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!
Thursday, April 09, 2026
Today is day 99 of 2026 and
day 191 of Water Year 2026
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
10-DAY FORECAST TREND:
LLLLLLLLLL
LATEST PARADISE WEATHER
As of: 04/09/2026 11:00 AM

50.2° F
Wind: E (100°) @ 4 G 10 mph
Snow Depth: 92 in (53% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.00 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
LATEST LONGMIRE WEATHER
As of: 03/30/2026 09:00 AM

28.9° F
Snow Depth: -1 in (-4% of normal)
24-hour Precip: 0.14 in

[ Observation | Forecast ]
WINDY.COM PRECIPITATION RADAR
MOUNT RAINIER VICINITY
FORECASTED SNOW PACK
AT PARADISE (5,400')
[ More Info ]
Mowich Face seen during an aerial reconnaissance flight (from a photo by Scott Beason on 02/10/2020)
LATEST EARTHQUAKES:
Earthquakes in the last 30 days near Mount Rainier
:
49

LAST 5 EARTHQUAKES:

  1. Wed, Apr 08, 2026, 03:58:38 GMT
    1 day 14 hours 43 minutes 52 seconds ago
    12.339 km (7.667 mi) S of summit
    Magnitude: 0.8
    Depth 37.56 km (23.3 mi)
    View More Info

  2. Tue, Apr 07, 2026, 00:24:51 GMT
    2 days 18 hours 17 minutes 40 seconds ago
    17.689 km (10.992 mi) NW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.05
    Depth 12.12 km (7.5 mi)
    View More Info

  3. Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 13:37:04 GMT
    3 days 5 hours 5 minutes 26 seconds ago
    0.899 km (0.559 mi) WSW of summit
    Magnitude: -0.02
    Depth -2.22 km (-1.4 mi)
    View More Info

  4. Mon, Apr 06, 2026, 10:38:51 GMT
    3 days 8 hours 3 minutes 39 seconds ago
    21.819 km (13.558 mi) NW of summit
    Magnitude: 0.5
    Depth 4.46 km (2.8 mi)
    View More Info

  5. Sun, Apr 05, 2026, 00:16:22 GMT
    4 days 18 hours 26 minutes 9 seconds ago
    4.231 km (2.629 mi) NNE of summit
    Magnitude: 0.3
    Depth 2.98 km (1.9 mi)
    View More Info

MISC:
Currently, this site has approximately
36,128,955
total data points in its database!
 
