Prepared in cooperation with 

Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica del Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería de Chile

United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk 

Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Circular 1432

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
Cover. Chilean and American delegates on caldera rim of Chaitén Volcano, Chile, March 28, 

2015. The steaming lava dome is in the background. (Photograph by Christopher Wills, California 

Geological Survey.)
United States-Chile Binational Exchange 

for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—

Activities and Benefits

By Thomas C. Pierson, Margaret T. Mangan, Luis E. Lara Pulgar, and 

Álvaro Amigo Ramos

Prepared in cooperation with Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica del Servicio 

Nacional de Geología y Minería de Chile

Circular 1432

U.S. Department of the Interior

U.S. Geological Survey
U.S. Department of the Interior

RYAN K. ZINKE, Secretary

U.S. Geological Survey

William H. Werkheiser, Acting Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2017

For more information on the USGS—the Federal source for science about the Earth, its natural and living 

resources, natural hazards, and the environment—visit https://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1–888–ASK–USGS.

For an overview of USGS information products, including maps, imagery, and publications, 

visit https://store.usgs.gov.

Any use of trade, firm, or product names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the 

U.S. Government.

Although this information product, for the most part, is in the public domain, it also may contain copyrighted materials 

as noted in the text. Permission to reproduce copyrighted items must be secured from the copyright owner.

Suggested citation:

Pierson, T.C., Mangan, M.T., Lara Pulgar, L.E., Amigo Ramos, Álvaro, 2017, United States-Chile binational exchange 

for volcanic risk reduction, 2015—Activities and benefits: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1432, 43 p., 

https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1432.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Pierson, Thomas C., author. | Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcâanica

 (Chile) | Geological Survey (U.S.), issuing body.

Title: United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction,

 2015 : activities and benefit / by Thomas C. Pierson [and three others].

Other titles: U.S. Geological Survey circular ; 1432. 1067-084X

Description: Reston, Virginia : U.S. Geological Survey, 2017. | Series:

 Circular, ISSN 1067-084X ; 1432 | “Prepared in cooperation with Red

 Nacional de Vigilancia Volcâanica del Servicio Nacional de Geologâia y

 Minerâia de Chile.” | Includes bibliographical references.

Identifiers: LCCN 2017033949| ISBN 9781411341555 | ISBN 1411341554

Subjects: LCSH: Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction (Program) |

 Volcanic hazard analysis--United States. | Volcanic hazard analysis--Chile.

Classification: LCC QE527.6 .P54 2017 | DDC 363.34/95--dc23 | SUDOC I

 19.4/2:1432

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2017033949

ISSN 1067-084X (print) 

ISSN 2330-5703 (online)

ISBN 978-1-4113-4155-5
iii

United States-Chile Binational Exchange Delegates

U.S. delegates Chilean delegates

Mona Bontty, southern regional administrator

California Governor’s Office of Emergency 

Services

Álvaro Amigo Ramos, volcanologist 

Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica, Servicio 

Nacional de Geología y Minería 

(Exchange co-coordinator—Chile)

Jeffrey Hinson, fire management officer

Inyo National Forest, Mammoth Ranger District, 

U.S. Forest Service

Mariela Chavarriga, Chilean national working as a 

risk-management specialist with 

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance, 

U.S. Agency for International Development

Kristin Kirschner, park ranger 

Yosemite National Park, National Park Service

Karem Cofré Orellana, chief of social services 

section

Gobernación de Palena

Helen Lopez, assistant director/international 

liaison

Financial Accountability and Compliance Office, 

California Governor’s Office of Emergency 

Services

Gonzalo Hermosilla Pineda, 

geologist/scientist-in-charge 

Observatorio Volcanológico de Coyhaique, Red 

Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica, Servicio 

Nacional de Geología y Minería

Margaret Mangan, volcanologist/scientist-incharge

U.S. Geological Survey California Volcano 

Observatory

(Exchange coordinator—U.S.A.)

Luis Lara Pulgar, volcanologist and chief

Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica, Servicio 

Nacional de Geología y Minería de Chile

(Exchange coordinator—Chile)

Ronald Martin, ranger operations supervisor 

Lassen Volcanic National Park, National Park 

Service

Felipe Plaza Chacón, geographer 

Centro de Alerta Temprana, Oficina Nacional de 

Emergencia

Carolyn Napper, district ranger

Shasta McCloud Management Unit, 

Shasta-Trinity National Forest, 

U.S. Forest Service

Pedro Vásquez Celedón, mayor

Municipalidad de Chaitén

Thomas Pierson, research hydrologist

U.S. Geological Survey Cascades Volcano 

Observatory

(Exchange co-coordinator—U.S.A.)

Alejandro Vergés Castillo, regional director

Región de Los Lagos, Oficina Nacional de 

Emergencia

Stuart Wilkinson, volcano monitoring network 

specialist

U.S. Geological Survey California Volcano 

Observatory

Carlos Zambrano Fernández, general manager

Parque Pumalín

Christopher Wills, engineering geologist

California Geological Survey

Nathan Wood, research geographer

U.S. Geological Survey Western Geographic 

Science Center
iv

Contents

United States-Chile Binational Exchange Delegates .............................................................................iii

Acronyms and Abbreviations......................................................................................................................vi

Introduction.....................................................................................................................................................1

Past Volcanic Activity and Crisis-Response Challenges at Chaitén Volcano and 

Long Valley Volcanic Region ..........................................................................................................3

Chaitén Volcano ....................................................................................................................................3

Long Valley Volcanic Region...............................................................................................................5

Exchange Delegates......................................................................................................................................6

Exchange Activities in Chile.........................................................................................................................6

Exchange Activities in the United States...................................................................................................9

Benefits for Exchange Participants..........................................................................................................12

Pretrip Questionnaire Responses ....................................................................................................12

Summary of U.S. Delegate Perspectives...............................................................................12

Summary of Chilean Delegate Perspectives.........................................................................12

Posttrip Questionnaire Responses ..................................................................................................13

U.S. Delegate Perspectives .....................................................................................................13

Chilean Delegate Perspectives ......................................................................................13

Summary........................................................................................................................................................14

References Cited..........................................................................................................................................14

Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires..........................................................................................................16

U.S. Delegate Responses to Chile Pretrip Questionnaire ............................................................16

Chilean Delegate Responses to California Pretrip Questionnaire..............................................21

Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires ........................................................................................................28

U.S. Delegate Responses to Chile Posttrip Questionnaire ..........................................................28

Chilean Delegate Responses to California Posttrip Questionnaire............................................35

Figures

1. Maps showing locations of the Long Valley volcanic region in

California, U.S.A., and Chaitén Volcano region in Chile .........................................................2

2. Photograph of an explosive eruptive pulse from Chaitén Volcano,

Chile, viewed from town of Chaitén during the first week of its

eruption in May 2008 ....................................................................................................................3

3. Photograph taken June 6, 2008, showing damage to the town of

Chaitén, Chile, caused by excessive sedimentation and flooding

from the Chaitén River .................................................................................................................4
v

4. Photograph showing Long Valley Caldera, California, viewed from 

summit of Mammoth Mountain, a lava-dome complex built on the 

caldera rim.....................................................................................................................................5

5. Photograph of a briefing to U.S. delegates at the National Seismological 

Center at the University of Chile.................................................................................................6

6. Photograph of a briefing to U.S.-Chile-exchange participants on volcano 

monitoring in the southern Andes by the chief of seismic monitoring at 

Observatorio Volcanológico de Los Andes del Sur.................................................................7

7. Photograph of U.S.-Chile-exchange participants examining deposits and 

damage caused by a lahar on March 3 during the 2015 eruption of 

Villarrica Volcano, Chile...............................................................................................................7

8. Photograph showing presentation of U.S. Geological Survey volcano 

hazard posters to the Mayor of Pucón, Chile, by a U.S.-Chile exchange 

coordinator during the first meeting of officials after evacuation of the 

town during the March 2015 eruption of Villarrica Volcano..................................................7

9. Photograph showing juxtaposition of a recently built and currently 

occupied municipal building with the ruins of a partially buried (in 2008) 

and now decaying and unoccupied house in the town of Chaitén, Chile...........................8

10. Photograph of a briefing to U.S.-Chile-exchange participants on 

operational protocols and responsibilities of emergency managers at the 

Los Angeles County Emergency Operations Center...............................................................9

11. Photograph of a discussion among Chilean delegates on summit of 

Mammoth Mountain, California, with a view of Horseshoe Lake (a carbon 

dioxide [CO2] gas hazard area) in the background..................................................................9

12. Photograph of U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) geologist explaining to 

U.S.-Chile-exchange participants USGS efforts to monitor and understand 

carbon dioxide (CO2) gas release in the Long Valley Caldera, California..........................10

13. Photograph of a U.S.-Chile exchange group discussion during overview of 

the Incident Command System, the National Incident Management System, 

and tabletop scenario exercises being presented by National Park 

Service rangers...........................................................................................................................11

14. Photograph of U.S.-Chile-exchange participants receiving an explanation 

of Yosemite National Park, California, access roads and visitor flow in order 

to understand National Park Service emergency-management and emergencyresponse philosophy, training protocols, and preparations for emergencies .................11

15. Photograph of U.S.-Chile-exchange participants, gathered on the shore of 

Mono Lake, California, receiving an explanation by a U.S. Geological Survey 

geologist of the eruptive history and hazards of the Mono-Inyo Craters .........................11
vi

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ft foot

km kilometer

m meter

Cal OES California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services

CGS California Geological Survey

CERT community emergency response team

CO2 carbon dioxide

CONAF Corporación Nacional Forestal [Chilean National Forest Corporation]

CVO U.S. Geological Survey Cascades Volcano Observatory

EOC emergency operations center

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

ICS Incident Command System

NIMS National Incident Management System

NPS National Park Service

OFDA Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance

ONEMI Oficina Nacional de Emergencia [Chilean National Emergency Office]

OVDAS Observatorio Volcanológico de Los Andes del Sur [Southern Andean Volcano 

Observatory]

RNVV Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica [Chilean National Volcano Monitoring 

Network]

SEMS Standardized Emergency Management System

SAFRR U.S. Geological Survey Science Applications for Risk Reduction

SERNAGEOMIN Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería de Chile [Chilean National Geology 

and Mining Service]

USAID U.S. Agency for International Development

USFS U.S. Forest Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

VDAP U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Disaster Assistance Program
United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk 

Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

By Thomas C. Pierson,1 Margaret T. Mangan,1 Luis E. Lara Pulgar,2 and Álvaro Amigo Ramos2

1

U.S. Geological Survey.

2

Red Nacional de Vigilancia Volcánica del Servicio Nacional de Geología y 

Minería de Chile.

Introduction

In 2015, representatives from the United States and 

Chile exchanged visits to discuss and share their expertise 

and experiences dealing with volcano hazards. Communities 

in both countries are at risk from various volcano hazards. 

Risks to lives and property posed by these hazards are a function not only of the type and size of future eruptions but also 

of distances from volcanoes, structural integrity of volcanic 

edifices, landscape changes imposed by recent past eruptions, 

exposure of people and resources to harm, and any mitigative 

measures taken (or not taken) to reduce risk. Thus, effective 

risk-reduction efforts require the knowledge and consideration 

of many factors, and firsthand experience with past volcano 

crises provides a tremendous advantage for this work. However, most scientists monitoring volcanoes and most officials 

delegated with the responsibility for emergency response 

and management in volcanic areas have little or no firsthand 

experience with eruptions or volcano hazards. The reality is 

that eruptions are infrequent in most regions, and individual 

volcanoes may have dormant periods lasting hundreds to 

thousands of years. Knowledge may be lacking about how 

to best plan for and manage future volcanic crises, and much 

can be learned from the sharing of insights and experiences 

among counterpart specialists who have had direct, recent, or 

different experiences in dealing with restless volcanoes and 

threatened populations. The sharing of information and best 

practices can help all volcano scientists and officials to better 

prepare for future eruptions or noneruptive volcano hazards, 

such as large volcanic mudflows (lahars), which could affect 

their communities.

To this end, the U.S. Geological Survey’s (USGS) 

Volcano Disaster Assistance Program (VDAP) inaugurated 

a program of reciprocal exchange visits between the United 

States and other countries faced with potential hazards from 

active volcanoes—the Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk 

Reduction. The program is funded by the U.S. Agency for 

International Development’s Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance (USAID-OFDA) and by the USGS. These exchanges 

bring together scientists, civil authorities, first responders, and 

emergency managers from various countries to discuss and 

share insights and experiences about the challenges of achieving effective hazard education, response planning, hazard 

mitigation, and risk reduction.

The first binational exchange in 2013 focused on issues 

at Mount Rainier (Washington, U.S.A.) and Nevado del Ruiz 

(Tolima and Caldas Provinces, Colombia) (Beason and others, 

2014; Driedger and Ewert, 2015; Westby, 2015). Both of these 

volcanoes are highly susceptible to lahars. The United StatesColombia exchange allowed participants to share insights on 

topics ranging from lahar warning systems, self-evacuation 

planning, and effective education programs for at-risk 

communities.

The 2015 exchange focused on Chaitén Volcano 

(Los Lagos region, southern Chile) and the Long Valley volcanic region (California, U.S.A.) (fig. 1), which are both capable 

of erupting highly explosive rhyolitic magma. During reciprocal exchange visits of about a week each, delegates to the 2015 

exchange traveled to both regions to discuss volcano hazards, 

volcano monitoring, disaster preparedness, and communications with at-risk communities. The Chileans hosted the first 

leg of the exchange during March 23–30, 2015. Meetings took 

place in Santiago, Temuco, Pucón, Puerto Varas, Puerto Montt, 

and Chaitén, with field trips to affected areas near Villarrica 

and Chaitén Volcanoes to inspect the impacts from recent 

eruptions and to discuss both official and unofficial responses 

to these eruptions. The eruption at Villarrica Volcano started 

on March 3, 2015, and was still ongoing at the time of our 

visit. The second leg of the exchange occurred in the United 

States during August 24–30, 2015. Initial meetings took place 

in Pasadena, California, but most of the meetings and field 

trips took place in and around Mammoth Lakes, California, in 

order to review Long Valley volcano-monitoring networks and 

to discuss response planning and the local impacts of recurring 

periods of intense volcanic unrest.
2 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

The explosivity and rarity of rhyolitic eruptions create 

unique challenges to risk reduction efforts. For example, the 

eruption of Chaitén Volcano in 2008 was unexpected—the 

volcano had been dormant for about 400 years, and little was 

known of its eruptive history. As a result, the volcano was not 

seen as a particular threat, and monitoring instrumentation 

and response protocols were nonexistent. Although eruptioninduced flooding devastated the community, no lives were lost, 

owing to the impromptu, yet decisive, actions by government 

and local leaders. The situation in the Long Valley volcanic 

region is at the other end of the preparedness/response 

spectrum—its eruptive history is well known, and because 

of sporadic periods of intense volcanic unrest over the past 

three decades, sophisticated monitoring networks are in place 

to detect eruption precursors. Because Long Valley is an area 

without firsthand experience with eruptions or eruption-related 

hazards, the challenge for officials and the population there 

is thus one of maintaining readiness in the face of unrest that 

continues for decades without any eruption.

Villarrica

Volcano

Chaitén

Volcano

Puerto Montt

Temuco

Chile-Peru Trench

73° W 72°30’ W

42°40’ S

43° S

B C

Area of figure 1C

0 100 MILES

0 100 KILOMETERS

Villarrica

Base map from Ryan and 

others, 2009, 

doi:10.1029/2008GC002332; 

also see 

http://www.geomapapp.org

Map from Ministerio de Obras Públicas, Chile

Pucón

Puerto Varas

PACIFIC

OCEAN

Gulf of Corcovado

Gulf of Corcovado

0 12 MILES

0 12 KILOMETERS

EXPLANATION

Volcano Town

N

PARQUE PUMALÍN

Area of

map B ARGENTINA

CHILE

BOLIVIA

PACIFIC OCEAN

Mammoth

Mountain

Inyo

Craters

volcanic

chain

LONG 

VALLEY 

CALDERA

Lake

Crowley

Convict Lake

Mammoth

Lakes Hot Creek

Owens River

0 5 MILES

0 5 KILOMETERS

Mammoth Creek

A 119°05’ W 119°00’ W 118°55’ W 118°50’ W 118°45’ W

37°45’ N

37°40’ N

37°35’ N

Horseshoe Lake

395

CALIFORNIA

Map

area

From U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 172-96 (ver. 2.0, 2000) Base modified from 

Wikimedia Commons, 

licensed under Creative 

Commons AttributionShare Alike 3.0 Unported

Figure 1. Maps showing locations of (A) the Long Valley volcanic region in California, U.S.A. (modified from Sorey and others, 1996),

and (B and C) Chaitén Volcano region in Chile. In 2015, representatives from the United States and Chile exchanged visits to these 

regions to discuss and share their expertise and experiences dealing with volcano hazards. Communities in both countries are at risk 

from various volcano hazards.
Past Volcanic Activity and Crisis-Response Challenges at Chaitén Volcano and Long Valley Volcanic Region 3

Past Volcanic Activity and CrisisResponse Challenges at Chaitén 

Volcano and Long Valley Volcanic 

Region

Chaitén Volcano

There was very little warning before the start of the 2008 

eruption of Chaitén Volcano (Major and Lara, 2013; fig. 2). 

