Hello guest! [ Log In ]
Welcome to!
Welcome to
Use this bar to navigate the site
Good Afternoon!
Friday, April 12, 2024
Today is day 103 of 2024 and
day 195 of Water Year 2024
Welcome to! 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.
As of: 04/12/2024 01:00 PM

45.8° F
Wind: NNW (332°) @ 4 G 10 mph
Snow Depth: 132 in (76% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.01 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
As of: 04/11/2024 03:00 PM

54° F
Snow Depth: 1 in (5% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.00 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
AT PARADISE (5,400')
[ More Info ]
Tahoma Glacier from St. Andrews Rock (from a photo by Scott Beason on 09/04/2019)
Earthquakes in the last 30 days near Mount Rainier


  1. Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 12:22:54 GMT
    8 hours 49 minutes 4 seconds ago
    13.616 km (8.461 mi) W of summit
    Magnitude: 0.0
    Depth 5.4 km (3.4 mi)
    View More Info

  2. Fri, Apr 12, 2024, 07:59:05 GMT
    13 hours 12 minutes 53 seconds ago
    21.049 km (13.079 mi) SW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.5
    Depth 6.3 km (3.9 mi)
    View More Info

  3. Thu, Apr 11, 2024, 12:02:47 GMT
    1 day 9 hours 9 minutes 11 seconds ago
    22.672 km (14.088 mi) NW of summit
    Magnitude: -0.2
    Depth 7.7 km (4.8 mi)
    View More Info

  4. Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 17:55:52 GMT
    2 days 3 hours 16 minutes 7 seconds ago
    17.245 km (10.716 mi) SW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.7
    Depth 4.3 km (2.7 mi)
    View More Info

  5. Wed, Apr 10, 2024, 16:15:53 GMT
    2 days 4 hours 56 minutes 6 seconds ago
    17.657 km (10.972 mi) SW of summit
    Magnitude: -0.4
    Depth 4.8 km (3.0 mi)
    View More Info

Currently, this site has approximately
total data points in its database!
  1. Ahammad et al. (2021) Simulated dynamics of mixed versus uniform grain size sediment pulses in a gravel-bedded river
    Mountain rivers often receive sediment in the form of episodic, discrete pulses from a variety of natural and anthropogenic processes. Once emplaced in the river, the movement of this sediment depends on flow, grain size distribution, and channel and network geometry. Here, we simulate downstream bed elevation changes that result from discrete inputs of sediment (∼10,000 m3), differing in volume and grain size distribution, under medium and high flow conditions. We specifically focus on comparing bed responses between mixed and uniform grain size sediment pulses. This work builds on a Lagrangian, bed-material sediment transport model and applies it to a 27 km reach of the mainstem Nisqually River, Washington, USA. We compare observed bed elevation change and accumulation rates in a downstream lake to simulation results. Then we investigate the magnitude, timing, and persistence of downstream changes due to the introduction of synthetic sediment pulses by comparing the results against a baseline condition (without pulse). Our findings suggest that bed response is primarily influenced by the sediment-pulse grain size and distribution. Intermediate mixed-size pulses (∼50% of the median bed gravel size) are likely to have the largest downstream impact because finer sizes translate quickly and coarser sizes (median bed gravel size and larger) disperse slowly. Furthermore, a mixed-size pulse, with a smaller median grain size than the bed, increases bed mobility more than a uniform-size pulse. This work has important implications for river management, as it allows us to better understand fluvial geomorphic responses to variations in sediment supply.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. Fuhrig et al. (2024) Evaluation of groundwater resources in the Upper White River Basin within Mount Rainier National Park, Washington State, 2020
    The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), in cooperation with the National Park Service, investigated groundwater gains and losses on the upper White River within Mount Rainier National Park in Washington. This investigation was conducted using stream discharge measurements at 14 locations within 7 reaches over a 6.5-mile river length from near the White River’s origin at the terminus of the Emmons Glacier on Mount Rainier to the White River Entrance near the northeast boundary of Mount Rainier National Park. Locations selected for the stream discharge measurements were on the main channel of the White River and on tributary streams near their confluence with the White River. A soil-water-balance (SWB) model analysis was also performed on the White River basin to estimate groundwater recharge throughout the basin during the time of the study. Analyses were made for the White River basin at the sub-basin (zone) scale to determine groundwater input to the stream for individual stream reaches. The gridded SWB model was simulated at a 10-meter (m) horizontal resolution, where recharge simulations were constructed using five spatially distributed datasets. Daily climate data as input for the simulation included gridded daily precipitation and air temperature. Upon analysis of the seepage run results, three of the seven reaches showed groundwater gains in this study. The SWB model results were used in conjunction with the baseflow gain totals in the reaches to estimate the length of time for recharge to become base flow. Further analysis estimated the rates of groundwater flow in the zones with adjacent gaining reaches. A streamflow gain curve was created from a simple flow model for each of the zones to relate the recharge from the zones to the adjacent reaches on the White River and tributaries. The fit of the streamflow gain curve to the calculated streamflow gain during the seepage run was used to analyze where the recharge from each zone resulted as streamflow gain. Consecutive reach losses from zones D and L were immediately followed downstream by a relatively large gain in zone GH, indicating that the gain in the reach adjacent to zone GH could be from the recharge in zones D and L.
  5. Hagen (2024) Weather Summary: Mount Rainier National Park - Water Year 2023
    The North Coast and Cascades Network (NCCN) Inventory and Monitoring Program monitors climate in order to compare current and historic data to understand long-term trends, to provide data to model future impacts to park facilities and resources, and to provide park staff with information needed to make management decisions. This brief summarizes climate data collected and notable weather events that occurred during water year 2023 in Mount Rainier National Park. Water year is defined as the period from October 1 to September 30 of the following year, to encompass a full cycle of precipitation accumulation.
  6. Hagen (2023) Weather Summary: Mount Rainier National Park - Water Year 2022
    The North Coast and Cascades Network (NCCN) Inventory and Monitoring Program monitors climate in order to compare current and historic data to understand long-term trends, to provide data to model future impacts to park facilities and resources, and to provide park staff with information needed to make management decisions. This brief summarizes climate data collected and notable weather events that occurred during water year 2022 in Mount Rainier National Park. Water year is defined as the period from October 1 to September 30 of the following year, to encompass a full cycle of precipitation accumulation.

View More Publications...

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: If you would like to view more information about the event, click here: 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 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:

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.


U.S. Geological Survey
Friday, January 5, 2024, 1:47 PM PST (Friday, January 5, 2024, 21:47 UTC)

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:
For seismic information on Oregon and Washington volcanoes:
For information on USGS volcano alert levels and notifications:


Jon Major, Scientist-in-Charge, Cascades Volcano Observatory,

General inquiries: