MOUNT RAINIER
GEOLOGY & WEATHER
Hello guest! [ Log In ]
Welcome to morageology.com!
Welcome to
morageology.com
Use this bar to navigate the site
Good Morning!
Saturday, July 27, 2024
Today is day 209 of 2024 and
day 301 of Water Year 2024
Welcome to morageology.com! This site is an externally-accessible clearing house of static, real-time, non-real-time, and archived Mount Rainier geologic and geomorphic data used for geohazard awareness and mitigation. All data provided on this site are publicly-accessible non-sensitive scientific information collected by geologists at Mount Rainier National Park. Individual datasets are provided here for informational use only and are not guaranteed to be accurate or final versions - all data should be considered provisional unless otherwise noted.
TODAY'S DEBRIS FLOW HAZARD
9-DAY FORECAST TREND:
LMMHHVHMHMHLL
LATEST PARADISE WEATHER
As of: 07/27/2024 12:00 AM

47.2° F
Wind: NE (40°) @ 1 G 2 mph
Snow Depth: -16 in (-329% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.00 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
LATEST LONGMIRE WEATHER
As of: 07/25/2024 03:00 PM

62.5° F
Snow Depth: 2 in (0% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.00 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
WINDY.COM PRECIPITATION RADAR
MOUNT RAINIER VICINITY
FORECASTED SNOW PACK
AT PARADISE (5,400')
[ More Info ]
Debris flow deposit from August 2015 debris flow on Tahoma Creek (from a photo by Scott Beason on 09/14/2015)
LATEST EARTHQUAKES:
Earthquakes in the last 30 days near Mount Rainier
:
56

LAST 5 EARTHQUAKES:

  1. Wed, Jul 24, 2024, 00:44:08 GMT
    3 days 7 hours 27 minutes 33 seconds ago
    12.964 km (8.055 mi) W of summit
    Magnitude: 0.3
    Depth 10.2 km (6.3 mi)
    View More Info

  2. Tue, Jul 23, 2024, 12:48:53 GMT
    3 days 19 hours 22 minutes 49 seconds ago
    18.144 km (11.274 mi) NW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.5
    Depth 6.8 km (4.2 mi)
    View More Info

  3. Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 17:39:31 GMT
    4 days 14 hours 32 minutes 10 seconds ago
    0.540 km (0.336 mi) SSW of summit
    Magnitude: -0.6
    Depth 1.5 km (0.9 mi)
    View More Info

  4. Mon, Jul 22, 2024, 09:55:02 GMT
    4 days 22 hours 16 minutes 40 seconds ago
    28.281 km (17.573 mi) NW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.5
    Depth 11.6 km (7.2 mi)
    View More Info

  5. Sun, Jul 21, 2024, 00:06:48 GMT
    6 days 8 hours 4 minutes 53 seconds ago
    0.106 km (0.066 mi) S of summit
    Magnitude: 0.4
    Depth 1.0 km (0.6 mi)
    View More Info

MISC:
Currently, this site has approximately
20,992,032
total data points in its database!
 