With no seismic stations near the volcano, earthquakes directly 

felt by residents of the town of Chaitén (6 miles/10 kilometers, 

km, downstream of the volcano) provided the first warning 

of the impending eruption, which commenced about 24 hours 

later. Following initial steam explosions on May 1, a violent 

explosive burst on May 2 jetted ash to an altitude of about 

65,000 feet (ft) (20,000 meters, m) and disrupted air traffic 

across South America. From May 2 to 8, the volcano continued to erupt violently. About 5,000 residents at risk in the 

town could not evacuate by road because of heavy ashfall, so 

evacuation by sea was rapidly organized and largely completed within 24 hours; the last people were out by May 6. 

Heavy rains beginning on May 11 washed a tremendous 

volume of volcanic debris (mostly ash) into the Chaitén River. 

Volcanic sediment filled the existing river channel, so the river 

cut a new channel through the middle of the town, depositing 

as much as 10 ft (3 m) of mud and sand and partially burying buildings and infrastructure. On two occasions in late 

2008 and early 2009, collapses from the volcano’s growing 

lava dome sent searing avalanches of hot gas, ash, and rock 

(pyroclastic density currents) down the Chaitén River valley 

to within 2 miles (3 km) of the town, which by February 2009 

had been unofficially reoccupied by hundreds of people.

Flooding and burial destroyed about 80 percent of the 

town of Chaitén (fig. 3). With the prospect of a lengthy period 

of dome growth and ongoing hazardous conditions related 

to potential dome collapse, the Chilean government declared 

the town unsuitable for habitation in late May 2008. Basic 

services were shut off, property buyouts were offered, and 

Figure 2. An explosive eruptive 

pulse from Chaitén Volcano, 

Chile, viewed from town of 

Chaitén during the first week 

of its eruption in May 2008. 

(Photograph courtesy of Servicio 

Nacional de Geología y Minería 

de Chile.)
4 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

former residents were encouraged to rebuild homes and businesses in the small settlement of Santa Bárbara—rebranded 

as “Nuevo Chaitén,” about 6 miles (10 km) to the north. 

However, the original site of the town of Chaitén offered a 

deep-water harbor and provided a strong emotional sense 

of home for the residents, whereas Santa Bárbara had neither. In late 2008, as volcanic activity diminished, hundreds 

residents began to reoccupy and rebuild the town of Chaitén 

using portable electric generators and an improvised waterdelivery system to carry on with daily life. In 2012, in the 

face of growing political pressure, a newly elected national 

government reversed the exclusion order, partially restored 

services, and permitted resettlement in the northern part of 

the town, despite a continuing but lessening threat from the 

volcano. The partially destroyed southern part of the town is 

at present illegally occupied by former residents without basic 

services but with the partial support of the local municipality. To safeguard the community from future hazards, Chaitén 

Volcano is currently well monitored, thanks to a new, wellfunded volcano-monitoring program in Chile—Red Nacional 

de Vigilancia Volcánica (RNVV), which is a department of 

the Servicio Nacional de Geología y Minería de Chile (SERNAGEOMIN)—the establishment of which was prompted by 

the 2008 eruption of Chaitén Volcano.

Figure 3. Photograph taken June 6, 2008, showing damage to the town of Chaitén, Chile, caused by excessive sedimentation and 

flooding from the Chaitén River. Sand and gravel deposition here resulted from massive volumes of volcanic ash washing off hillslopes 

farther upstream during the first rainstorm to follow the main explosive phase of the 2008 eruption of Chaitén Volcano. Sediment filled 

the channel, forcing the river to flow out of its banks and through the town. (Photograph courtesy of Servicio Nacional de Geología y 

Minería de Chile.)
Past Volcanic Activity and Crisis-Response Challenges at Chaitén Volcano and Long Valley Volcanic Region 5

Long Valley Volcanic Region

Hundreds of mostly explosive rhyolitic eruptions over 

millions of years have shaped California’s Long Valley 

volcanic region along the eastern front of the Sierra Nevada. 

Long Valley Caldera (fig. 4), a depression 20 miles (32 km) 

long, 10 miles (16 km) wide, and as much as 1 mile (1.6 km) 

deep was created by one phase of that volcanic activity—a 

cataclysmic “super eruption” about 760,000 years ago, and 

the region continues to be volcanically active (Hill and others, 

1985; Miller, 1985; Hildreth, 2004; Hildreth and Fierstein, 

2016). Eruptions in the past 100,000 years produced Mammoth Mountain just outside the west rim of Long Valley 

Caldera. The mountain is partly within the town of Mammoth 

Lakes, which is home to about 8,000 permanent residents. 

Because of its natural beauty and abundant outdoor recreational opportunities, the town also hosts millions of visitors 

each year. Northward from Mammoth Mountain, younger 

rhyolitic eruptions produced a 10-mile-long (16-km-long) 

chain of lava domes and volcanic craters (Mono-Inyo Craters), the most recent of which erupted only 250 years ago. In 

recent years, sporadic periods of intense volcanic unrest under 

Mammoth Mountain and adjacent parts of the Sierra Nevada 

and the Caldera have caught the attention of scientists, civil 

authorities, and the public. In the 1980s and 1990s, powerful 

earthquake swarms, rapid ground deformation, and intense gas 

emission episodically affected the area. Although the signals 

of volcanic unrest have become more subdued in recent years, 

volcanic gas hazards and the threat of eruption remain.

Decades of waxing and waning volcanic unrest present unique communication challenges about the hazards. For 

example, during the 1980s, missteps in delivering warnings 

of potential volcanic activity by the USGS outraged local 

authorities and residents, who were concerned about impacts 

on real-estate values and tourism. Most notable was the 

unforeseen circumstance under which a warning was released 

to the public. Officials of Mammoth Lakes felt “blindsided” 

when they first learned that a formal Notice of Potential Hazard was about to be printed in a newspaper article before the 

USGS had had an opportunity to inform civil authorities and 

the community at large. In the face of strong public opposition, the USGS backed away from issuing the warning. Since 

then, scientists have worked to regain and maintain the trust of 

the community, learning how to communicate hazard information so that undue worry is avoided and economic disruption is 

minimized.

Figure 4. Long Valley Caldera, California, viewed from summit of Mammoth Mountain, a lava-dome complex built on the caldera rim. 

View northeastward toward the center of the caldera with Mammoth Mountain ski trails immediately below viewpoint, the town of 

Mammoth Lakes in the near distance on right (forested area), and the east caldera rim formed by the mountain ridge in the far distance. 

(Photograph by Thomas Pierson, U.S. Geological Survey.)
6 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Exchange Delegates

Participants in the binational exchange included 9 delegates from Chile, representing six different agencies or 

government entities, and 11 delegates from the United States, 

representing five State and Federal agencies. The delegates 

and their positions are listed at the front of this report. Wherever possible during the visits, the official exchange delegates 

were joined by other in-country participants—scientists and 

local officials involved in various aspects of volcano hazard 

mitigation. The exchange was coordinated by U.S. delegates 

Mangan and Pierson and by Chilean delegates Lara Pulgar and 

Amigo Ramos. Wilkinson, Chavarriga, and Lopez provided 

most of the translation services during the exchange visits.

Exchange Activities in Chile

The U.S. delegation arrived in Santiago, Chile, on Sunday, March 22, 2015. Starting on the morning of March 23, the 

delegation was briefed by high-level officials at the headquarters for three national agencies—SERNAGEOMIN (the Chilean Geology and Mining Service), Oficina Nacional de Emergencia (ONEMI; the national emergency-response agency), 

and the National Seismological Center at the University of 

Chile (fig. 5). These visits afforded opportunities to learn 

about the organization and infrastructure of the emergency 

management of volcanic and earthquake hazards in Chile.

After a late afternoon flight to Temuco on March 24, 

scheduled activities included a briefing at the Southern 

Andean Volcano Observatory (OVDAS), SERNAGEOMIN’s main observatory (fig. 6), and a day trip to the town 

of Pucón. In Pucón, delegates (1) examined the site of a lahar 

that had occurred on the southern flank of Villarrica Volcano on March 3 during the volcano’s 2015 eruption (fig. 7), 

(2) attended a reception luncheon hosted by the municipality 

of Pucón, and (3) participated in a debriefing meeting between 

local, regional, and national officials following emergencyresponse activities carried out during the just-concluded 

eruption crisis (fig. 8). This meeting provided an unexpected 

opportunity to learn what can happen during a volcanic crisis. 

Discussions revealed that at the height of the crisis, confusion 

occurred over posted alert levels and evacuation orders, owing 

to communication breakdowns between volcano scientists, 

national-level emergency managers, and the local officials 

who had needed to make some quick decisions as the level of 

eruptive activity rapidly increased. In response to the frustrations expressed by several local officials, the national- and 

regional-level officials who were part of the exchange delegation listened and offered explanations, allowing for frank discussions of how emergency response during a volcanic crisis 

might be improved. These discussions gave the U.S. delegates 

a realistic view of the kinds of issues commonly faced by 

authorities dealing with volcano crises, including the practical challenges of dealing with rapidly changing forecasts and 

coordinating an emergency response among various governmental agencies.

Figure 5. A briefing to U.S. delegates at the National Seismological Center at the University of Chile. (Photograph by Thomas Pierson, 

U.S. Geological Survey.)
Exchange Activities in Chile 7

Figure 6. A briefing to U.S.-Chile-exchange 

participants on volcano monitoring in the 

southern Andes by the chief of seismic 

monitoring at Observatorio Volcanológico de 

Los Andes del Sur (OVDAS). Active volcanoes 

in southern Chile are monitored from this 

observatory, primarily using seismicity. 

(Photograph by Christopher Wills, California 

Geological Survey.)

Figure 7. U.S.-Chile-exchange participants 

examining deposits and damage caused by 

a lahar on March 3 during the 2015 eruption 

of Villarrica Volcano, Chile (in background). 

(Photograph by Thomas Pierson, U.S. 

Geological Survey.)

Figure 8. Presentation of U.S. Geological 

Survey volcano hazard posters to the Mayor 

of Pucón, Chile, by a U.S.-Chile exchange 

coordinator during the first meeting of officials 

after evacuation of the town during the 

March 2015 eruption of Villarrica Volcano. 

(Photograph by Christopher Wills, California 

Geological Survey.)
8 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

On March 26, the entire group traveled to Puerto Varas 

and met that afternoon with ONEMI staff at the Los Lagos 

regional office of ONEMI in nearby Puerto Montt. Delegates 

were briefed further on the organizational structure and 

responsibilities of ONEMI during volcanic eruptions and 

on the emergency plan for this jurisdictional region of the 

country. The delegation also received updates on an ongoing nearby wildfire by an official from Corporación Nacional 

Forestal (CONAF), the national forestry corporation.

During March 27–29, the delegates visited the area 

around Chaitén Volcano. Pedro Vásquez Celedón, mayor of 

Chaitén, and Karem Cofré Orellana, Chief of Palena Province 

Social Services briefed the other delegates on the evacuation 

of the town of Chaitén and the somewhat-complex history 

of the town’s recovery after the heavy damage caused by 

the 2008 eruption-induced lahar and flood. Later, delegates 

heard about eruption impacts to infrastructure and the rural 

population by Carlos Zambrano, general manager of Pumalín 

Park, a large, foundation-administered, private nature reserve 

surrounding Chaitén Volcano. All three of these officials were 

part of the Chilean delegation. Delegates also learned about 

the experiences of some of the local residents during the eruption from the proprietor of our hotel in Chaitén. The rest of the 

time in the town included walking tours to see damage caused 

by flooding and sediment deposition, and then a hike to the 

volcano’s caldera rim (fig. 9 and cover photograph). March 30 

began two days of travel back to the United States.

Figure 9. Juxtaposition of a recently built and currently occupied municipal building (on left) with 

the ruins of a partially buried (in 2008) and now decaying and unoccupied house (right) in the town of 

Chaitén, Chile. (Photograph by Thomas Pierson, U.S. Geological Survey.)
Exchange Activities in the United States 9

Exchange Activities in the 

United States

The second half of the binational exchange began with 

the arrival of the Chilean delegation in Los Angeles, California, on August 23. The group then drove to the home of Mona 

Bontty (U.S. delegate) for a welcome luncheon. The California leg of the exchange included the original Chilean and 

U.S. delegates (listed above), as well as seven representatives 

from the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS), National Park Service (NPS), California Geological 

Survey (CGS), and California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES), who had learned of the exchange 

and participated in parts of the scheduled program. Additionally, an administrator and a public outreach specialist from the 

USGS Cascades Volcano Observatory (CVO)—Sara Jivanjee 

and Elizabeth Westby, respectively—joined the group to help 

with logistics and with documentation of the proceedings.

The first phase of the week’s activities focused on Federal and State management of natural hazards in California. 

Activities on August 24 in USGS’s Pasadena office included 

morning briefings on the USGS’s Science Applications for 

Risk Reduction (SAFRR) project by Lucy Jones (then USGS 

Science Advisor for Risk Reduction) and on the USGS 

Earthquake Early Warning program by Douglas Given (USGS 

Earthquake Early Warning coordinator). U.S. delegate Christopher Wills also gave an overview of natural-hazard riskreduction strategies promulgated by CGS. Afternoon briefings 

included an overview of the USGS Volcano Hazards Program 

by Thomas Murray, director of the USGS Volcano Science 

Center, and an introduction to Cal OES by U.S. delegates 

Helen Lopez and Mona Bontty. This phase of the exchange 

concluded the next morning with a briefing by Steven Lieberman, assistant director for operations at the Los Angeles 

County Emergency Operations Center (EOC) (fig. 10). This 

overview gave delegates some insight into how emergency 

responses are handled through a technologically sophisticated 

EOC in a large, but locally managed, jurisdiction of 12 million 

people (88 cities, towns, and unincorporated municipalities).

On August 25, the delegates drove from Los Angeles to 

Mammoth Lakes for the second phase of exchange activities, 

where focus shifted from emergency management to volcanohazard assessment and risk-reduction strategies in the complex and restless Long Valley volcanic region. The next day, 

Wednesday, August 26, was devoted to a geologic overview 

of this high-threat volcanic system that most recently erupted 

about 250 years ago. In the morning, the group took a gondola ride to the summit of Mammoth Mountain on the rim of 

Long Valley Caldera for a bird’s-eye view of the region from 

11,053 feet (3,369 m) (fig. 11). There, Edward (Wes) Hildreth 

and Judith Fierstein (both with CalVO) provided an overview 

of regional geology and the eruptive history of Long Valley. In 

the afternoon, the two scientists led a field trip to the Owens 

River Gorge, where the group examined a massive pyroclastic flow produced during the catastrophic “super eruption” of 

Long Valley Caldera about 760,000 years ago. According to 

Hildreth and Fierstein, future Long Valley eruptions are likely 

to be less energetic and to occur either near Mammoth Mountain (and the resort town of Mammoth Lakes) or along the 

Mono-Inyo Craters chain that extends northward from Mammoth Mountain to Mono Lake, where the most recent eruption occurred. The day ended with a reception at the home of 

long-time Mammoth Lake residents, Robert and Sally Drake. 

Figure 10. A briefing to U.S.-Chile-exchange participants on 

operational protocols and responsibilities of emergency managers 

at the Los Angeles County Emergency Operations Center. 

(Photograph by Christopher Wills, California Geological Survey.)

Figure 11. A discussion among Chilean delegates on summit of 

Mammoth Mountain, California, with a view of Horseshoe Lake 

(a carbon dioxide [CO2] gas hazard area) in the background. 

