnitude may change by a few tenths from this value as records are further analyzed. The earthquake was followed by several aftershocks up to M2.8 over the next few hours (www.pnsn.org...), the three largest of which were also reported felt. All of the earthquakes are located in an area about 8 kilometers (5 miles) north of the crater of Mount St. Helens, near the Johnston Ridge Observatory, at a depth of about 4 to 6 kilometers (2.5 to 4 miles).

Today's earthquakes are in the same place as a small swarm that took place about two weeks earlier, on 29 January. These earthquakes are reminiscent of a swarm that took place about 30 years ago, when a swarm of small earthquakes began in August 1980, a few miles northwest of today's activity. The 1980-1981 sequence climaxed with an M5.5 earthquake on 14 February 1981. Analysis of the 1981 events suggested that they occurred along existing faults in the Mount St. Helens seismic zone, a northwest to southeast trending system of faults in which Mount St. Helens lies. The Mount St. Helens seismic zone exhibits strike-slip motion, with the southwestern rocks slipping horizontally northwest relative to the rocks northeast of the fault zone. The fault zone likely exerts control on the location of Mount St. Helens volcano. Studies following the 1980 eruption suggested that the magma removed during the May 1980 eruption and subsequent lava-dome building caused faults along the seismic zone to slip in response to the magma withdrawal. Similar interaction of volcanic activity and tectonic fault movement is possible in the case of today's earthquakes, but at present there appears to be no signs of unrest in the volcanic system.

The USGS and the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network at University of Washington continue to watch conditions at Mount St. Helens closely.

(emphasis mine)

SOURCE

Great thread geotechs. Tagging thread as well.
Don't mean to intrude there guys but here is some MSM info on the flares, their grade, and ETA. About 1:30am EST. The article does say could be lower, could be stronger, if so will be viewed through the continental US. If weaker just the standard Northern Pole activity. It took the M class 37 hrs. So does a X class travel faster or slower? Weds. morning seems so far away some how.
This published before the X class arrived, and they buried it and hadn't listed the X yet.

hope this helps, just my 2sense.

reply to post by SunflowerStar


Thanks for the info...I was wondering when it was suposed to get here. I plan on looking for it, hopefully the clouds will blow away.

For anyone interested in info on Mount St. Helens, I have THE link for you:

HERE

HERE is a picture of the very old drum style seismograph of the 1980 eruption.

This is a paper on seismic signatures


Edit to add: some more examples:

Major HT

MORE

I know very little about volcanoes although I've lived near one for the majority of my life, but I must ask, if all three volcanoes are connected by the same chamber (Helens, Rainier, and Adams or is it Baker?), if Helens blows, will that relieve the pressure from the other volcanoes or will it set off a chain reaction? I know in the past it hasn't, but is it possible?

I find it odd that it's awaken again on it's anniversary date, but from what I've learned, St. Helens is the most active in the area. Overall is activity at St. Helens a good sign? I must know for personal, life saving reasons.

reply to post by collietta


Well, I am by no means an expert. Like you said, the last major eruptions plus other, smaller ones has not led to any other volcanos becoming active. I believe that geologist here have said before that it will NOT.

I just see this as another symptom to the bigger, over-all picture. Odd, numerous little quakes, that wierd episode (unconfirmed) at Glacier Peak, the deep tremors....

No, you don't need to worry at this point about anything life-saving. I think that as far as the volcanos go, we have learned enough in the past to have quite a bit of warning. It's the subduction zone that concerns me,and although this totally just me speculation, I think it is ALL conected in one way or another.

Just a side note - my dog is doing her 'earthquake thing' again. Not that bad....but still reacting to something.

reply to post by westcoast


I woke up to this thread,,

now i go to sleep.


??SEE YOU TOMORROW???

Originally posted by leaualorin
reply to post by westcoast

 

well , thank GOD I live in ROMANIA ...

Here we have BIG problems with our evil satanic VERY GREEDY politicians...
But the US guys...
I don't know...
I mean , west coast , CALIFORNIA has daily almost earthquakes and now EAST COAST , washington...
Bad...
Stay close to your car keys and check this site often :

earthquake.usgs.gov...

Buna ziua Leaualorin - Might be a good idea for you search around your local area, aside from your accurate description of your politicians, why would they post warning notices on risky buildings and not even have an earthquake evacuation plan in place after the 1977 disaster?

Start here maybe

www.bucharestlife.net...

reply to post by highseer



because they don't give a ... about the population!
Just like YOUR politicians!

I don't need to "start" anywhere; I know who am I "Dealing" with !
And I am prepared for whatever may come , be sure of this!
By the way : did I disturbed you by posting on this forum?

Hay Westcoast

I was just browsing RSOE EDIS

They have the Quakes from Helen's on there:

The second largest earthquake since Mount St. Helen's erupted -- a magnitude 4.3 shaker -- rocked a fault line six miles north of the volcano Monday morning. People felt it as far away as Astoria, Lake Oswego, Hood River and even Bremerton, Wash., near Seattle. The last one, as it happens, was 30 years ago also on Valentine's Day, a magnitude 5.5 temblor. That 1981 earthquake appeared to be the result of the earth's crust readjusting after magma oozed up through the fault and blew the mountain's top on May 18, 1980.