1 RANDOM PUBLICATION AND THE 5 LATEST PUBLICATIONS ADDED TO THE DATABASE:
  1. Jones et al. (2001) Updating flood maps efficiently using existing hydraulic models, very-high-accuracy elevation data, and a geographic information system - A pilot study on the Nisqually River, Washington
    A method of updating flood inundation maps at a fraction of the expense of using traditional methods was piloted in Washington State as part of the U.S. Geological Survey Urban Geologic and Hydrologic Hazards Initiative. Large savings in expense may be achieved bybuilding upon previous Flood Insurance Studies and automating the process of flood delineation with a Geographic Information System (GIS); increases in accuracy and detail result from the use of very-high-accuracy elevation data and automated delineation; and the resulting digital data sets contain valuable ancillary information such as flood depth, as well as greatly facilitating map storage and utility. The method consists of creating stage-discharge relations from the archived output of the existing hydraulic model, using these relations to create updated flood stages for recalculated flood discharges, and using a GIS to automate the map generation process. Many of the effective flood maps were created in the late 1970's and early 1980's, and suffer from a number of well recognized deficiencies such as out-of-date or inaccurate estimates of discharges for selected recurrence intervals, changes in basin characteristics, and relatively low quality elevation data used for flood delineation. FEMA estimates that 45 percent of effective maps are over 10 years old (FEMA, 1997). Consequently, Congress has mandated the updating and periodic review of existing maps, which have cost the Nation almost 3 billion (1997) dollars. The need to update maps and the cost of doing so were the primary motivations for piloting a more cost-effective and efficient updating method. New technologies such as Geographic Information Systems and LIDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) elevation mapping are key to improving the efficiency of flood map updating, but they also improve the accuracy, detail, and usefulness of the resulting digital flood maps. GISs produce digital maps without manual estimation of inundated areas between cross sections, and can generate working maps across a broad range of scales, for any selected area, and overlayed with easily updated cultural features. Local governments are aggressively collecting very-high-accuracy elevation data for numerous reasons; this not only lowers the cost and increases accuracy of flood maps, but also inherently boosts the level of community involvement in the mapping process. These elevation data are also ideal for hydraulic modeling, should an existing model be judged inadequate.
  2. (2024) Mount Rainier National Park climate futures summary
    Climate change is already threatening resources, assets, and visitors in national parks, and, increasingly, park decisions require consideration of plausible climate change implications and potential adaptations. This climate futures summary for Mount Rainier National Park describes both recent changes in climate and plausible climate futures to help inform and support a broad range of climate assessments and climate adaptation efforts and activities.
  3. Driedger et al. (2024) Lawetlat'la—Mount St. Helens—Land in Transformation
    This poster provides an overview of Mount St. Helens’ eruption history and emphasizes the continuous transformation of the volcanic landscape and its ecosystems. After each eruption, the landscape and ecosystems are not so much restored as they are morphed into new forms and patterns.
  4. Driedger et al. (2024) Following the tug of the audience from complex to simplified hazard maps at Cascade Range volcanoes
    Volcano-hazard maps are broadly recognized as important tools for forecasting and managing volcanic crises and for disseminating spatial information to authorities and people at risk. As scientists, we might presume that hazards maps can be developed at the time and with the methods of our discretion, yet the co-production of maps with stakeholder groups, who have programmatic needs of their own, can sway the timing, usability, and acceptance of map products. We examine two volcano hazard map-making efforts by staff at the U.S. Geological Survey. During the 1990s and early 2000s scientists developed a series of hazard assessments and maps with detailed zonations for volcanoes in Washington and Oregon. In 2009, the National Park Service expressed the need for simplified versions of the existing hazard maps for a high-profile visitor center exhibit. This request created an opportunity for scientists to rethink the objectives, scope, content, and map representations of hazards. The primary focus of this article is a discussion of processes used by scientists to distill the most critical information within the official parent maps into a series of simplified maps using criteria specified. We contextualize this project with information about development of the parent maps, public response to the simplified hazard maps, the value of user engagement in mapmaking, and with reference to the abundance of guidance available to the next generation of hazard-mapmakers. We argue that simplified versions of maps should be developed in tandem with any hazard maps that contain technical complexities, not as a replacement, but as a mechanism to broaden awareness of hazards. We found that when scientists endeavor to design vivid and easy-to-understand maps, people in many professions find uses for them within their organization’s information products, resulting in extensive distribution.
  5. Iverson and George (2024) Numerical modeling of debris flows: A conceptual assessment: Advances in debris-flow science and practice
    Real-world hazard evaluation poses many challenges for the development and application of numerical models of debris flows. In this chapter we provide a conceptual overview of physically based, depth-averaged models designed to simulate debris-flow motion across three-dimensional terrain. When judiciously formulated and applied, these models can provide useful information about anticipated depths, speeds, and extents of debris-flow inundation as well as debris interactions with structures such as levees and dams. Depth-averaged debris-flow models can differ significantly from one another, however. Some of the greatest differences result from simulation of one-phase versus two-phase flow, use of parsimonious versus information-intensive initial and boundary conditions, use of tuning coefficients versus physically measureable parameters, application of dissimilar numerical solution techniques, and variations in computational speed and model accessibility. This overview first addresses these and related attributes of depth-averaged debris-flow models. It then describes model testing and application to hazard evaluation, with a focus on our own model, D-Claw. The overview concludes with a discussion of outstanding challenges for development of improved debris-flow models and suggestions for prospective model users.
  6. Vallance (2024) Lahars: Origins, behavior and hazards: Advances in debris-flow science and practice
    Volcanic debris flows that originate at potentially active volcanoes are called lahars. Lahars are like debris flows in non-volcanic terrain but can most notably differ in origin and size. Primary lahars occur during eruptions and may have novel origins such as turbulent mixing of hot rock moving across ice- and snow-clad volcanoes and eruptions through crater lakes. Lahars range in volume to more than a cubic kilometer (109 m3), with the biggest ones caused by huge deep-seated flank collapses of water-saturated edifice rock. Because they can be so voluminous, can have high water contents, and commonly can be clay rich, these lahars can travel tens to even hundreds of kilometers. Long transport causes evolution of flow types from flood flow to hyperconcentrated flow to debris flow. Lahars capable of traveling far downstream are commonly sufficiently liquefied that they drape valley slopes and leave behind thin deposits as they pass downstream. Only in valley bottoms are lahars likely to emplace thick deposits, and even there the deposits are apt to be much thinner than peak flow depths. Flows with long transport change character with time and distance downstream. Deposits, especially those in valley bottoms, can accrete during intervals that represent a significant proportion of the time it takes the flow to pass (typically minutes). The combination of flows changing character and their progressive accretion imposes distinctive characteristics on their deposits such as normal and inverse grading. Historically, lahars have caused thousands of fatalities and destroyed entire towns. Perhaps the most disastrous known lahar occurred in 1985 at Nevado del Ruiz in Colombia and killed more than 23,000 people. Since that disaster, an increasing awareness of lahar hazards has led to efforts to mitigate them. In recent decades, improved land-use decisions, monitoring and communication have improved hazard responses and saved many lives. Lahar hazard maps and development of lahar inundation models have helped planners and people at risk to better understand the nature of the risk owing to lahars.