(Photograph by Thomas Pierson, U.S. Geological Survey.)
10 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

During the reception, David Hill (CalVO) gave an overview 

of the recent history of volcanic unrest in Long Valley—sporadic earthquakes, ground deformation, and gas emissions 

spanning more than three decades—and Sally Drake provided 

insight on the effect of the prolonged unrest on residents and 

businesses. Also present were John Eastman (former mayor of 

Mammoth Lakes) and Thomas Heller (Mammoth Lakes fire 

marshal), who added to the numerous small-group discussions 

that occurred on the various aspects of how natural hazards 

are perceived in communities where local residents sometimes 

fear that highlighting potential hazards can negatively affect 

tourism and real-estate values.

Activities on the next day (August 27) focused on the 

Long Valley hydrothermal (volcanically heated groundwater) 

system. In the morning, the group visited the Ormat Geothermal Power Plant on the outskirts of Mammoth Lakes. After 

the visit, Jennifer Lewicki (CalVO) described monitoring of 

volcanic carbon dioxide (CO2) gas emissions in Long Valley 

(fig. 12). The group learned that (1) an increase in CO2 emissions can precede a volcanic eruption and (2) CO2

 is a potential hazard in itself—it is a heavier-than-air gas that, although 

not toxic, can collect in low-lying areas (or under snowpack), 

where concentrations can build to levels causing suffocation. 

For example, in 2006 two ski patrollers fell into a CO2-filled 

snow pit above a fumarole (volcanic steam/gas vent) at the 

Mammoth Mountain ski area and were asphyxiated, and a 

third person died trying to rescue them. In the afternoon, the 

group visited Horseshoe Lake—another area at the base of 

Mammoth Mountain where CO2 emissions were concentrated 

enough in 1998 to cause the death of another person who fell 

into a CO2-filled depression in the snow next to a building. 

CO2 buildup in the soil has also killed trees over an extensive 

area at Horseshoe Lake.

On August 28, the focus shifted to volcanic-disaster 

preparedness, mitigation, and response. Morning briefings 

at the Mammoth Lakes Fire Department conference room 

began with an overview given by NPS Rangers (and U.S. delegates) Ronald Martin and Kristin Kirschner (fig. 13) of the 

Incident Command System (ICS) and the National Incident 

Management System (NIMS). These are highly effective 

command and control systems that have been widely adopted 

for emergency management during crises in the United States. 

This first presentation was followed by examples of tabletop 

scenario exercises, also explained by Rangers Martin and 

Kirschner. Finally, the Mammoth Lakes Police Department 

explained how a Community Emergency Response Team 

(CERT) operates and showed equipment that is used by the 

local team. The afternoon session started with an introduction 

by U.S. delegate Nathan Wood (USGS) about how vulnerable communities can lessen their risk from volcano hazards. 

This was followed by an overview from Thomas Pierson 

(USGS; U.S. co-coordinator of the exchange) of the Federal 

Figure 12. U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) geologist explaining to U.S.-Chile-exchange participants USGS efforts to monitor and 

understand carbon dioxide (CO2) gas release in the Long Valley Caldera, California. The group is at Hot Creek, the site of numerous hot 

springs and fumaroles. (Photograph by Thomas Pierson, U.S. Geological Survey.)
Exchange Activities in the United States 11

Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) Volcanic Crisis 

Awareness Course—a newly developed tool for educating 

emergency managers about volcano hazards. The day’s activities concluded with a visit to Devils Postpile National Monument and a discussion of the challenges of emergency evacuation during a crisis from locations with numerous visitors 

and only limited or restricted escape routes. Deanna Dulen 

(monument superintendent) hosted this visit.

The final day of the exchange, August 29, began 

with a visit to Yosemite National Park to learn about NPS 

emergency-management and emergency-response philosophy, 

training, and preparation, as well as to take in the incredible 

Sierra Nevada scenery (fig. 14). NPS Ranger Kristin Kirschner 

(U.S. delegate) led this visit. On the way back to Mammoth 

Lakes, the group stopped at Mono Lake—a hypersaline lake 

that anchors the north end of the Mono–Inyo Craters chain. 

Stuart Wilkinson (U.S. delegate) explained the unique ecology 

of the lake. Finally, from the shores of Mono Lake, geologist 

Judith Fierstein (CalVO) (fig. 15) explained the recent eruptive history of the Mono–Inyo Craters.

Figure 13. A U.S.-Chile exchange group discussion during 

overview of the Incident Command System, the National Incident 

Management System, and tabletop scenario exercises being 

presented by National Park Service rangers. (Photograph by 

Christopher Wills, California Geological Survey.)

Figure 14. U.S.-Chile-exchange participants receiving an 

explanation of Yosemite National Park, California, access roads 

and visitor flow in order to understand National Park Service 

emergency-management and emergency-response philosophy, 

training protocols, and preparations for emergencies. (Photograph 

by Thomas Pierson, U.S. Geological Survey.)

Figure 15. U.S.-Chileexchange participants, 

gathered on the shore of 

Mono Lake, California, 

receiving an explanation 

by a U.S. Geological Survey 

geologist of the eruptive 

history and hazards of 

the Mono-Inyo Craters. 

(Photograph by Christopher 

Wills, California Geological 

Survey.)
12 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Benefits for Exchange Participants

To assess the levels of knowledge and areas of interest 

of delegates with regard to volcano hazards, both U.S. and 

Chilean delegates filled out pretrip and posttrip questionnaires. 

The pretrip questionnaire targeted delegates’ knowledge 

about volcano hazards and emergency-management-protocols 

in their respective countries. They also assessed what each 

delegate personally hoped to gain from the exchange. The 

posttrip questionnaire assessed the delegates’ new insights 

and understandings gained after participation in the exchange. 

Responses were thoughtful and detailed, and individual 

answers (with names deleted and answers in Spanish translated into English) appear in appendixes 1 and 2).

Pretrip Questionnaire Responses

Learning objectives brought by the U.S. and Chilean 

delegates to the exchange were broadly similar but with some 

differences in emphasis. Articulation of objectives beforehand 

seemed to help form the basis for many presentations and 

fruitful discussions during the exchange.

Summary of U.S. Delegate Perspectives

On the basis of nine pretrip questionnaire responses, 

U.S. delegates set personal goals that they hoped to achieve 

and formulated questions they hoped to have answered. Learning objectives focused mainly on specific decisions or actions 

that might be required of them during a volcanic crisis. Many 

delegates had questions about (1) when to issue alerts and 

evacuation orders; (2) how to predict the long-term impacts 

of eruptions; (3) how volcanic crises differ from other emergencies, such as wildfire, with which many were familiar; (4) 

what issues are important in recovery and resettlement; and 

(5) what best practices have been distilled from emergencyresponse experiences in Chile. Most of the U.S. delegates 

were familiar with the emergency-response plans for their own 

jurisdictions, although most of these were all-hazards plans 

(not focused on volcano hazards) that involved a multiagency 

response and establishment of an ICS for major crises. Specific questions common among the U.S. delegates included:

• What are some best practices for conducting evacuations during a crisis?

• How are decisions made to evacuate towns in Chile, 

and how is community exposure assessed?

• How are protocols established for incident notification, 

issuing alerts, and evacuating populations?

• How are indigenous populations treated with regard to 

education and information dissemination (for example, 

are language, cultural issues, and remote communities 

addressed)?

• What are some of the long-term impacts of eruptions 

that affect the recovery of communities?

• How can first responders best be protected during a 

volcanic crisis?

Summary of Chilean Delegate Perspectives

For the Chilean delegates (based on seven responses), 

goals for the exchange before their visit to California in 

August 2015 could be largely divided between desires to gain 

a broad overview understanding of how volcanic crises are 

handled in the United States and to learn specific approaches 

or methodologies that might help solve problems or overcome 

challenges encountered in Chile. The Chilean delegates also 

had set several personal goals and formulated questions that 

involved the roles and responsibilities of their particular agencies and challenges faced while working to fulfill their duties. 

In general, the Chilean delegates had a strong sense of what 

the responsibilities were for their respective agencies, but it 

was unclear from the questionnaires whether comprehensive 

(and well-practiced) emergency-response protocols were in 

place at either the national or regional levels—an interagency 

command system like ICS for the management of emergencies 

is not widely used in Chile. The hoped-for new perspectives 

for the Chilean delegates were extensive and focused on several general areas but also on many specific questions:

• How can communities best prepare for volcanic crises?

• How are risk maps made and used in the United States?

• How is scientific information integrated into response 

plans before a crisis, and then how is it shared with 

emergency managers during a crisis? 

• What computer applications or tools can be used to 

help manage risk?

• How are volcano observatories in the United States set 

up and organized?

• What kinds of studies are carried out at U.S. volcanoes 

to better understand the hazards?

• How do emergency managers communicate warnings 

to the public, particularly in large parks with dispersed 

visitor populations?

• How are the media used during crises?

• How are at-risk communities educated about hazards in 

the United States?

• What is a formula for a good emergency-response 

plan?

• How are emergency-response plans integrated among 

various agencies?

• How are warning alert systems set up and operated in 

the United States?
Benefits for Exchange Participants 13

• What methods are used to foster/implement better communication among emergency managers and scientists?

• How are issues of overlapping responsibility and 

jurisdiction (“turf issues”) among different agencies 

handled during crises?

• How much scientific information should scientists give 

out to managers, officials, and the public during crises 

(in other words, how much is too much)?

• How should exclusion zones be managed during a 

crisis?

• What criteria are used to decide when to change volcano alert levels?

Posttrip Questionnaire Responses

U.S. Delegate Perspectives

Answers based on nine responses strongly suggest that 

all of the U.S. delegates gained a greater understanding of the 

issues and challenges inherent in managing volcano hazards. 

These insights came not only from their visit to Chile but also 

from a more in-depth examination of Long Valley hazards 

and emergency-response challenges. Interactions with their 

Chilean counterparts, presentations by technical experts, and 

observations on how the recent crises at Villarrica and Chaitén 

Volcanoes were perceived and responded to all broadened 

their perspectives. Many key insights were shared among U.S. 

delegates, although many other new perspectives (see appendix 2) were specific to the communities, systems, and agencies 

of which the delegates are part of in the Long Valley region. 

New insights held in common include:

• Response planning depends on the overall system of 

government—highly centralized, hierarchical systems tend to produce top-down plans; less centralized 

systems with more distributed responsibilities at local 

levels tend to produce bottom-up plans. Organizational 

structure is important.

• Good communication about hazards among scientists, 

emergency managers, and the public is difficult before, 

during, and after a crisis; good communication requires 

hard work.

• People in at-risk communities need a good understanding of potential hazards and necessary responses during a crisis.

• At-risk communities need more and better education 

about volcano hazards.

• High turnover rates of emergency-management officials and public complacency are two major obstacles 

to hazard preparedness.

• Politics play an important role in resettlement and 

recovery after disasters.

• Although an all-hazards approach to natural disasters 

is the dominant and appropriate approach to response 

planning, but it might be good to do more to educate 

key players on California ICS teams about the unique 

aspects of volcanic crises in comparison to other 

hazards.

• People and institutional resources in affected communities definitely need to be part of the response-planning 

process.

• Volcanic crises can have much longer durations than 

the emergencies to which many crisis managers must 

respond. 

Chilean Delegate Perspectives

After the visit to California, answers by the Chilean 

delegates to the posttrip questionnaire revealed that they came 

away with many new insights and ideas. Five of the nine Chilean delegates responded; some of the more general comments 

include:

• Scientists need to participate in educating communities 

about hazards.

• Effective hazard mitigation depends on government 

policies that promote integration of the scientific data 

with emergency management.

• Emergency-management systems can be effectively 

run in a decentralized fashion involving the bottom-up 

participation of people in local communities; the topdown model originating from our national government 

is not the only model.

• Coordination of emergency-response plans among 

agencies, institutions, and communities in advance of a 

crisis is crucial for effective crisis management.

• Journalists and the media play key roles in the communication of information during emergencies.

• Compartmentalization of agencies and institutions can 

lead to detrimental attitudes and consequences during 

emergencies, such as a reluctance and failure to share 

data and information.

• The responsibility for education of at-risk communities 

about hazards needs to be built into the protocols and 

cultures of agencies and institutions; it should not be 

left to the initiative of individual scientists or emergency managers.

• It is important to have an institutionalized process of 

assigning work responsibilities and resources (within a 

specified legal framework) that allows multiple agencies to work under a single standard during an emergency response. Within the United States, this process 

is ICS.
14 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Summary

The 2015 United States-Chile Binational Exchange 

for Volcanic Risk Reduction, sponsored by the USGS and 

USAID-OFDA, involved scientists, emergency managers, and 

public officials from the United States and Chile in reciprocal 

visits of about a week in duration to active volcanic regions in 

each other’s countries. The visit to southern Chile took place 

March 23–30, and the California visit occurred August 24–30, 

2015. The shared encounters with real volcano-monitoring and 

hazard-mitigation issues enabled the delegates to learn from 

local experts and from each other about how vulnerable populations can be better prepared to deal with volcanic eruptions, 

how best practices for emergency response are continuously 

being modified by direct experience, and how volcanic risk 

ultimately can be reduced. 

Although the Chile leg of the exchange focused initially 

on Chaitén Volcano in northern Patagonia, an eruption of Villarrica Volcano that involved community evacuations started 

only weeks before the visit by the U.S. delegation, allowing 

the scope of the visit to be broadened. The U.S. leg of the 

exchange focused on emergency operation systems in the Los 

Angeles area and on hazards monitoring and crisis-response 

planning in the Long Valley volcanic region in the eastern 

Sierra Nevada. Chaitén Volcano and Long Valley were chosen 

for this exchange because both are centers of rhyolitic volcanism. The high viscosity and gas content of rhyolitic magma 

can cause explosive eruptions with widespread destruction. 

Rare but catastrophic “super eruptions” have largely been the 

result of rhyolite volcanism.

Exchange activities included site visits to areas of 

volcanic unrest and eruption, presentations by subject-matter 

experts, and facility tours—all of which provided opportunities for informal social interaction and exchange of ideas. Delegates examined and compared types and threats of volcano 

hazards, volcano-monitoring strategies, approaches to disasterpreparedness planning, and methods of communications with 

at-risk communities. Both U.S. and Chilean delegates reported 

gaining new insights and understanding from the exchange, 

as well as increased motivation to improve the status quo for 

volcanic-risk management in their home jurisdictions.

References Cited

Beason, S., Driedger, C., Lockhart, A., Schelling, J., Gibson, 

Z., Burkhart, F., Banks, D., Bustad, K., Allen, R., and Scott, 

M., 2014, Lessons learned from a bi-national exchange 

between Colombia and the United States—Real-life emergency planning and preparedness from a worst-case scenario: Geological Society of America Annual Meeting, Vancouver, British Columbia, October 19–22, 2014, accessed 

March 14, 2017, at https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2014AM/

webprogram/Paper244620.html.

Driedger, C., and Ewert, J., 2015, Volcano-hazards education 

for emergency officials through study trip learning—The 

2013 binational exchange: American Geophysical Union 

Fall Meeting, San Francisco, Calif., December 14–18, 2015, 

abstract 76171, accessed March 14, 2017, at https://agu.

confex.com/agu/fm15/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/76171.

Hildreth, Wes, 2004, Volcanological perspectives on Long 

Valley, Mammoth Mountain, and Mono Craters—Several 

contiguous but discrete systems: Journal of Volcanology and 

Geothermal Research, v. 136, p. 169–198, doi: 10.1016/

j.jvolgeores.2004.05.019.

Hildreth, Wes, and Fierstein, Judy, 2016, Eruptive history of 

Mammoth Mountain and its mafic periphery, California: 

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1812, 128 p., 

2 plates, scale 1:24,000, accessed March 14, 2017, at 

https://doi.org/10.3133/pp1812.

Hill, D.P., Bailey, R.A., and Ryall, A.S., 1985, Active tectonic and magmatic processes beneath Long Valley 

Caldera, eastern California—An overview: Journal of 

Geophysical Research, v. 90, no. B13, p. 11111–11120, 

accessed March 14, 2017, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1029/

JB090iB13p11111.

Major, J.J., and Lara, L.E., 2013, Overview of Chaitén Volcano, Chile, and its 2008–2009 eruption: Andean Geology, 

v. 40, p. 196–215.