1 RANDOM PUBLICATION AND THE 5 LATEST PUBLICATIONS ADDED TO THE DATABASE:
  1. Wright et al. (2023) Development of a volcanic risk management system at Mount St. Helens: 1980 to present
    Here, we review volcanic risk management at Mount St. Helens from the perspective of the US Geological Survey’s (USGS) experience over the four decades since its 18 May 1980 climactic eruption. Prior to 1980, volcano monitoring, multidisciplinary eruption forecasting, and interagency coordination for eruption response were new to the Cascade Range. A Mount St. Helens volcano hazards assessment had recently been published and volcanic crisis response capabilities tested during 1975 thermal unrest at nearby Mount Baker. Volcanic unrest began in March 1980, accelerating the rate of advance of volcano monitoring, prompting coordinated eruption forecasting and hazards communication, and motivating emergency response planning. The destruction caused by the 18 May 1980 eruption led to an enormous emergency response effort and prompted extensive coordination and planning for continuing eruptive activity. Eruptions continued with pulsatory dome growth and explosive eruptions over the following 6 years and with transport of sediment downstream over many more. In response, USGS scientists and their partners expanded their staffing, deployed new instruments, developed new tools (including the first use of a volcanic event tree) for eruption forecasting, and created new pathways for agency internal and external communication. Involvement in the Mount St. Helens response motivated the establishment of response measures at other Cascade Range volcanoes. Since assembly during the early and mid-1990s, volcano hazard working groups continue to unite scientists, emergency and land managers, tribal nations, and community leaders in common cause for the promotion of risk reduction. By the onset of renewed volcanic activity in 2004, these new systems enabled a more efficient response that was greatly facilitated by the participation of organizations within volcano hazard working groups. Although the magnitude of the 2004 eruptive sequence was much smaller than that of 1980, a new challenge emerged focused on hazard communication demands. Since 2008, our understanding of Mount St. Helens volcanic system has improved, helping us refine hazard assessments and eruption forecasts. Some professions have worked independently to apply the Mount St. Helens story to their products and services. Planning meetings and working group activities fortify partnerships among information disseminators, policy and decision-makers, scientists, and communities. We call the sum of these pieces the Volcanic Risk Management System (VRMS). In its most robust form, the VRMS encompasses effective production and coordinated exchange of volcano hazards and risk information among all interested parties.
  2. Wood and Peters (2026) Influence of modeling assumptions on pedestrian evacuation success for non-eruptive lahar hazards at Mount Rainier, Washington
    Previous efforts to characterize lahar threats posed to communities downstream of volcanoes have focused primarily on delineating hazard zones that lack information on lahar-arrival times and exposure estimates that implicitly treat threats to be the same regardless of distance from the volcano. Estimated lahar-arrival times, travel times for individuals to leave hazard zones, and possible evacuation delays related to event identification, warning dissemination, and evacuee behavior are important, but often overlooked, aspects of understanding the societal threats posed by lahars. These temporal considerations are important for unexpected lahars that could occur due to slope failure in the absence of precursory volcanic unrest or eruption. This case study examines the role of time in lahar evacuations by quantifying population exposure and evacuation potential for non-eruptive lahar hazards associated with Mount Rainier, Washington. Lahars could directly affect tens of thousands of residents and employees, thousands of students at primary and secondary schools, and hundreds of individuals at long-term residential care facilities. Geospatial path-distance modeling quantified evacuation potential for 736 scenarios that represent combinations of lahar sources, evacuation destinations, pedestrian travel speeds, and a range of departure-delay assumptions. Depending on location, some communities may have substantial loss of life in tens of minutes after lahar initiation, whereas other communities may be managing large-scale evacuations over several hours. Estimates of evacuation success based on a range of scenarios provide individuals in hazard zones and risk-reduction agencies with insights on how their actions may increase or decrease the number of people that survive future lahars.
  3. Raup et al. (2025) Tracking extinct glaciers in GLIMS
    Global Land Ice Measurements from Space (GLIMS), an initiative to build and distribute a database of global glacier data, has recently begun to track glaciers that have recently disappeared. GLIMS provides a definition of “extinct” glaciers for our community, and the final determination of extinction is left to local experts. There are currently 181 glaciers in the GLIMS Glacier Database that are marked as “extinct”, though we recognize that there have been many more reported in the literature. GLIMS welcomes more submissions to make the list more complete.
  4. Carlson et al. (2026) Disappearing glaciers of the Oregon Cascades, USA
    The Oregon Cascades had 35 named glaciers on seven volcanoes in the 1980s, with 34 of those glaciers remaining by 2000. Here, we document the glaciers that fall into the Global Glacier Casualty List categories based on five years of field observations of these 34 glaciers. Five glaciers have disappeared, four have almost disappeared and eight are critically endangered. Thus, half of the Oregon Cascades named glaciers have disappeared, almost disappeared, or reached critically endangered status in the 21st century. Between 1980 and 2024, the May–October ablation season of the Oregon Cascades region warmed at ∼0.3°C per decade, with a 2020–24 mean temperature ∼1.7°C warmer than the 1975–84 mean. In contrast, there was no significant trend in November–April accumulation season precipitation. Given the significant rise in melt-season temperature, we attribute ongoing glacier disappearance in the Oregon Cascades to the warming climate.
  5. Ghent et al. (2026) When every second counts: Parental decision-making in Mt Rainier’s lahar inundation zone
    Mount Rainier, a heavily glaciated stratovolcano in Washington State [USA], has a documented history of producing major lahars. The potential for future high-magnitude flows threatens approximately 90,000 downstream residents and has prompted one of the nation’s most extensive volcanic monitoring systems, including a specialized lahar detection network. Because portions of Rainier’s west flank are composed of hydrothermally altered, unstable rock, the region is especially vulnerable to “no-notice” lahars triggered by sudden, non-eruptive slope failure. In response, schools in at-risk zones have conducted lahar evacuation drills – now a legal requirement – for over two decades, demonstrating that on-foot evacuation is the most effective strategy for student and staff safety. Despite these efforts, many parents report an intention to retrieve their children from school during an emergency lahar evacuation, contradicting official guidance. Such actions could obstruct evacuation routes, delay emergency response, and increase personal risk, especially in areas where modeled lahar arrival times are under one hour. Parent decision-making thus presents a critical, yet understudied, variable in evacuation planning and is considered integral to the success of city-wide evacuations. Here we present the ongoing work from focus groups held with local parents to explore motivations behind their intentions. Topics of discussion within the focus groups include parents’ general understanding of lahar hazards, their intended actions, their confidence in school evacuation plans, and underlying factors in their decision-making. These insights can support more effective communication and preparedness strategies by emergency managers and school officials, while also contributing to broader discussions about protective action decision-making in rapid-onset hazards beyond volcanic settings.
  6. Conner et al. (2026) Quantifying seismic properties of a river channel at Mount Rainier for use in debris flow monitoring and analysis
    Theoretical models that relate debris flow properties to their seismic signature suggest seismic methods may be used to remotely characterize properties of these events. However, the complexity of debris flow sources and poorly constrained material properties in near‐surface environments limit our ability to determine important attributes of debris flows, such as volume and particle size distribution, from seismic records alone. In this study, we explore the sensitivity of debris flow seismic signals to subsurface seismic characteristics using an established debris flow seismicity model and subsurface properties derived from active‐source measurements in the Tahoma Creek stream channel at Mount Rainier, United States. Using refraction and multichannel analysis of surface waves, we estimate 1D primary and secondary wave velocity profiles to a depth of 11 m and calculate the frequency‐varying phase velocity (⁠vc) and Rayleigh‐wave quality factor (⁠QR⁠) for frequencies between 9 and 50 Hz. We find that the Tahoma Creek stream channel has low ⁠vc, varying with frequency between 226 and 434 m/s, and is highly attenuating, with QR⁠ estimated below 13.3 at all analyzed frequencies. We model the seismic signal of a hypothetical debris flow in Tahoma Creek using our measured values and compare the results against the same model but varying vc and ⁠QR over a range of frequency‐independent, single values commonly used in the literature when measurements are not available (⁠vc = 250-750 m/s, ⁠QR = 3-33⁠). We find that the power spectral densities of the modeled debris flows vary by orders of magnitude within the subset of our test values, highlighting the benefits of measuring material properties when using modeled debris flow seismic signals for quantitative monitoring.

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