View More Publications...

LATEST UPDATES AND SITE NEWS:
August 5, 2019 Tahoma Creek Debris Flow
Posted on Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 17:00 by Scott Beason. Updated on Wed, Aug 14, 2019, 17:00

The 32nd recorded debris flow in Tahoma Creek occurred on August 5, 2019, between 6:44 PM PDT (8/6/2019 01:55 UTC) - 8:10 PM PDT (8/6/2019 03:10 UTC), as observed on the Pacific Northwest Seismic Network's (PNSN) Emerald Ridge (RER) seismograph. The event began as a sudden and significant change in the primary outlet stream from the terminus of the South Tahoma Glacier. This change caused a surge of water to go over loose, steep and unconsolidated sediment-rich areas just downstream of the terminus. Debris flow deposits were observed approximately 4 miles downstream at the Tahoma Creek Trail trailhead (an area affectionally known in the park as 'barrel curve'). The event is still being investigated... a good photo set (with a few videos) is available here: https://www.flickr.com/photos/mountrainiernps/sets/72157710161403356/. If you would like to view more information about the event, click here: http://www.morageology.com/geoEvent.php#145. If you were in the area of the South Tahoma Glacier or Tahoma Creek on the evening of August 5 and/or morning of August 6, and have any interesting observations, please send them to Scott Beason.

New Camp Schurman weather station added!
Posted on Tue, Jul 23, 2019, 14:17 by Scott Beason. Updated on Tue, Jul 23, 2019, 14:17

A new weather station has been added to morageology.com. Click the following link to see hourly data from Camp Schurman on the NE side of Mount Rainier's volcanic edifice at 9,500 feet: http://waterdata.morageology.com/station.php?g=MORAWXCS.

Longmire RSAM Down
Posted on Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 05:00 by Scott Beason. Updated on Wed, Jul 10, 2019, 05:00

The Longmire (LON) seismograph has been reporting ground vibrations from a construction project in the area near the seismograph. In order to prevent erroneous debris flow alerts, the RSAM (debris flow detection) analysis has been disabled. The system will be restored once the construction project has been completed.

LATEST CASCADES VOLCANO OBSERVATORY WEEKLY UPDATE:

CASCADES VOLCANO OBSERVATORY WEEKLY UPDATE
U.S. Geological Survey
Friday, January 5, 2024, 1:47 PM PST (Friday, January 5, 2024, 21:47 UTC)


CASCADE RANGE (VNUM #)
Current Volcano Alert Level: NORMAL
Current Aviation Color Code: GREEN

Activity Update: All volcanoes in the Cascade Range of Oregon and Washington are at normal background activity levels. These include Mount Baker, Glacier Peak, Mount Rainier, Mount St. Helens, and Mount Adams in Washington State and Mount Hood, Mount Jefferson, Three Sisters, Newberry, and Crater Lake in Oregon.

Past Week Observations: During the past week, small earthquakes were detected at Mount Rainier and Mount St. Helens. All monitoring data are consistent with background activity levels in the Cascades Range.



The U.S. Geological Survey Cascades Volcano Observatory and the University of Washington Pacific Northwest Seismic Network continue to monitor Washington and Oregon volcanoes closely and will issue additional notifications as warranted.

Website Resources

For images, graphics, and general information on Cascade Range volcanoes: https://www.usgs.gov/observatories/cvo
For seismic information on Oregon and Washington volcanoes: http://www.pnsn.org/volcanoes
For information on USGS volcano alert levels and notifications: https://www.usgs.gov/programs/VHP/volcano-notifications-deliver-situational-information



CONTACT INFORMATION:

Jon Major, Scientist-in-Charge, Cascades Volcano Observatory, jjmajor@usgs.gov

General inquiries: vhpweb@usgs.gov