Miller, C.D., 1985, Holocene eruptions at the Inyo volcanic 

chain, California—Implications for possible eruptions in 

Long Valley Caldera: Geology, v. 13, p. 14–17.

Pierson, T.C., Major, J.J., Amigo, Á., and Moreno, H., 2013, 

Acute sedimentation response to rainfall following the 

explosive phase of the 2008–2009 eruption of Chaitén volcano, Chile: Bulletin of Volcanology, v. 75, article no. 723, 

accessed March 14, 2017, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/

s00445-013-0723-4.

Sorey, M.L., Farrar, C.D., Gerlach, T.M., McGee, K.A., 

Evans, W.C., Colvard, E.M., Hill, D.P., Bailey, R.A., Rogie, 

J.D., Hendley, J.W., II, and Stauffer, P.H., 1996, Invisible 

CO2 gas killing trees at Mammoth Mountain, California 

(ver. 2.0, June 2000): U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 

172-96, accessed April, 26, 2017, at https://pubs.usgs.gov/

fs/fs172-96/.

Westby, L., 2015, Colombia–USA Binational Exchange: 

U.S. Geological Survey video, accessed March 14, 2017, 

at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MNp_7iVtd28

(Spanish version, https://www.youtube.com/

watch?v=Xb7GSZ9XsmI).
Appendixes
16 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires

U.S. Delegate Responses to Chile Pretrip 

Questionnaire

U.S. Delegate Response 1

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• I’d like to gain some insight into the impact of the 

Chaitén eruption on fluvial systems and how that 

might apply to Crowley Lake and other key pieces of 

infrastructure in California.

• I’d like to learn more about how long-term planning 

can apply in areas subject to volcano hazards. We 

have a lot of experience with other hazards in statewide mitigation plans, hazard zones, and emergencyresponse plans, so I’d like to learn more about how 

some of the techniques we use for other hazards can 

apply to volcano hazards.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• Can the planning scenario concept used for earthquakes in California be adapted for volcano 

emergency-response planning and preparedness 

exercises?

• Do emergency responders conduct practice drills 

to simulate how they would respond to a volcanic 

eruption?

• Does the public participate in such drills?

• Can the hazard-zoning concept used for earthquake 

hazard mitigation in California be used for volcano 

hazards?

• How much warning will we get with a good network?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Volcano hazards in California are related to several 

well-known volcanic centers, which are fortunately 

distant from the main population centers, but could 

impact populated areas and important infrastructure.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• CGS has a volcano emergency-response plan, part 

of our overall geologic emergency-response plan. 

We’ve just revised that and I am familiar with it.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• CGS response would be in cooperation with USGS 

and coordinated through Cal OES-the emergencyresponse plan gives a basic outline of roles and 

responsibilities.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• Volcanic activity can come with days/weeks of 

warning, similar to flood or landslide hazards but 

different from earthquakes.

• Volcanic activity can continue for months/years, 

much longer than the time scale of other geologic 

hazards.

• Volcanic activity can produce a level of devastation 

only approached by tsunamis.

U.S. Delegate Response 2

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• Greater understanding of types of preparedness 

awareness performed prior to eruptions.

• More information on risk management decisions—

values considered and planning process.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• Who [should make up] the best team to involve—

key skills needed?

• How is information shared with different stakeholders?

• What are the next steps after a response—rebuilding 

and sharing information?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 17

• I have been learning of the hazards in my community over the years; I am familiar with USGS 

CalVO and status of Mount Shasta. I have read and 

reviewed the Siskiyou County general plan on volcanic hazards and their assessment.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• No specific plan in place. Opportunities exist to use 

our existing multi-agency groups to develop and 

coordinated an appropriate response.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• Multiagency. With our history of large fires in the north 

part of the State, I think we have good communication 

bout our level of preparedness is low.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• Duration. We are uncertain of NEXT stops following 

volcanic activity and exactly how to ensure emergency 

management and safety are maintained over time.

U.S. Delegate Response 3

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• Ideas on indicators of warning. 

• How early is too early and how late is too late?

• Emergency response and planning that relate to all 

all-risk emergency scenarios?

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• Possible initial extent of effective area?

• Long-term effects?

• USGS (?) response time?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Limited understanding to volcanic hazards, specifically with knowledge of natural disaster hazards 

(particularly wildfire). I do believe Mammoth Lakes 

and surrounding communities are vulnerable to hazards associated with evacuations and environmental 

impacts.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• I am not totally familiar with the volcano response 

plan. A volcanic eruption and associated response 

would definitely be/require a multiagency response.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• Management would definitely be multiagency. 

Multiagency all-risk teams already exist and are 

continuously being built, coordinated, and improved 

upon. The [multiagency partners] along the Eastern 

Sierra have had recent events (wildfires) to refine 

coordination between incident management teams 

and emergency operation centers.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• Every all-risk incident provides unique circumstances every time. I would think the initial response 

would create similar safety concerns as other 

incidents, that is, evacuation, exclusion zones, and 

long-range planning. Expertise in volcanism would 

be a unique and mandatory requirement. Long-rang 

planning and understanding of future or lasting hazards would be unique compared to wildfires.

U.S. Delegate Response 4

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• What caught emergency managers by surprise, other 

than the volcano?

• How are they dealing with the resettlement issue and 

future emergency preparedness?

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• What were unexpected problems during emergency 

management of eruptive/evacuation phase?

• How did you keep the first responders safe? What 

were identified as risks for the emergency response 

teams?
18 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

• How did you deal with at-risk special-needs populations?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Mostly denial of any real risk. It’s such a far-off 

possibility that almost no one takes it very seriously. 

Certainly a poor understanding of risk to the shortterm visiting public; the volcano shifting to a more 

eruptive phase would be an attractor, bringing people 

the area as spectators.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• Lassen Volcanic NP has a comprehensive emergency 

operations plan that encompasses a volcanic eruption, as well as a number of other events such as 

wildland fire, severe storms, long-duration power 

outages, etc. 

• Plan consists of 3 distinct elements: emergency 

command and control procedures, evacuation, and 

continuity of operations. I wrote the plan.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• Lassen Volcanic National Park sits right in the 

middle of four counties. A volcanic crisis would very 

much be a multiagency endeavor. Joint training and 

table top exercises have helped. SAR [search and 

rescue] coordinator meetings with various counties, 

other jurisdictions (Cal OES). Still always a challenge, for example key people come and go, protocols change, sheriffs are elected officials, etc.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• The potential scope of disruption.

• The length of disruption.

• Potential for major impacts to vital economic centers 

and infrastructure—I -5 corridor , irrigation canals, 

major portions of the power grid, major natural gas 

pipelines, plus tourism and impacts to native salmon 

and steelhead spawning habitat.

U.S. Delegate Response 5

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• If/how Chile assesses and communicates community 

exposure, sensitivity, and resilience to hazards.

• How community evacuation decisions are made.

• How Chilean authorities communicate threats, 

evacuation orders, and return to normalcy.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• What plans exist to help vulnerable populations?

• Do response plans take into account community 

quality of life and continuity?

• How do they decide when to evacuate communities 

and who makes the decision? Are communities part 

of the decision process?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Not exactly applicable since I don’t have a community or jurisdiction at risk. But I do have a good 

sense of societal exposure to CA volcanoes.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• Yes, USGS is involved in multiagency planning.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• USGS works with local, State, and Federal partners.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• The long run-up to catastrophic events.

• The long-term nature of the hazards.

• The regional and indirect nature of impacts.
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 19

U.S. Delegate Response 6

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• As a response lead for the department, I hope to gain 

insight on how we can support local jurisdictions 

with volcanic threats in mitigation planning to further enhance preparedness, response, and recovery.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• What are the toughest challenges officials have faced 

in working with volcanic hazards and how are they 

being addressed?

• What are the protocols for volcanic hazard notification, alerting, and evacuation?

• What community engagement is done to help people 

understand potential volcanic hazards?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• This is not my area of expertise, and I hope to gain 

from this delegation experience a greater understanding of how to support the planning, response, and 

recovery efforts to volcanic hazards in California.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• During FY15–16 staff will work with USGS to 

continue development of the volcano hazard-specific 

appendix to the State Emergency Plan. This appendix will summarize the volcanic hazards and the 

threats they pose to people, property, environment, 

and the economy.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• As in other emergencies we would use our SEMS 

[Standardized Emergency Management System], 

which would lead to a multiagency effort. Our 

Southern Region EOC would be activated along with 

the State Operations Center to coordinate mutual aid.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• The capability to forewarn those in an impact area in 

order to minimize loss of life. Unlike other no-notice 

events, such as earthquakes, early notification due to 

the probability of an eruption can be significant in 

preserving the safety of a population.

U.S. Delegate Response 7

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• Solutions for foreign language residents and visitors.

• Issues that SERNAGEOMIN faces with education, alert response or lack thereof, and monitoring 

network issues.

• Things we can learn from their techniques.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• Maintain hazard warning signs on public lands.

• Refresh and update response plans for towns and 

public lands with potential hazards.

• Don’t hide the “volcano.”

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Ash hazards, lahar/mudflow hazards, small but 

potential explosive hazards.

• Lots of visitors that may not be aware of the hazards.

• Foreign populations, older populations, and people 

with special needs.

• Not many back-up road systems.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• CalVO has a response plan for the Long Valley 

and Mammoth Lakes areas, but it needs updating. 

The plan has been incorporated into Mono County 

and Inyo County response plans. Not sure of other 

volcanic areas.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• A sudden onset crisis would be a multiagency 

effort—most likely with an EOC or Unified Command. Scientists would provide data and activity 

alert level information to emergency response man-
20 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

agers, most likely USFS, sheriff, and local government.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• Potential long-lasting effects.

• Activity levels can increase suddenly and lead to 

eruption [, but an eruption might not occur despite 

precursory signals].

• Public is generally complacent and not always 

[ready to respond].

U.S. Delegate Response 8

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• Strategies and ideas of evacuations of large numbers 

of people from hazard zones.

• Best practices and lessons learned from real-world 

experiences in Chile.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• How to best communicate hazards with tourist/transient populations?

• Estimated timeframes for repopulation of affected 

areas?

• Major risks to responders and ways to quickly mitigate responder risks during evacuation process?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• Yosemite/Mammoth areas seem more concerned 

with earthquake, flood, or fire threats. General misunderstanding that volcano hazards are not overly 

high in the Sierra.

• Overall evacuation planning is occurring in Yosemite and with surrounding communities that could be 

adapted for volcano hazards.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• Yosemite National Park is working on a broad 

evacuation plan for the park with specific appendices 

for various hazards.

• Devils Postpile National Monument is working with 

an interagency team and hopes to create a better 

response plan.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• Most likely modeled after large-scale wildland fire 

responses that have occurred in previous years. 

Interagency effort would be coordinated using the 

ICS system and most likely a unified command.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• Some of the threats from volcanic activity are not 

readily seen as dangerous (that is, slow moving lava 

flow) or are not visible to populations at risk (that 

is, lahars can impact towns a long distance away, 

ashfall can impact areas even farther away).

U.S. Delegate Response 9

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip?

• During the trip, I hope to better understand emergency management through disasters such as those 

caused by volcanoes—how to plan, prepare, and 

recover from such disasters. I am also increasingly 

interested in fostering a line of communication 

between Cal OES and our ONEMI counterparts.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response.

• What is the volcano preparedness platform and 

approach? Is it consistent throughout the regions and 

country?

• What is the frequency and method (written, radio, 

television) of reaching the population with a preparedness message?

• Is volcano preparedness/volcano education taught in 

schools, if so at what levels (for example, primary or 

secondary)?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction?

• I recently learned that there are eight volcanoes varying from very high to low threat levels in California, 

which that are presently on the watch list.
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 21

• Volcano hazard zones cover roughly 24,000 square 

miles in California and impact and cross 10 counties.

• Approximately 190,000 residents live in volcano 

hazard zones, and can be affected by the initial eruption, volcanic ash, pyroclastic flows, and lava and 

mudflows.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan?

• For volcano emergencies, Cal OES operates according to the following plans:

• State Emergency Plan.

• Joint Cal OES-FEMA Catastrophic Incident Base 

Plan.

5. How would a sudden-onset volcano crisis in your 

“backyard” be managed? Would it be a multiagency 

effort? How are multiagency efforts coordinated 

where you work?

• As with all emergencies in California, disasters are 

first attacked at the local level. Yet, it is a multiagency effort in that other agencies assist local 

agencies when these agencies have exhausted their 

aid. When higher-level State agencies deplete their 

resources, only then are Federal agencies called 

upon to supply any remaining assistance.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards?

• What I believe to be unique about volcanic activity is the level of air pollution that it can leave 

behind, even months and years after the disaster has 

occurred. As with earthquakes and tsunamis, there 

may be a lot of infrastructure damage to repair, but 

the air quality caused by a volcanic eruption may be 

more difficult to remedy.

Chilean Delegate Responses to California 

Pretrip Questionnaire

Chilean Delegate Response 1

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• Conocimiento y comunicación con personas. Knowledge and communication with people.

• Tecnologías y estrategias asociadas al manejo del 

riesgo. Technologies and strategies associated with 

managing risk.

• Sistemas de información Geográfica, modelación de 

riesgos y amenazas. GIS systems; modeling risks and 

hazards.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• Forma de llegar con la alarma a la comunidad y sus 

tiempos de respuesta. How to facilitate alarms for 

communities and their response times.

• Tratamiento de comunicación con las personas y su 

relación con las autoridades. How communication 

with people in communities is done, and how they 

relate to the authorities.

• Estrategias de preparación, educación y entrenamiento a la comunidad. Strategies for preparation, 

education, and training people in communities.

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• Como Director Regional de ONEMI, es amplia y 

especifica respecto de cada comunidad, no obstante 

esta se logra por medio de la asociación directa con 

los entes TECNICOS, como SERNAGEOMIN. As 

a Regional Director of ONEMI, my understanding 

is broad and specific for each community [in my 

region]. However, this is achieved through direction 

association with technical entities such as SERNAGEOMIN.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• Estamos preparando un plan por parte de cada 

comunidad respecto de su propio Volcán, iniciamos 

una fase previa de conocimiento, directamente con la 

propia comunidad y difusión de las características de 

cada uno de ellos, les proporcionamos la señalética 

y seguidamente los preparamos para elaborar su propio plan, para finalmente entrenar con la comunidad 

ese plan. We are preparing a plan for each community with respect to its own volcano. We are initiating 
22 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

a preliminary education outreach directly to each 

community in accordance with its particular needs. 

We provide signage and prepare them for developing 

their own plans, and finally we train the community 

on putting the plan into action.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• Están bien, pero se debe seguir trabajando coordinadamente, en las diferentes etapas de la emergencia y 

con objetivos comunes. They are fine, but working 

together in concert should continue for each of the 

different stages of an emergency to further the goals 

of the community.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• Que lo conocemos, sobemos donde esta y lo 

podemos seguir. We know it, we know where it is, 

and we can follow.

Chilean Delegate Response 2

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• Learn how communities are educated in terms of 

natural hazards.

• How civil authorities can manage exclusion zones 

when the natural hazards occurrence is difficult to 

forecast in the long term.

• Hazard management plans during natural crises, 

involving different agencies.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• What are the criteria for changing volcanic alert 

levels under volcanic unrest (either due to increase 

or decrease of volcanic activity)?

• How are the volcanic alert levels (defined by the 

volcano observatory) compared to the emergency 

office alert levels?

• Who is responsible for informing communities about 

volcanic unrest and potential evacuations?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• I do have a good understanding of volcano hazards 

in my community, which corresponds to Temuco 

city in the central valley. Those are mostly related to 

fine ash fallout during explosive eruptions (however, low accumulation on the surface is expected) 

and impacts derived from extreme (low probability) 

events, such as distal facies of large ignimbrites 

that occurred in the past 10,000 years (for example, 

derived from Llaima and Villarrica volcanoes). 

Owing to the type of volcanic phenomena indicated 

and their recurrence, the vulnerability of Temuco 

city to volcano hazards is low. 

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• During volcanic unrest, internal meetings at SERNAGEOMIN are held to evaluate the status of the 

volcano activity according to monitoring parameters. 

These meetings are technical, including geologists 

and geophysicists. Occasionally, SERNAGEOMIN 

higher authorities are involved (national director 

and (or) national head of geology (Subdirector de 

Geología)).