Monday's quake was of the "strike-slip variety," said seismologist Seth Moran of the Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver. The large tectonic Juan de Fuca plate is diving beneath the North American plate. At places, the plates get stuck together. An earthquake occurs when the plates slip past each other, releasing energy, he said. More than 900 people reported feeling the 10:35 a.m. earthquake, posting their responses on the U.S. Geologic Survey's "Did you feel it?" page on its website. No damage was reported. "I felt it, and certainly a lot of people here felt it," Moran said. "It was broadly felt, and, for a 4.3, that's appropriate, it was a decent-sized earthquake." Mount St. Helens has rumbled and belched and quaked nearly every day since the May 1980 eruption, averaging one to two earthquakes a day, Moran said. In late January, a swarm of earthquakes was detected in the same general area as Monday's quake, known as the Mount St. Helen's Seismic Zone.

The zone runs from Mount St. Helen's 30 miles north to Morton, Wash. The largest quake in that January swarm was a modest magnitude 2.6, he said. Monday's quake, like those previous ones, occurred at a relatively shallow depth of about 3.1 miles. The quake doesn't presage another eruption, or another round of dome-building inside the crater like the action that followed a smaller magma eruption in fall 2004, Moran said. This one was simply a result of tectonic plates clashing beneath the earth's surface along the fault. Still, he said: "Anytime a 4.3 earthquake happens in this area, you pay attention because they're not that common. Realistically, we don't know exactly what's going to happen, but there's a reasonable guess that this was the largest event that we're going to see, and that's based on the fact that we've only had one event that's larger in the past 30 years."

So are they right do you think? Could these larger quakes be due to tectonic plates clashing?

Great thread by the way

I think the webis are showing the wind
Forecast for St Helens:


Overnight: Snow showers. Low around 29. Windy, with a south southwest wind around 32 mph, with gusts as high as 45 mph. Chance of precipitation is 80%. Total nighttime snow accumulation of 5 to 9 inches possible.

Tuesday: Snow showers. High near 30. Southeast wind between 15 and 18 mph, with gusts as high as 25 mph. Chance of precipitation is 90%. New snow accumulation of 4 to 8 inches possible.

Tuesday Night: Snow showers. Low around 22. Breezy, with a south southwest wind between 21 and 23 mph, with gusts as high as 31 mph. Chance of precipitation is 90%. New snow accumulation of 3 to 5 inches possible.

Wednesday: Snow showers. High near 25. Southwest wind around 15 mph, with gusts as high as 22 mph. Chance of precipitation is 80%. New snow accumulation of 3 to 5 inches possible.

Wednesday Night: Snow showers likely. Mostly cloudy, with a low around 17. West southwest wind between 8 and 14 mph, with gusts as high as 20 mph. Chance of precipitation is 60%. New snow accumulation of 2 to 4 inches possible.
source

It's hard to find the quakes in all that mess on pnsn.

Great information. I am so much better prepared now. Thanks!!

I'm coming over to the States for another four months this summer in June... Starting to wonder if i'll even make it over there with all these quakes going off!

Originally posted by Caji316
I can't say they are to blame because I don't have any hard facts..It's just my gut feeling though that they are behind it all.

Lol. Its an earthquake, around a volcano. I dont think "they" can be reasonably blamed for that

Why are "they" always so maliciously trying to destroy the world? they must have woken up on the wrong side of the bed.

"they" are going to cause the end of the world, i know they are. They've been planning it for a thousand thousand years, and were been expecting them to make it happen soon for just as long.

They need to chill

Good thread West-Coast...S&F

Although, like darrman says, I live in she shadow of Rainier myself and was 15 and living in between Seattle and Tacoma when St. Helens blew - I'm not really going to get too excited about this. It is interesting and something to make a mental note of, but when St. Helens blew nearly 31 years ago we all had plenty of warning at the time. I would think that the warning system in place would be far more accurate now so that if there was an imminant eruption, the relatively small population living in the vicinity of St Helens would be evacuated weeks ahead of time.
Also, I believe Rainier is currently the most monitored volcano on the planet (correct me if I'm wrong), so I'm not too worried about it going off unexpectedly either - even though my kids are in the Orting School District - roughly 30 minutes from being buried if Rainier blows (well, 2 have since graduated - one still in school). Here's a picture I took from my front porch:
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/4e6b6d448acb.jpg[/atsimg]

I literally have a front row seat if she goes off!

Also, I am still planning to go camping at Silver Springs (about 20 miles closer to the mountain than the above picture) this summer, so I'm not too worried. For those who are unfamiliar, if you are at Silver Springs and Rainier goes off - you might have time to hear the explosion and say "Oh crap", but that's about it.
Darrman - just out of curiosity are you living in Bonney Lake or Buckley or Enumclaw? Just curious from what you have indicated as your location. Nice to see a few of my "neighbors" on this website!

reply to post by tallcool1


Nice pic!! Now, we all expect time-elapsed shots when she blows, okay?