• If the volcano alert level will be changed—based on 

technical criteria—an official report is sent to several 

authorities in the country, including the National 

Emergency Office (ONEMI).

• If a volcanic crisis occurs, coordination meetings are 

held, including both regional and national authorities. The focus is the evaluation of volcano hazards, 

their extent, and which actions must be taken to 

ensure the safety of people and infrastructure.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• As described above, during volcanic crises there is a 

close relation with other agencies, in particular with 

ONEMI and local governments.

• During non-unrest time, some activities are usually 

done to inform people about volcano hazards and 

geological evolution. However, these are mostly 

based on individual interest rather than multiagency 

coordination.
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 23

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• In some aspects, it is hard to evaluate volcano hazards based not only on the recorded history of past 

events (during historical times). For example, the 

effect of pyroclastic flows that have reached populated areas in the geological record cannot be fully 

understood. This can be a problem for mitigation 

plans.

• Another unique aspect is the uncertainty related to 

eruption forecast. At the moment, I see that forecasting volcanic unrest works pretty well in most cases, 

but on the other hand, it is much more difficult to 

forecast eruption size and duration, or even the 

potential extension of the products. Not to mention 

that volcanic unrest might not be an indication of 

eruptive activity necessarily.

• Finally, hazards such as ashfall or distal lahars might 

impact areas faraway from volcanoes, where communities are not used to volcanic phenomena.

Chilean Delegate Response 3

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• I want to get some ideas about how to create a volcanic emergency plan for the park. I want to know the 

concepts included in an emergency plan.

• I hope to learn some tools for good alert communication and coordination with public services and what 

kind of communications system is necessary in the 

park for a good alert system.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• How expensive is the implementation of an effective 

early alert system in a national park?

• What kind of devices and instruments do you need 

for an effective early alert system in a national park?

• How does the method work to make the system 

effective for visitors?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• I know about the volcanoes’ locations. I know different kinds of possible damages and effects on the 

visitors, workers, communities and infrastructure.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• No, we don’t have a response plan and we are not 

part of a multiagency plan.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• Well, I think we are working on that. This internship is a big step. But, we are giving some support 

to SERNAGEOMIN with the access to the land 

around the volcanoes in the area, and we are giving 

them some Internet support for sending data. SERNAGEOMIN has given a couple of workshops to the 

Pumalín Park ranger team; thanks to that, our team 

knows more about the volcanoes and their hazards.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• The singularities are how powerful it is, the magnitude, and the unexpected impacts.

Chilean Delegate Response 4

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• Conocer los centros encargados del monitoreo 

volcánico y eventualmente sísmico de California 

y su relación con estados unidos. Know the facilities responsible for volcanic and possibly seismic 

monitoring in California and its relationship with 

monitoring by the United States.
24 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

• Intercambio de experiencias de los científicos de 

EEUU y de Chile, para determinar semejanzas, diferencias y cómo mejorar en Chile. Sharing experiences of scientists from the United States and Chile, 

to determine similarities, differences and how to 

improve things in Chile.

• Visitar zonas volcánicas. Visit volcanic zones.

• Ver la preparación de la población respecto a 

emergencias volcánicas. See how populations are 

prepared for volcanic emergencies.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• ¿Cómo determinan las áreas de peligro volcánico? 

How are volcanic hazard zones determined?

• ¿Cómo influyen los instrumentos de planificación 

territorial en las zonas de riesgo? How do local planning procedures influence hazard zones?

• ¿Cómo se prepara la población para las emergencias 

volcánicas, quién les enseña y cómo se entrega la 

alerta a la población? How is the population prepared for volcanic emergencies, who teaches them, 

and how is the alert transmitted to the population?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• La ciudad de Santiago se encuentra en la Región 

Metropolitana, donde se encuentran algunos volcanes activos. The city of Santiago is located in a 

metropolitan region, where there are several active 

volcanoes.

• Sernageomin ha elaborado cartas de peligros volcánicos, considerando área de caída de piroclástos, 

lahares y cenizas. SERNAGEOMIN has prepared 

charts about volcano hazards, considering the areas 

subject to pyroclastic fall, lahars, and ash.

• ONEMI entrega recomendaciones en general sobre 

qué debe hacer la población ante una emergencia 

volcánica. ONEMI delivers general recommendations on what a community should do to prepare for 

a volcanic emergency.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• ONEMI tiene folletos con recomendaciones de erupciones volcánicas en general, no existe para cada 

volcán. ONEMI has brochures with recommendations about volcanic eruptions in general.

• Las comunas, cuentan con un plan de emergencia 

para su respectivo volcán, pero es de conocimiento 

de sus habitantes y no de la población en general. 

The towns rely on emergency plans for their respective volcanoes, but it is local knowledge that is not 

understood by the general population.

• El plan de emergencia del volcán incluye la información de peligros volcánicos elaborada por 

Sernageomin. The volcano emergency plan includes 

information about volcano hazards, which is produced by SERNAGEOMIN.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• Existe coordinación entre ONEMI, encargada de 

la protección civil y Sernageomin, encargado de 

estudiar e informar los peligros volcánicos. There is 

coordination between ONEMI, which is responsible 

for civil protection, and SERNAGEOMIN, which is 

responsible for studying and providing information 

about volcano hazards.

• ONEMI y Sernageomin tienen un protocolo, donde 

se indican las responsabilidades de cada uno en caso 

de emergencia. ONEMI and SERNAGEOMIN have 

a protocol that indicates the responsibilities of each 

agency in case of an emergency.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• Existe capacidad para determinar anticipadamente 

una alerta temprana para las erupciones volcánicas 

porque Sernageomin tiene una gran red de instrumentos científicos para el monitoreo volcánico. The 

ability exists to produce early warnings of volcanic 

eruptions, because SERNAGEOMIN has a large network of scientific instruments to monitor volcanoes.
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 25

Chilean Delegate Response 5

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• Conocer CalVO para ayudar a modelar el desarrollo 

del futuro Observatorio Volcanológico de los Andes 

Australes, conocer la manera de procesar datos, de 

estándares internacionales y la vinculación con las 

demás instituciones antes, durante y después de una 

crisis volcánica. To learn about CalVO in order to 

help shape the development of the future Southern 

Andes Volcano Observatory, to learn how data are 

processed, to learn about international standards, 

and to learn how other institutions are linked before, 

during, and after a volcanic crisis.

• Conocer otros estudios que se realizan en volcanes 

y que, tal vez, no realizamos en Chile. To know 

about other studies that are carried out at volcanoes, 

which perhaps are not conducted in Chile.

• Conocer una rápida discriminación de sismos volcánicos v/s sismos de glaciares. To learn a method of 

rapidly discriminating between volcanic earthquakes 

and glacier quakes.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• ¿Cómo se coordinan las acciones frente a una 

erupción; desde lo técnico hasta las decisiones de los 

organismo de Protección Civil? How is [information 

about] eruptive precursory activity coordinated with 

civil protection agencies?

• ¿Cuál es la dinámica antes y durante una crisis volcánica al interior del CalVO? What are the dynamics 

within CalVO before, during, and after an eruption?

• ¿Cómo han logrado una estandarización en la 

adquisición y en compartir datos desde distintas 

instituciones, universidades o servicios? How has 

standardization in the acquisition and sharing of 

data been achieved between different institutions, 

universities, and agencies?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• Muy buena, conozco los distintos productos volcánicos predominantes de los distintos edificios 

volcánicos cercanos a mi ciudad; también se de la 

afectación de los mismos, debido a que, por mi profesión (Geólogo) he participado en la confección de 

los planes de evacuación ante emergencias volcánicas (junto a diversas instituciones, fuerzas armadas 

y servicios de mi región). También, cuando estoy 

en terreno reconozco depósitos y transmito de esos 

hallazgos a los colegas que trabajan en la confección 

de mapas de peligros. Very good. I know the different 

predominant volcanic products of various volcanoes 

near my city; I am involved in this because of my 

profession (geologist). I have participated in the 

preparation of volcanic emergency evacuation plans 

(together with various institutions, the armed forces 

and agencies in my area). When I’m on the ground I 

also recognize deposits and transmit these findings 

to colleagues working in the mapping of hazards.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• Si, existen protocolos basados en la actividad 

sísmica de los volcanes al interior de SERNAGEOMIN; también hay coordinación a nivel nacional 

y la región tiene su propio Plan de Emergencia. 

Estoy familiarizado con los planes. Yes, protocols 

exist, based on volcanic seismic activity, within 

SERNAGEOMIN. There is also coordination at the 

national regional level, and the region has its own 

plan. I am familiar with the plans.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• Las coordinaciones con otras instituciones presentes 

en la región, se realizan mediante el COE (Comité 

Operativo de Emergencias) y son efectivas. Coordination among other institutions present in the region is 

carried out by the COE (Emergency Operations Committee), and it is effective.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• Caída de cenizas en mi ciudad; ocurrencia de lahares 

en zonas cercanas al volcán; remociones en masa en 

toda la región. Ashfall in my city, the occurrence of 

lahars near the volcano, and mass removals [landslides/debris flows] throughout the region.
26 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Chilean Delegate Response 6

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• To know about experiences in crisis response in 

U.S.A.; the relationships among scientists, emergency responders, authorities, and the media.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• How you in U.S.A. distinguish technical alerts 

issued by USGS from civil protection alerts?

• How do you manage the competing authorities at 

Federal, State, and national levels?

• How deep do you go with science into the emergency response in terms of basic information and 

technical advice?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• Poor in general, but growing fast.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• We at SERNAGEOMIN are part of the Civil Protection System, which is itself a multiagency scheme.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• There is a committee for coordination, but in my 

opinion the mix between representatives of the agencies and scientists who act as individuals is not good 

enough.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• There are a number of common features, perhaps the 

media attention being a very big issue.

Chilean Delegate Response 7

1. What specific insights do you hope to gain from this 

trip? ¿Cuáles ideas específicas qué esperes ganar de este 

viaje?

• Conocer como se implementan los mapas de riesgos 

en EEUU (por ejemplo HAZUS). To learn how 

risk maps are implemented in the United States (for 

example, HAZUS).

• Conocer cómo se integra a la comunidad en la alerta 

temprana. To learn how [risk maps] are used by 

communities for early warnings.

• Y como se integra el trabajo que realiza USGS a las 

organizaciones de respuesta. And to learn how work 

done by the USGS is integrated with the work of 

response organizations.

2. List three questions that YOU want to see answered 

concerning effective volcano response. ¿Qué son tres 

preguntas que quieres ver contestado sobre las respuestas 

eficaces a las erupciones volcánicas?

• ¿Cómo se dio la alerta? How are alerts given?

• ¿Cómo se preparan para realizar evacuaciones? What 

is done to prepare for evacuations?

• ¿Cómo es el retorno de la comunidad, luego de pasada la emergencia? How is the return of communities 

[to hazard zones] handled following an emergency?

3. What is your understanding of the volcano hazards, 

and the vulnerability to these hazards, in your community or jurisdiction? ¿Cuál es tu comprensión de los 

peligros volcánicos y la vulnerabilidad a estos peligros, en 

tu comunidad o jurisdicción?

• En mi comunidad inmediata no existen riesgos volcánicos, para Chile sin embargo el tema es relevante 

y diría que la comunidad no entiende aun como 

convivir con las amenazas volcánicas, cuales son los 

sistemas de alerta. In my immediate community there 

are no volcano hazards; for Chile, however, the topic 

is relevant and one could say that the population 

does not understand yet lives with volcano hazards 

and warning systems.

4. Does your agency have a volcano crisis coordination or 

response plan, or is it part of a multiagency plan? Are 

you familiar with the plan? ¿Tiene tu agencia un plan de 
Appendix 1. Pretrip Questionnaires 27

coordinación o de respuesta a la crisis de “tu” volcán, o es 

parte de un plan multi-agencia? ¿Estás familiarizado con 

el plan?

• Not applicable.

5. How are multiagency efforts coordinated where you 

work? ¿Cómo están los esfuerzos de múltiples agencias 

coordinadas en la que trabajas?

• Not applicable.

6. From an emergency-management and safety perspective, what do you see as unique about volcanic activity 

in comparison with other hazards? Desde una perspectiva de gestión de emergencias y seguridad, ¿qué ves 

como único acerca de la actividad volcánica en comparación con otros riesgos?

• Me parece que hay conocimiento científico que se 

ha generado, hay análisis histórico de erupciones 

volcánicas, es un fenómeno que se ha estudiado y 

por lo mismo, se puede explicar a la comunidad. It 

seems that there is scientific knowledge that has been 

generated, there are historical analyses of volcanic 

eruptions, and it is a phenomenon that has been 

studied. Therefore, it can be explained to the community.

• Los volcanes son un importante elemento del paisaje 

en Chile y pese a ello y al conocimiento científico 

existente no toda la población sabe como convivir 

con ellos. Volcanoes are an important element of the 

Chilean landscape, and despite that and the existing 

knowledge, not all the population knows how to live 

with them.
28 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires

U.S. Delegate Responses to Chile Posttrip 

Questionnaire

U.S. Delegate Response 1

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• I was incredibly impressed by the amount of work 

being done in Chile related to hazard monitoring, 

education, and response with a very small amount 

of staff in comparison to the United States. We 

are lucky to have the people and funding to have 

developed/specialized programs and operations in 

the United States. Although we have a lot of expertise in planning for events, Chile has had (and is still 

having) direct experience dealing with a huge variety 

of hazard response, including from floods, tsunamis, 

earthquakes, fires, volcanoes, landslides. Tabletop 

exercises and drills just can’t compare with living 

and dealing with the real thing.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• The need for technical expertise to be included in 

the ICS system during disaster response. The only 

barrier to this would be having those contacts preestablished so that you know who to call immediately 

when the incident management team is not from the 

local area. Knowing that the incident management 

team I am on will likely be deployed if a volcanic 

crisis affects any Western parks, I feel like I now 

have a contact list that includes people who will be 

able to immediately get me quality information, as 

well as technical expertise. 

• Increased collaboration with local experts related to 

volcano hazards my park faces. The major barrier 

to this is that like Chile, Yosemite has a wide range 

of potential hazards—drought, fire, winter storms, 

floods, and rockfall. Presenting a new hazard without 

it getting lost in all of the emergency education 

information can be a challenge.

• Provide Devils Postpile National Monument with 

oversight and assistance as they develop an evacuation plan. 

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• Integrate Yosemite National Park and the NPS into 

multiagency coordination for Long Valley. We will 

likely have less damage but be a huge resource during a volcanic crisis.

• Incident management training targeted for USGS 

technical specialists so they can be deployed during 

all risk responses and incorporated within the incident command structure.

• Volcano-hazard planning for parks should not 

only include monitoring and evacuation plans but 

repopulation plans and guidelines for dealing with 

secondary hazards, such as lahars, landslides, and 

ash. Plans should be created in consultation with 

technical specialists and park resource-management 

staff to address what if any reconstruction or ecosystem manipulation may or may not occur after the 

incident.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• I have always identified volcano hazards with the 

typical cone shaped snowy volcanoes of the [Pacific] 

Northwest. I learned a great deal about the hazards 

of Long Valley, which opened my eyes to the wide 

range of volcano hazards both in Chile and in the 

Western United States.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• This was a great experience! The only thing I would 

have changed was the schedule. It seemed like 

many of the days were so packed with meetings and 

presentations (which were awesome!) that it left 

little time for reflection on what we were learning 

and discussing. One of the most meaningful experiences I had was sitting in Silvia’s kitchen talking to 

her about the eruption and evacuation, which only 

occurred because we had decided not to have dinner! 

[Silvia was the proprietress of the small hotel where 

the delegates stayed.] A little more “downtime” 

could have allowed for more informal interactions 

like that.
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 29

U.S. Delegate Response 2

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• Communications is key at all levels. Risk managers 

and scientists need to meet and discuss emergency 

planning and operations. Populations in towns 

located within hazard zones need to understand the 

risks and potential actions they can take in the lead 

up to an eruption. The importance of Federal officials meeting with local officials cannot be understated. Hazard maps should come as no surprise to 

anyone in affected communities. Expect politics to 

play a significant role in repopulation and posteruptive mitigation. Do not underestimate the public’s 

emotional attachment to their homes and surrounding communities. 

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• Meet with Mineral [California] townsfolk to discuss 

the volcano and share hazard maps. Barriers include 

task management and always being called away to 

shorter-term issues, and indifference among people 

who do not see the volcano as much of a threat. Continue education efforts started by Maggie [Mangan] on 

volcanic crisis awareness among local first responders. Barriers include high agency turnover especially 

in key positions. Education and tabletop exercises 

need to be a continuing effort to combat high agency 

turnover. Complacency is a real barrier. Thirdly, start 

the discussion with our park superintendent on what he 

expects to do in rehabilitation of the park posteruption. 

It would be beneficial to have some of those conversations now and get the thought processes going.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• I am not sure what is going on right now in the Long 

Valley area. I will gain more insight once that part of 

the exchange is completed. 

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• We have it pretty good in the sense that our emergency management is much more integrated at the 

national, State and local levels to handle large-scale 

crisis. However, the Chileans have a lot more experience at it. Volcanoes seem to be erupting all the time 

there. My biggest worry on the U.S. side is complacency . . . getting folks to realize there are issues and 

real concrete things they should do to prepare. We 

can expect a concerted effort to repair and repopulate 

any affected areas post eruption. We as a society 

will continue to rebuild in known hazard zones. 

Examples can be found everywhere from Hurricane 

Katrina, superstorm Sandy, and other such events.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• Not much to be improved upon; delegation seemed 

to be a great mix of people. Pretrip briefing was 

outstanding. Well informed before leaving. Travel 

logistics were almost too nice. Only real improvement would be the ground transportation for the 

Temuco to Puerto Montt section. Pretty rough all 

being crammed in such small vans. Biggest pains 

were negotiating the bureaucracy of getting approvals to go, the long timelines needed to obtain an official passport, and complexities of the travel-voucher 

system upon return. It would be very beneficial to 

have a sample international travel voucher for travel 

folks to review, or someone who really knew the 

system to be available for support during the travelauthorization and travel-voucher process.

U.S. Delegate Response 3

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• Multihazards that the country experiences, with volcanos being a key hazard. The approach to managing 

various hazards with clear, outlined response plans.

• The importance of having a plan to engage volunteers and repopulation of a hazard area.

• The importance of supporting resiliency and engaging a community to be part of the response.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• Enhance volcanic awareness training. (Need subject 

matter experts and funding to provide the training.)

• Development of a regional volcano-hazard mitigation plan.

• Coordinate with local jurisdictions a communitypreparedness education campaign regarding vol-
30 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

cano hazards. (Need support of local jurisdiction to 

commit resources and local voluntary organizations 

active in disasters (VOADS).)

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• Dedicated trained staff who become more subjectmatter experts within the Cal OES region to support 

internal staff and external stakeholders in mitigation/

planning for a volcanic event in Long Valley.

• Develop a list of best practices in coordination and 

response to a volcanic event.

• Conduct a volcanic-hazard exercise to identify areas 

of opportunity to improve response to such an event.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• I am much more knowledgeable of the dangers and 

impacts of a volcanic eruption and the preparedness 

that is needed at the local level to ensure the protection of life and property. I don’t think people who 

live near volcanic areas realize the serious impacts 

due to the low level of activity in California versus 

other volcanic regions.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• Previsit briefings would be helpful versus waiting a 

few days before the trip to review logistics. 

• Also, an online volcanic course or awareness course 

should be a prerequisite for participating in the 

exchange. 

• The days were too long in Chile making it difficult 

to be effective in end-of-the-day discussions to get 

the full value of the presentations. 

• End-of-the-day delegate briefings would be helpful 

to ensure we are capturing key lessons learned for 

the day to report back to our respective agencies.

U.S. Delegate Response 4

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• First, an appreciation for the organizational structure 

we have to respond to State and (or) national emergencies. Second, the importance of communication 

and sharing of information before, during, and after 

an emergency/evacuation. Finally, the importance of 

developing local resources and capacity.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• In regard to volcanoes in the United States or more 

specifically California, it is important to start the 

dialog and share information with local resources. 

To do that it will be important to coordinate with 

local entities and work together on a scenario that 

involves an eruption and evacuation. Develop information and contacts for addressing an emergency 

in this landscape. I think the biggest barrier is that 

people don’t necessarily want to admit that they may 

live within a hazard zone.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• Develop the network of contacts, as well as roles 

and responsibilities, to be PREPARED for a future 

volcano crisis.

• Share information on what is being done now, what 

information is being gathered and how will that be 

used.

• Use the ICS as a tool for emergency management.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• I think what struck me was the timeframes involved 

with volcano hazards. The volcanic eruption in Chaitén was relatively long ago and to see the conditions 

of that community now was rather sobering. Oftentimes we work with wildland fires that are generally 

not so long-lasting in duration and with weather conditions the hazards may be reduced. I was struck by 

the fact that volcano hazards are ALWAYS there and 

evacuations may be ongoing for quite some time. All 

of that made me think that we are unprepared for an 

eruption.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• I think the briefings and all the meetings were very 

good. Initially I had trouble grasping the organiza-
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 31

tional structure but that became clear through the 

meetings and discussions. I think this particular 

exchange covered the gamut in terms of all the various levels of organization, which was very good. I 

think moving down from the national to the local 

level provided insightful discussions. I think it really 

went very well, and I can’t think of anything I would 

recommend changing.

U.S. Delegate Response 5

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• Planning for geologic hazards and response to 

natural disasters is highly dependent on the overall 

system of government. The highly centralized planning and emergency-response system in Chile may 

make adoption of procedures from the U.S. system 

very difficult. Natural-hazard information in Chile is 

highly fragmented among government departments 

and academic institutions. They may be able to learn 

from the example of California, where the Caltech, 

Berkeley, USGS, and CGS networks have been 

melded into the California Integrated Seismic Network—with encouragement funding from Cal OES.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• At this point, I don’t see a need for changes within 

the scope of my job. Possibly after the second half of 

the exchange in September.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• At this point I don’t see a need for changes in the 

status quo regarding my agency’s planning for 

events at Long Valley—maybe after we visit and 

talk about planning, monitoring, and consequences 

of specific events there. I do see a need for detailed 

descriptions of the possible consequences of different types of volcanic eruptions at Long Valley. Such 

“planning scenarios” are a key means for communicating science to emergency managers.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• Even though I still view volcano hazards as a relatively low-level threat to California (compared to 

earthquakes, flooding, and landslides) the range and 

severity of volcano hazards needs to be effectively 

communicated to emergency managers. 

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• I’m very impressed that this exchange, set up by 

volcanologists, decided to focus on emergency 

response and recovery. That focus, and the representation of emergency-response professionals, seems 

to be where the most improvement can be made. We 

saw pretty vividly in Chile that the communication 

between scientists, emergency managers, and the 

public needs to be worked on and improved. The 

interaction between the U.S. and Chilean emergency 

managers seemed to go really well and has the most 

potential for positive change in the way Chileans 

organize their emergency response.

• There seems to be good representation from regional 

and local government among the Chilean delegates, 

but no representative of local government or emergency-response agencies among the U.S. delegates. 

• The logistics of the Chile trip worked well (although 

the drive from Temuco to Puerto Varas took more 

time and was less interesting/scenic than hoped). My 

only regret is that I didn’t learn more of the government structure of Chile before going. My answers to 

the pretrip questionnaire assumed a California-like 

system, where planning and development decisions 

are made at the local level. Clearly, some major decisions in Chile are supposed to be made in Santiago, 

but I’m still not sure of the roles of regional and 

provincial government.

U.S. Delegate Response 6

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• I learned that the emergency-response process in 

Chile is similar to California’s, with some exceptions.

• Chile faces some of the same challenges that we 

have also faced in the past, such as communicating 

and coordinating effectively with our local partners and dealing with politics during emergency 

responses.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 
32 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• I feel that we need more focus and awareness of the 

volcano threats that exist here in California. I have 

been working here for 8 years and was not aware of 

the high threat potential volcanoes that exist in our 

State and can also say that many in our department 

are also not aware of these threats. I will be recommending to our deputy director of preparedness that 

Cal OES needs to make the department more aware 

of volcanic threats and perhaps have an exercise on 

how we would respond to a volcanic eruption.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• (1) Finalize efforts to develop a volcano-hazard 

response plan, (2) raise awareness of the need 

for increased coordination among agencies, and 

(3) exercise the plan once developed.

• Of course, volcano planning requires available staff 

time and a budget that competes with earthquake 

preparedness and tsunami planning as an agency 

priority.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• Yes, my views have changed significantly. I was 

not aware of the volcano threats that we face here 

in California. I think that our department needs to 

increase awareness on preparing and responding to 

this threat. Schools and the public that live within 

volcano-hazard areas should be made aware of the 

dangers of a volcanic eruption, have a preparedness 

plan, and practice their plan on an ongoing basis.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• Overall, the exchange experience and coordination 

was great. The number of delegates was adequate, 

and you brought expertise from various disciplines 

and scheduled meetings with our appropriate counterparts. I learned a great deal from this experience 

and it reinforced that our mutual aid system in California is great. I also think they would benefit if we 

provided them with a briefing or presentation on our 

specific discipline, such as in my case, emergencyresponse process or California’s mutual-aid system. 

This way, representatives in Chile would have the 

opportunity to learn from our system. In regards to 

logistics, I would recommend hiring or leasing the 

delegation’s own van and driver.

U.S. Delegate Response 7

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• The trip to Chile made me more aware and gave me 

some understanding of the potential for volcanic 

activity in the Long Valley Caldera and risks and 

hazards that could be present if to occur.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• First would be to enlighten my colleagues in incident 

management of the potential risks and hazards associated and the potential reality of an incident locally.

• Second is to learn what precautions and preplanning 

has been implemented here [Long Valley] in the 

past, revisit those plans, and update them and spread 

awareness.

• Third, I have thought a lot about spreading awareness of different types of natural-disaster scenarios 

and what is the best way to get that word out to 

residences, transient visitors, and others effectively. 

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo? 

• That’s a tough one. Awareness as stated is one. We 

cannot focus just on volcanoes but should include 

all natural disasters. We live with fire every year 

and still do not have a message that really gets to 

everyone with all the (1) risks and hazards that can 

be mitigated to prevent wildfires or (2) procedures to 

follow in the event of a natural disaster (for example, 

evacuation routes).

• I believe that the ICS that is used by emergency 

responders works and would work in the event of an 

eruption within Long Valley Caldera.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed? 

• I learned a lot about the hazards volcanoes can 

exhibit, which I did not know before. So instead of 

changing my view, it opened up a new vista.
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 33

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else? 

• I don’t have much here. I thought the logistics went 

well, and I cannot complain about accommodations. 

I thought the quality of subject matter experts from 

the Chilean side was adequate. The U.S. delegate 

group was engaged and meddled well together. I felt 

from previsit briefings and correspondence that I was 

prepared for the trip.

• It was difficult (1) from an emergency-responder 

point of view and (2) trying to learn the Chilean 

command system and having meaningful conversations without a translator versed in the subject.

U.S. Delegate Response 8

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• Chile faces many of the same hazards that Baja 

California, California, Oregon, and Washington have 

to prepare for. The Chilean emergency-management 

programs and hazard-monitoring networks in place 

are well developed. Disseminating pertinent information to the public is difficult, owing to access 

to communities and the time constraints placed on 

management and monitoring organizations. Each 

community at the base of a given volcano will have 

similar yet different hazards so each management 

plan has to be customized individually. I do not 

understand the separation of the tectonic seismic 

network (and not registering events less than magnitude 3) from the volcanic seismic network. Small 

volcanic earthquakes may not reach all distant seismometers, but some might, especially if it is a larger 

volcanic event. Similarly, a tectonic event may have 

an effect on a volcanic center.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• Better awareness and education to the public servants that greet visitors upon arrival, including welcome center staff, USFS staff, and Devils Postpile 

National Monument staff.

• Implement public-outreach programs for the school 

systems and summer interpretive programs during 

the busy summer season. Work with local schools to 

get information to non-English-speaking populations 

(mostly Spanish).

• Some in Mono County may not like to accept that 

several communities live on the edge of potentially 

active volcanic centers.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo? 

• Review and update the emergency-response plan. 

Not necessarily updating sections on seismic activity 

but updating information on key USGS officials, 

emergency responders, and evacuation plans.

• Remind emergency managers, public-land managers, and communities that volcano hazards are a real 

potential in California and dangerous conditions can 

develop without an actual eruption.

• Review what is on the USGS, FEMA, Cal OES 

information and make sure people know it is available. Do a presentation for the local Community 

Emergency Response Team (CERT).

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• California has several volcanic centers that the 

public and emergency managers are unaware of or 

have not had to respond to. Emergency managers 

are more accustomed to dealing with hazards like 

earthquakes, floods, fires, and other weather related 

events. The lack of recent volcanic activity in the 

“lower 48” [States] has put volcano hazards more 

on the back burner. It is better to be prepared for a 

nonevent than to be caught off guard.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• The presentations were well done and informative. 

The schedule was possibly a bit too busy with little 

time for reflection or to catch up with the information given at a given presentation(s). As an interpreter, it would have been beneficial to have had a 

chance to review presentations before interpreting 

them, but I understand that is not always possible.

• I have been impressed by “nuevas noticias” on the 

Web page related to education and outreach that 

include a new video in Spanish “what is a volcano,” 

a public meeting in Puerto Montt about Calbuco 

Volcano, ironically a week or so before the eruption.
34 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

U.S. Delegate Response 9

1. What key insights have you gained from the visit to 

Chile (from a broad perspective)?

• I really enjoyed the time in Chaitén and speaking 

with local officials and private citizens about the 

2008 evacuation and life today in the community. 

I thought the discussion about the evacuations, the 

sheltering, and the current evolution of the Chaitén 

community was the highlight of the trip. As for key 

insights in Chaitén, I guess it was learning about the 

parallel efforts of public officials and community 

members attempting to recover from the eruption. 

They were often complementary but sometimes 

conflicting on the vision for the community and at 

the business/household level. I also enjoyed the time 

in Santiago/Temuco and seeing their monitoring and 

operations. One insight from the time in Santiago is 

that [Chile’s] USGS and FEMA equivalents seem 

to be well connected and coordinated. It seems they 

work very well together.

2. Name three specific changes that you will try to apply 

personally within the scope of your job, based on what 

you have learned. Do you see barriers to their implementation?

• I enjoyed the discussion with the ranger from 

Pumalín Park. I will now try to look more into park 

issues, not just visitors but also ecosystem goods and 

services represented by the parks. I am also intrigued 

by the sheltering issues during evacuations and how 

to quantify/map some of those quality-of-life and 

socioeconomic issues. Perhaps look at neighboring 

communities to understand evacuee capacity when 

we do vulnerability assessments. We could focus 

on indirect impacts to neighboring communities, 

instead of just looking at direct impacts for communities in hazard zones. A similar issue occurred with 

Hurricane Katrina in that many communities (as far 

away as Atlanta) were impacted because of refugees 

streaming in and overwhelming local services. I 

imagine the same could happen with an evacuation 

from a U.S. volcano.

3. Identify three key recommendations you would like 

to make to management within your agency to more 

effectively deal with a future volcano crisis at Long 

Valley. In other words, what changes would you like to 

see in the status quo?

• Hard to say, because I’m not in the USGS Volcano 

Hazards Program. However, I do look forward to 

continuing to work with you all at CVO and CalVO 

on issues of societal vulnerability to volcano hazards. So many opportunities in the near future. As for 

changes in the status quo at the USGS, it would be 

great to see volcano vulnerability research become 

even more recognized at the program level, instead 

of only individual efforts led by passionate and 

supportive volcanologists. Much could be done at 

the program level in terms of analysis (for example, 

national assessment of population exposure to volcano hazards) that could complement National Volcano Early Warning System (NVEWS) and support 

local efforts with external partners. Related, there 

could be community/practitioner-based vulnerability 

and needs assessments to gauge primary issues at 

each volcano. They would involve holding meetings 

with key practitioners to understand key vulnerabilities in various sectors that would help inform the 

type of warnings and hazard assessments that may 

be needed locally.

4. After seeing the situation in Chile, have your views on 

volcano hazards in California changed?

• My views haven’t changed, just confirmed that 

California has volcano hazards and there is much to 

be done.

5. How could this exchange experience be improved? For 

example, please comment on logistics, number of delegates and expertise represented, delegate interactions, 

previsit briefings, or anything else?