I agree with you. As I said earlier, I am not THAT concerned. It was more of...oh man, a 4.3 at Helens? That is NOT normal and perhaps a sign of something else to come...so definately need to pay attention.

I Was just at packwood this past summer (where I took my rainier pic from), so I too get quite close to these giants. People who don't live here probably don't understand why and maybe they are right. Perhpas we ARE a bit crazy...but it is hard to resist their beauty.

Not much going on today...couple of small quakes. We did have that 2.9 off Vancouver which is also an odd spot.

Magnitude 2.9
Date-Time Tuesday, February 15, 2011 at 14:47:40 UTC
Tuesday, February 15, 2011 at 06:47:40 AM at epicenter
Time of Earthquake in other Time Zones

Location 48.885°N, 123.494°W
Depth 18.9 km (11.7 miles) set by location program
Region VANCOUVER ISLAND, CANADA REGION
Distances 19 km (12 miles) ENE (67°) from North Cowichan, British Columbia, Canada
38 km (24 miles) SW (220°) from Richmond, British Columbia, Canada
44 km (27 miles) SW (232°) from Delta, British Columbia, Canada
51 km (32 miles) SSW (211°) from Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada

Location Uncertainty Error estimate not available
Parameters NST= 25, Nph= 25, Dmin=26 km, Rmss=0.08 sec, Gp=108°,
M-type=duration magnitude (Md), Version=1

reply to post by boo1981


Thanks for the RSOE article! I hadn't read it. You know what though? I call bull crap on that one. Here is why:


Note this great map showing where our last big quake was in relation to both the Jaun De Fuca fault and the subduction zone:





Here is another one :




Now take a good look at the above maps, note the geological make-up depth of the faults and subduction zone in relation to the mountain range.

The 6.8 nisqually quake near seattle in 2001 was at a depth of 52 km. That is what you would expect when dealing with these tectonics.

Now, compare these statements. The first is taken from the best source, the CVO (cascade volcano observatory)in washington.

Analysis of the 1981 events suggested that they occurred along existing faults in the Mount St. Helens seismic zone, a northwest to southeast trending system of faults in which Mount St. Helens lies. The Mount St. Helens seismic zone exhibits strike-slip motion, with the southwestern rocks slipping horizontally northwest relative to the rocks northeast of the fault zone. The fault zone likely exerts control on the location of Mount St. Helens volcano. Studies following the 1980 eruption suggested that the magma removed during the May 1980 eruption and subsequent lava-dome building caused faults along the seismic zone to slip in response to the magma withdrawal. Similar interaction of volcanic activity and tectonic fault movement is possible in the case of today's earthquakes, but at present there appears to be no signs of unrest in the volcanic system.

SOURCE

Compared to RSOE's source, (also very credible), the CVO in Vancouver:

Monday's quake was of the "strike-slip variety," said seismologist Seth Moran of the Cascades Volcano Observatory in Vancouver. The large tectonic Juan de Fuca plate is diving beneath the North American plate. At places, the plates get stuck together. An earthquake occurs when the plates slip past each other, releasing energy, he said.

This one was simply a result of tectonic plates clashing beneath the earth's surface along the fault. Still, he said: "Anytime a 4.3 earthquake happens in this area, you pay attention because they're not that common. Realistically, we don't know exactly what's going to happen, but there's a reasonable guess that this was the largest event that we're going to see, and that's based on the fact that we've only had one event that's larger in the past 30 years."

SOURCE



So I don't know if perhaps they twisted his words around or mis-quoted him....but they make it sound as if the second guy is saying this quake was from the juan de fuca fault...which is not accurate.

At this depth, in that location, it is obviously in the Helens seismic zone and any faults there are the direct result of magmatic movement, they believe created back in 1980....totally seperate, at a different locationa and depth than the Juan De Fuca.

I just felt it important to clear that up. This is why they continue to watch closely....any seismic activity there could possible correlate with magma movement, although I stress none has been noted or recorded so far that we know!

I'll leave ya with I picture I took last night. I was hoping to see some Northern lights. I don't think I did (maybe vaguely) but wow, I never knew how it would turn out. Breathtaking!!!!

reply to post by westcoast


I have been lurking here for years and am impressed with the knowledge and amount of research you guys apply on genuine topics such as this. That being said, I'd like to ask if this current quake could possibly have any connection to the 5.0 on Okinawa yesterday?

reply to post by scaredlady


Thank you!

No, I don't see how it could. My thoughts (and from what the Wa CVO is saying) is that is a local seismic event occuring in the same area were the last big one was (5.5). It was shallow at around only 3 miles deep. I couldn't possibly see how any correlation to a quake in okinawa could be made.

Thanks for posting!

It's good she's settled down - for now.

another quake just a few moments ago

2.2 2011/02/15 19:53:54 46.303 -122.182 10.5 11 km ( 7 mi) N of Mount St. Helens Volcano, WA