• I thought the exchange went very well, including 

translations and logistics. I was very happy with 

how the trip played out and enjoyed the emphasis on 

how public officials plan for, respond to, and recover 

from volcano hazards. Although we don’t have any 

California communities recovering from a catastrophic volcano eruption, I hope the California part 

of the exchange will focus as well on the emergencymanagement aspects of the volcano hazards, perhaps 

even do a tabletop exercise with officials and a 

practitioner-based vulnerability assessment (that is, 

not huge community meeting, perhaps 20 folks at 

most).

• I thought the number of delegates was great. As for 

improvements in hindsight, it would have been nice 

to have a county emergency manager represented in 

the group, perhaps from Shasta or Mammoth. also 

perhaps someone from FEMA Region IX. As for 

interactions in Chile, it would have been nice to have 

more time speaking one on one with the community 

members in Villarrica, who had just experienced the 

volcano eruptions (two weeks before) so their experiences with understanding and acting upon volcano 

hazards information is priceless. As for delegate 

interactions, it may have been nice to give everyone 

in the U.S. delegation a chance to present/discuss 

what they do before going down there (for example, 
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 35

webex back here in the States) or perhaps on the first 

day in Chile. People’s expertise and backgrounds 

emerged slowly over the trip, but it would have 

been nice to have a better handle before going to 

maximize discussions. The bios were nice but didn’t 

really capture people’s expertise.

Chilean Delegate Responses to California 

Posttrip Questionnaire

Chilean Delegate Response 1

1. What key ideas that you have obtained from the visit 

to California (from a broad perspective)? ¿Qué ideas 

clave que has obtenido de la visita a California (desde una 

perspectiva amplia)?

• El conocimiento geológico es fundamental para la 

correcta definición de escenarios futuros y su potencial mitigación. Geological knowledge is essential 

for the correct definition of future scenarios and 

potential mitigation.

• -La comunidad debe ser continuamente educada con 

respecto a los peligros que representan su entorno y 

en conocimiento de las medidas que se deben seguir 

en caso de una emergencia. The community must be 

continually educated about the dangers of their environment and knowledge of measures to be followed 

in case of an emergency.

• La estructura y organización del manejo de crisis 

deben estar definidas y consensuadas entre todos 

los actores relevantes en forma previa a un evento 

natural catastrófico, independiente de su naturaleza. 

The structure and organization of crisis management 

should be defined and agreed upon by all relevant 

stakeholders in advance of a catastrophic natural 

event, independent of its nature.

2. Identify three specific changes that you are going to 

try applying personally within the scope of your work, 

based on what you’ve learned. Do you see barriers to 

implementation? Identificar tres cambios específicos que 

vas a tratar de solicitar personalmente en el ámbito de tu 

trabajo, con base en lo que has aprendido. ¿Ves barreras 

para su implementación? 

• Mayor contacto con las comunidades locales en los 

distintos lugares donde realizamos estudios geológicos. Increased contact with local communities in 

various places where we conduct geological studies.

• Orientar la manera de comunicación escrita hacia 

una mejor comprensión para el público no-técnico, 

evitando términos que a veces resultan demasiado 

específicos. Guide the way of written communication 

to a better understanding for a nontechnical audience, avoiding terms that are sometimes too specific.

• Impulsar la interacción entre las distintas agencias 

relacionados a la evaluación y manejo de crisis 

mediante seminarios y reuniones periódicas. Encourage interaction among the different agencies related 

to the assessment and crisis management through 

seminars and regular meetings.

3. Are there any recommendations you would make to 

management within your agency to deal more effectively with future volcanic crisis in Chile? In other 

words, what changes would you like to see in the status 

quo? ¿Hay recomendaciones que te gustaría hacer a la 

gestión dentro de tu agencia para hacer frente de manera 

más eficaz con una futura crisis volcánica en Chile? En 

otras palabras, ¿qué cambios te gustaría ver en el status 

quo?

• Una relación más estrecha con otras instituciones, 

estableciendo claramente cuáles son las responsabilidades asociadas a las distintas agencias en el 

país. Dentro de mi propia agencia, recomendaría 

la creación de un equipo que pudiera establecer las 

relaciones comunicacionales directamente con los 

medios y que el flujo de información no dependiera 

de los geólogos o sismólogos involucrados en la 

atención de las crisis volcánicas. De esta manera se 

asegura un mayor enfoque en la evaluación de la 

crisis y en los requerimientos de las autoridades. A 

closer relationship with other institutions, clearly 

stating what responsibilities are associated with 

each of the various agencies in the country. Within 

my own agency, I would recommend creating a team 

that could establish relationships directly with the 

media, so that the flow of information would not be 

dependent on geologists and seismologists who are 

involved in dealing with the volcanic crisis. This 

would ensure both a greater focus on the assessment 

of the crisis and greater attention to the requirements of the authorities.

• Finalmente, tal como ocurre en EE.UU., recomendaría la creación de distintos observatorios 

volcanológicos a lo largo del país, los cuales tengan 

capacidad independiente para realizar monitoreo 

volcánico en tiempo real y estudios de peligros.

Finally, as in the United States, I would recommend 

creating different volcanological observatories 

throughout the country, which have independent 

ability to perform real-time volcanic monitoring and 

hazard studies.

4. After seeing the situation in California, have you 

changed your views on volcanic risk and preparedness 

in Chile? Después de ver la situación en California, ¿han 
36 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

cambiado tus puntos de vista sobre riesgo volcánico y la 

preparación en Chile? 

• En términos de monitoreo volcánico, pienso que 

estamos a un nivel bastante avanzado en nuestro 

país. Sin embargo, aún estamos lejos de tener un 

conocimiento geológico detallado de los volcanes 

más peligrosos de Chile y el análisis de los peligros 

asociados, por ejemplo en términos de recurrencia 

eruptiva o análisis probabilísticos. In terms of volcano monitoring, I think we are at a fairly advanced 

level in our country. However, we are still far from 

having a detailed geological knowledge of the most 

dangerous volcanoes in Chile and analysis of associated risk; for example, in terms of eruptive recurrence or probabilistic analysis.

• Por otra parte, la educación de la población civil 

y autoridades sobre geología y volcanismo es aún 

básica y por lo tanto puede afectar negativamente en 

la preparación de la población ante una crisis. Moreover, the education of the civilian population and 

authorities on geology and volcanism is still basic 

and therefore may adversely affect the preparation of 

the population before a crisis.

5. How can we improve this experience exchange? For 

example, please comment on the logistics, the number of delegates and experts represented, delegates’ 

interactions, information meetings prior to the visit, or 

anything else. ¿Cómo podría mejorarse esta experiencia 

de intercambio? Por ejemplo, por favor comente sobre la 

logística, el número de delegados y expertos representado, 

interacciones de delegados, reuniones de información 

previa a la visita, o cualquier otra cosa. 

• En general me pareció una excelente experiencia en 

términos de logística y del número de participantes, 

pues lo hace bastante manejable. Creo que la principal dificultad fue la barrera idiomática, pues hay 

aspectos relevantes que pueden quedar sin discusión 

por la no comprensión inmediata de los tópicos 

tratados. Adicionalmente, a las actividades realizadas 

agregaría al menos una sesión de mesas de trabajo 

donde fuese posible discutir en grupos pequeños un 

tema específico en profundidad. Overall, I found it a 

great experience in terms of logistics and the number 

of participants; it makes it quite manageable. I think 

the main difficulty was the language barrier, as there 

are relevant aspects that may be left without discussion, preventing a full understanding of the topics 

covered. Additionally, the exchange activities could 

also include at least one session where it would be 

possible for small groups to discuss a specific topic 

in depth.

Chilean Delegate Response 2

1. What key ideas that you have obtained from the visit 

to California (from a broad perspective)? ¿Qué ideas 

clave que has obtenido de la visita a California (desde una 

perspectiva amplia)? 

• Los volcanes activos no solo son aquellos que han 

hecho una erupción reciente. Active volcanoes are 

not only those that have had a recent eruption.

• El gran riesgo en que se encuentra la población 

ubicada en Mammoth Lake y en el Valle de la Gran 

Caldera. The big risk is for the population located in 

Mammoth Lakes and in the large caldera.

• Los estudios más recientes relacionados con la 

gestión de emergencias a través de la información 

geológica (presentación de Nate). The most recent 

studies relate emergency management to geological 

information (Nate [Wood]’s presentation).

• Descentralización del sistema de emergencias y 

comprender cómo en EEUU el modelo es desde el 

nivel local hacia arriba. Decentralization of emergency-management system in the United States and 

understanding how the model works from the local 

level upwards.

2. Identify three specific changes that you are going to 

try applying personally within the scope of your work, 

based on what you’ve learned. Do you see barriers to 

implementation? Identificar tres cambios específicos que 

vas a tratar de solicitar personalmente en el ámbito de tu 

trabajo, con base en lo que has aprendido. ¿Ves barreras 

para su implementación? 

• Reevaluar la pertinencia de continuar realizando 

capacitaciones CERT directas a la comunidad o bien 

a través de una institución especializada que sea 

agente multiplicador porque la capacidad de ONEMI 

es baja y el impacto es menor. A través de una 

institución es más favorable. La principal barrera es 

el presupuesto de la institución. Reevaluate the relevance of CERT teams in helping communities versus help through a specialized institution that could 

be a [an assistance] multiplier, because [currently] 

ONEMI’s capacity is low and its impact is minor. In 

general, the potential of an institution is greater. The 

main barrier is the budget of the institution.

• Generar e impulsar campañas de difusión pertinentes 

a cómo actuar en emergencias volcánicas, actualizando las ya existentes. Generate and promote 

campaigns of information dissemination relevant to 

how to act in volcanic emergencies, updating existing ones.
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 37

• Aumentar el número de profesionales especializados 

en SCI, el cual permitirá poder desenvolverse en 

emergencias en terreno como también comprender 

mejor la gestión de estas en el gabinete. Increase 

the number of specialized professionals in SCI, who 

would be able to function in the field during emergencies and also look at how to better manage these 

personnel.

3. Are there any recommendations you would make to 

management within your agency to deal more effectively with future volcanic crisis in Chile? In other 

words, what changes would you like to see in the status 

quo? ¿Hay recomendaciones que te gustaría hacer a la 

gestión dentro de tu agencia para hacer frente de manera 

más eficaz con una futura crisis volcánica en Chile? En 

otras palabras, ¿qué cambios te gustaría ver en el status 

quo? 

• Potenciar las campañas de difusión de riesgo volcánico. Strengthen [information] campaigns about 

volcanic risk.

• Trabajar los planes de emergencia y evacuación de 

cada volcán con la comunidad. Develop emergency 

and evacuation plans with the local communities for 

each volcano.

• Generación de estudios de tiempos de evacuación 

una vez que ya se han realizado los estudios básicos 

que indican áreas de inundación, vías de evacuación 

y puntos de encuentro. Generate studies of [community] evacuation times once basic studies of inundation areas, evacuation route, and meeting points 

have been completed.

• Diseñar mejor logística en los procesos de evacuación. Design better logistics in the evacuation 

process.

4. After seeing the situation in California, have you 

changed your views on volcanic risk and preparedness 

in Chile? Después de ver la situación en California, ¿han 

cambiado tus puntos de vista sobre riesgo volcánico y la 

preparación en Chile? 

• Siempre se aprende más, es posible generar mejoras 

a lo que actualmente se hace. You can always learn 

more and make improvements to what is currently 

done.

• A diferencia de California, los volcanes han presentado registros históricos muy antiguos de erupciones 

y en Chile, no podemos dedicarnos a los volcanes 

que han tenido erupciones tan antiguas, porque 

tenemos muchos volcanes activos con erupciones en 

los últimos años. Desde 2008, Chaitén, Puyehue–

Cordón Caulle, Villarrica, Copahue, Calbuco. Unlike 

in California, where [many] volcanoes only have 

records of ancient eruptions, in Chile we cannot dedicate ourselves to the volcanoes that have only had 

ancient eruptions, because we have so many active 

volcanoes with recent eruptions. For example, since 

2008,Chaitén, Puyehue-Cordón Caulle, Villarrica, 

Copahue, and Calbuco [Volcanoes have erupted].

5. How can we improve this experience exchange? For 

example, please comment on the logistics, the number of delegates and experts represented, delegates’ 

interactions, information meetings prior to the visit, or 

anything else. ¿Cómo podría mejorarse esta experiencia 

de intercambio? Por ejemplo, por favor comente sobre la 

logística, el número de delegados y expertos representado, 

interacciones de delegados, reuniones de información 

previa a la visita, o cualquier otra cosa. 

• La logística preparada fue correcta y muy eficiente. 

The logistical preparations were correct and very 

efficient.

• Los tiempos empleados también se cumplieron a la 

perfección. Use of time available was also fulfilled to 

perfection.

• Los traslados fueron cómodos y los horarios 

establecidos también muy correctos. The transfers 

[between cities] were comfortable and the schedules 

established were very appropriate.

• Es muy importante poder acercar a los especialistas geólogos con los gestionadores de emergencia, 

porque la experiencia se hace más enriquecedora. It 

is very important to bring together geological specialists with the emergency managers because that 

makes the experience richer.

Chilean Delegate Response 3

1. What key ideas that you have obtained from the visit 

to California (from a broad perspective)? ¿Qué ideas 

clave que has obtenido de la visita a California (desde una 

perspectiva amplia)? 

• Que tenemos mucho que mejorar en las políticas de 

nuestro país. Estos cambios políticos deben conducir 

a la integración de diferentes servicios y que se 

cuente con autoridades conocedoras de las consecuencias del volcanismo y de cómo afrontar medidas 

para su mitigación hacia la población. We have a 

lot to improve in the policies of our country. These 

policy changes should lead to the integration of 

different services and to knowledgeable authorities 

who understand the consequences of volcanism and 

how to carry out mitigation measures for affected 

populations.
38 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

2. Identify three specific changes that you are going to 

try applying personally within the scope of your work, 

based on what you’ve learned. Do you see barriers to 

implementation? Identificar tres cambios específicos que 

vas a tratar de solicitar personalmente en el ámbito de tu 

trabajo, con base en lo que has aprendido. ¿Ves barreras 

para su implementación? 

• Compartir datos con otras instituciones, para 

complementar redes de monitoreo en tiempo real. 

Como barrera veo la falta de disposición de parte de 

algunos colegas en abrir los datos desde el SERNAGEOMIN. Share data with other institutions, to 

implement monitoring networks in real time. A barrier I see is the unwillingness of some colleagues to 

make data available from SERNAGEOMIN.

• Generar difusión del conocimiento hacia la 

población, mediante talleres, charlas y entrevistas con las personas. No hay barreras, pues es una 

actividad complementaria al asistir a terreno. Se 

maneja la idea hace mucho tiempo de desarrollar 

este tipo de actividades como rol institucional y que 

no se restrinja a iniciativas personales. Se tratará 

de retomar esta iniciativa para enmarcarla dentro 

de los compromisos institucionales. Generate dissemination of knowledge to the population, through 

workshops, lectures, and interviews with people. 

There are no barriers, it is a complementary activity 

to assist [people] on the ground. The idea is handled 

much time by developing such activities as institutional role ago and not by restricting it to personal 

initiatives. Advancement of this initiative will need 

to be framed within [existing] institutional commitments.

• Crear planes de evacuación y atención de crisis 

volcánica con integrantes de la región (autoridades, 

fuerzas armadas y demás servicios públicos). La 

única barrera es la multiplicidad de tareas, por lo que 

se requiere de mayor personal en la oficina. Create evacuation plans and volcanic crisis response 

plans together with the various entities of the region 

(authorities, armed forces and other public services). 

The only barrier is the increase in jobs, so it requires 

more personnel in the office.

3. Are there any recommendations you would make to 

management within your agency to deal more effectively with future volcanic crisis in Chile? In other 

words, what changes would you like to see in the status 

quo? ¿Hay recomendaciones que te gustaría hacer a la 

gestión dentro de tu agencia para hacer frente de manera 

más eficaz con una futura crisis volcánica en Chile? En 

otras palabras, ¿qué cambios te gustaría ver en el status 

quo? 

• Me gustaría participar de las reuniones de toma de 

decisión respecto a los cambios de alerta y también 

participar de las discusiones técnicas. Una recomendación a mi institución, entonces, será: la integración de diferentes departamentos y unidades del 

SERNAGEOMIN a la comprensión del fenómeno 

volcánico, por ejemplo, la unidad de Geotermia, de 

Geofísica. I would like to attend meetings for decision making with respect to changes of alert levels 

and also to participate in the technical discussions. 

A recommendation to my institution, then, is: the 

integration of different departments and units of 

SERNAGEOMIN to improve the understanding of 

volcanic phenomena, for example, the units Geothermal and Geophysics.

4. After seeing the situation in California, have you 

changed your views on volcanic risk and preparedness 

in Chile? Después de ver la situación en California, ¿han 

cambiado tus puntos de vista sobre riesgo volcánico y la 

preparación en Chile? 

• Me asombra el grado de coordinación y respeto que 

vi en U.S. Espero contribuir a mejoras en el futuro 

para mi país. I am amazed at the level of coordination and respect that I saw in United States. I hope 

to contribute to improvements in the future for my 

country.

5. How can we improve this experience exchange? For 

example, please comment on the logistics, the number of delegates and experts represented, delegates’ 

interactions, information meetings prior to the visit, or 

anything else. ¿Cómo podría mejorarse esta experiencia 

de intercambio? Por ejemplo, por favor comente sobre la 

logística, el número de delegados y expertos representado, 

interacciones de delegados, reuniones de información 

previa a la visita, o cualquier otra cosa. 

• Todo me pareció perfecto. Propondría generar un 

intercambio donde se incluya también un componente político, para educar a esos funcionarios, que 

son quienes delinean los caminos sobre los cuales 

transitamos como sociedad. Everything seemed perfect to me. I would suggest generating an exchange 

that also includes a political component, in order to 

educate those public officials who [make decisions 

affecting how our societies work].

Chilean Delegate Response 4

1. What key ideas that you have obtained from the visit 

to California (from a broad perspective)? ¿Qué ideas 

clave que has obtenido de la visita a California (desde una 

perspectiva amplia)? 
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 39

• Comparto las ideas de Carlos sobre los aprendizajes 

obtenidos respecto a aspectos culturales, el rol de 

los comunicadores, quienes son los voceros, la 

institucionalidad y marco legal y la necesidad de 

capacitación y entrenamiento a todo nivel. Me permito incluir que llamo mi atención cómo el conocimiento y práctica del mundo científico se acerca a 

la comunidad, acá en Chile comúnmente lo situamos 

“afuera”, pero me pareció interesante que la gente de 

USGS participe de la socialización hacia las comunidades, al escucharlos se deja de ver a los volcanes, 

fallas geológicas , etc. como meros elementos del 

paisaje o por el contario como terribles amenazas 

que ponen en peligro a las comunidades, lo son en 

uno y otro caso por cierto, pero conocer el fenómeno ayuda a entender que conductas humanas son 

posibles de modificar. Share the ideas of Carlos 

[Zambrano Fernández]on the lessons learned about 

cultural aspects, the role of journalists, who are the 

spokespersons, the institutional and legal framework, and the need for education and training at all 

levels. I would add that what caught my attention 

was how knowledge and practice from the scientific 

world is brought to the community. Here in Chile 

often we keep [science] “outside” [of our dealings 

with communities], but I found it interesting that 

USGS people participate in [communicating hazards 

information to] communities and that people hear 

that volcanoes, geologic faults, and other features 

are [not] mere elements of the landscape but are 

terrible threats that also endanger the communities 

in which they occur. However, knowing the phenomenon helps people understand that human behaviors 

can be changed.

• Esto refuerza la idea de educar, las comunidades 

aun viviendo al lado de la amenazas volcánicas por 

dar un ejemplo (como el caso de Mammoth Lake 

o de Chaiten) , pueden ser educadas para conocer 

esta amenaza y aprender a convivir con ella. This 

reinforces the idea that communities still living next 

to the volcanoes can be educated about hazards—for 

example, in the cases of Mammoth Lake or Chaitén [Volcano]. People can be educated to meet this 

threat and learn to live with it.

2. Identify three specific changes that you are going to 

try applying personally within the scope of your work, 

based on what you’ve learned. Do you see barriers to 

implementation? Identificar tres cambios específicos que 

vas a tratar de solicitar personalmente en el ámbito de tu 

trabajo, con base en lo que has aprendido. ¿Ves barreras 

para su implementación?

• Sugerir que OFDA siga apoyando a USGS para 

continuar este programa porque es valioso generar 

estos intercambios. Suggest that [USAID-]OFDA 

continue to support USGS to continue this program 

because these exchanges are valuable.

• Promover un acercamiento de OFDA y SERNAGEOMIN. Promote a relationship between 

[USAID-]OFDA and SERNAGOEMIN.

• Promover que la comunidad de Chaiten postule a un 

programa de small grants de OFDA para apoyarlos 

en su esfuerzo de educar y preparar a la comunidad 

frente al riesgo volcánico. Encourage the community 

of Chaitén to apply for a program of small grants 

from [USAID-]OFDA to support their effort to 

educate and prepare the community for the volcanic 

risk.

3. Are there any recommendations you would make to 

management within your agency to deal more effectively with future volcanic crisis in Chile? In other 

words, what changes would you like to see in the status 

quo? ¿Hay recomendaciones que te gustaría hacer a la 

gestión dentro de tu agencia para hacer frente de manera 

más eficaz con una futura crisis volcánica en Chile? En 

otras palabras, ¿qué cambios te gustaría ver en el status 

quo? 

• Desde el rol que a USAID-OFDA le compete, 

recomendaría apoyar eventos de diseminación de 

conocimiento científico y vinculación con comunidades, también si Onemi estuviera de acuerdo, poder 

entregarles asistencia técnica para optimizar el proceso de alerta temprana desde la perspectiva del trabajo de municipios, esto por las brechas que fueron 

identificadas durante la visita de campo a Chaiten y 

Pucon. From the role that USAID-OFDA [plays in 

being] responsible, I would recommend supporting 

events [by SERNAGEOMIN?] for dissemination of 

scientific knowledge to communities, even if ONEMI 

has already agreed to deliver technical assistance, 

in order to optimize the efforts of municipalities to 

provide early warning [during a crisis]. Gaps [in 

this flow of hazard information] were identified during our field visits to Chaitén and Pucón.

4. After seeing the situation in California, have you 

changed your views on volcanic risk and preparedness 

in Chile? Después de ver la situación en California, ¿han 

cambiado tus puntos de vista sobre riesgo volcánico y la 

preparación en Chile? 

• Si, es evidente que en California hay un proceso 

institucionalizado de trabajo, disponen de recursos 

y de un marco legal que faculta a las instituciones 

a trabajar bajo un mismo estándar (ICS). Yes, it is 

clear that in California there is an institutionalized 

process of work, available resources, and a legal 

framework that empowers institutions to work under 

one standard (ICS).
40 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

5. How can we improve this experience exchange? For 

example, please comment on the logistics, the number of delegates and experts represented, delegates’ 

interactions, information meetings prior to the visit, or 

anything else. ¿Cómo podría mejorarse esta experiencia 

de intercambio? Por ejemplo, por favor comente sobre la 

logística, el número de delegados y expertos representado, 

interacciones de delegados, reuniones de información 

previa a la visita, o cualquier otra cosa.

• En mi opinión el tamaño y diversidad de los grupos 

es el correcto, también la duración del programa. 

Solamente sugiero que en el presupuesto se considere a un traductor profesional, para asi optimizar 

la comunicación entre los participantes de EEUU 

y Chile. In my opinion, the size and diversity of the 

groups was correct, also the duration of the program. I would only suggest that the budget should 

have included funds for a professional translator to 

optimize communication between the participants 

from the United States and Chile.

Chilean Delegate Response 5

Preliminary comments. Comentarios Preliminares. 

• La pasantía fue una experiencia muy gratificante y 

muy interesante. El grupo hizo lo suyo también, ya 

que no siempre se participa en grupos tan colaborativos y amistosos como el que compartimos. Agradezco en forma especial a todos nuestros anfitriones 

en USA, que nos mostraron un profesionalismo, una 

calidez y una paciencia envidiable, muchas gracias. 

También en forma especial a Álvaro, por su consideración al invitarme. The internship was a very 

rewarding and interesting experience. The [Chilean] 

group also had this experience, because we seldom interact in ways that are as collaborative and 

friendly when we meet in groups.

• Si me lo permiten quisiera, a modo de ejercicio muy 

personal, compartir con ustedes algunas reflexiones 

sobre lo que vi en este intercambio, tratando de 

rescatar los conceptos y los desafíos y oportunidades 

que veo en el horizonte. Muchos de los comentarios 

que hago pueden sonar muy básicos y comunes, pero 

creo que la experiencia que tuvimos vale hacer una 

reflexión y el escribir ayuda. Agradezco desde ya 

al que se de el tiempo de leer y más aun si decide 

comentar. If I may, I would like, as a very personal 

exercise, to share with you some thoughts about 

what I saw in this exchange, while trying to extract 

the concepts, challenges, and opportunities that I 

see on the horizon [for the United States and Chile]. 

Many of the comments I am making may sound very 

basic and ordinary, but I think I can better reflect on 

our experience by writing. Thank you for reading 

this and for your thoughts if you choose to comment.

• Aspectos culturales y políticos. Cultural and political aspects:

• Es indiscutible que existe una gran diferencia 

política y cultural (cómo razonamos y actuamos 

como sociedad) entre USA y Chile, por lo que es 

obvio que no es posible “copiar” el sistema de 

manejo de emergencias que el Estado de California tiene implementado, tampoco en Chile es 

posible contar con los presupuestos con que ellos 

disponen, que nos parecen enormes. Sin embargo, 

creo que es posible rescatar los conceptos y 

trabajo sobre puntos críticos que vimos en nuestro 

intercambio. It is indisputable that there is great 

political and cultural difference (how we reason 

and act as a society) between the U.S.A. and 

Chile, so obviously it is not possible to “copy” 

the emergency-management system that the State 

of California has implemented, nor in Chile is 

it possible to have the budgets they have, which 

seem enormous. However, I think it is possible to 

extract the concepts and work on critical points 

that we saw on our exchange.

• Trabajo con los medios de comunicación y 

comunicadores sociales: Fue curioso conocer 

que los periodistas y comunicadores sociales de 

los Medios juegan en USA un papel clave en el 

manejo de emergencias, esto se da también en 

Chile. Resulta entonces que en Chile, al igual que 

en USA, debiésemos trabajar sobre los medios y 

comunicadores sociales en pro de que entiendan 

que su rol es determinante y pueden transformarse 

en un agente clave para un correcto manejo de la 

emergencia en una comunidad, creo que dándoles 

el reconocimiento y la importancia adecuada ellos 

podrían alinearse. Quizás debiesen ser incluidos 

en futuros cursos respecto de estos temas, ya 

que esto no redundaría en importantes costos de 

operación, también, tiene relación con que cada 

encargado de emergencia y/o alcalde se decida 

a trabajar esto en forma metódica y constante. I 

work with the media and journalists—It was interesting to recognize that journalists and the media 

in the U.S.A. play a key role in emergency management; this also occurs in Chile. It follows that 

in Chile, as in the U.S.A., we should work with the 

media and journalists (and give them training?), 

while recognizing that their roles are crucial 
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 41

and they can become key players (partners?) in 

the effective management of an emergency in a 

community. I think giving proper recognition and 

importance to them could promote alignment of 

interests. Maybe they should be included in future 

emergency-management courses, as this would 

not result in significant operating costs, but every 

emergency manager and (or) mayor has to decide 

how to work this out in a consistent way.

• Informantes locales y leguajes comunes: En la 

eventualidad de una emergencia, ya sea para contar con información temprana asertiva y precisa o 

por que la magnitud de la emergencia tiene caídos 

los mecanismos formales y habituales de comunicación, creo que al igual que con los medios 

de comunicación, se podría capacitar en materias 

de emergencias a los presidentes de juntas de 

vecinos, clubes deportivos, etc. Esto podría ayudar 

a implementar un lenguaje en común y universal 

para expresar, informar y evaluar preliminarmente 

una emergencia. Local informants speaking a 

common language—As with the media, I think you 

could provide training in emergency procedures 

to the presidents of neighborhood associations, 

sports clubs, [and other organizations], so that in 

the event of an emergency, they could communicate early information clearly and accurately, and 

communities wouldn’t have to rely on the usual 

formal communication mechanisms. 

• Credibilidad, vocería y oportunidad: Cuando te 

aproximas y trabajas en forma habitual con la 

comunidad, cumpliendo los compromisos adquiridos vas ganando credibilidad, que como vimos, es 

un factor clave en el manejo de emergencias. Al 

involucrar a las juntas de vecinos, clubes deportivos, etc. en capacitaciones de manejo de emergencias, se les hace parte del sistema y por lo tanto de 

la credibilidad y del entendimiento del proceso.

Credibility, spokespeople, and opportunity—

When you approach and routinely work with the 

community, fulfilling commitments made to them, 

you gain credibility, as we saw [working with a 

community in Parque Pumalín]. That credibility is 

a key factor in handling emergencies. By involving neighborhood associations, sports clubs, and 

others in emergency-management training, they 

are made part of the system by virtue of that credibility and understanding of the process.

• Una gran diferencia que vimos entre Chile y USA 

es el manejo de la vocería en la emergencia. Por 

lo poco que he visto y lo que escuché de ustedes, 

en Chile es habitual que el Alcalde sea el que 

haga la vocería, dada la responsabilidad que tiene 

en sobre el territorio y recursos, también, porque 

es una vitrina política. Sin embargo, esta vocería 

puede transformarse en un salvavidas de plomo 

si el manejo de la emergencia resulta mal o no se 

lleva la comunicación en forma asertiva y adecuada. Resulta clave, creo, que el COE (técnico) 

[Comité de Operaciones de Emergencia] otorgue 

al Alcalde esta atribución, pero sea el COE el 

que elabore los comunicados para que el Alcalde 

pueda “lucirse” y deje actuar a los equipos técnicos en la evaluación y propuestas de intervención.

One big difference we saw between Chile and the 

U.S.A. is in the management of the official voice 

in managing the emergency. From what little I’ve 

seen and what I heard from you, in Chile it is 

customary that the mayor is the official spokesperson, given the responsibility he/she has over [the 

local] territory and resources, and also because it 

is politically advantageous for such local officials 

[to take this role]. However, this responsibility 

can be transformed to a “lead lifejacket” if the 

handling of the emergency is bad [ineffective] or 

if the [warning or other hazard information] is 

not accurately or appropriately communicated. It 

is key, I believe that technically the COE [Emergency Operations Committee] gives this authority 

to the mayor. However, the COE must prepare the 

information releases for the mayor, so that he/she 

can make public statements that are accurate with 

regard to the [hazard] assessment and intervention proposals.

• Quizás es posible desde ONEMI definir algunas 

comunas “pilotos” en que los Alcaldes están dispuestos a probar este método, luego sistematizar 

la experiencia y socializarla en otras comunas y 

dentro del mundo político (parlamento), convocando a más Alcaldes a sumarse al método. Para 

incentivar este proceder, ONEMI, podría disponer 

de algunos fondos que se otorgarían sólo a aquellas comunas que estén dispuestas a esto, por ejemplo para hacer capacitaciones (no sé si es posible 

esto en términos legales, pero sospecho que sí). 

A otra escala el comando de emergencias en USA 

hace algo similar y me pareció una buena idea.

Perhaps it would be possible for ONEMI to define 

some “pilot” communities in which the mayors 

would be willing to try this approach [and accept 

this responsibility]. Then this approach could be 

systematized for wider application in other communities, and political leaders (parliament) could 
42 United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits

call for more mayors to participate. To encourage 

this approach, ONEMI could be granted additional funds that would be released only to those 

municipalities willing to do this [more localized 

emergency preparation]; for example, for training (not sure if this is possible in legal terms, but I 

suspect so). On another scale, emergency command in the U.S.A. does something similar, and it 

seemed a good idea.

• Quizás en este tema hay un gran desafío para el 

personal de prensa de ONEMI y SERNAGEOMIN. ¿Han participado ellos de este tipo de 

actividades, como la que compartimos nosotros 

en esta oportunidad? Perhaps this issue is a major 

challenge for the outreach staff in ONEMI and 

SERNAGEOMIN. Have they participated in such 

activities previously, such as we have shared this 

time [on the exchange]?

• Cambio en la institucionalidad: Desconozco mayores detalles de cómo ésta opera en Chile y cómo 

está definida la institucionalidad para el manejo de 

emergencias, lo que sí sé es que escuché de ustedes muchas críticas y un permanente sentimiento 

de traba. Por otro lado el manejo de las emergencias tiene un gran impacto en la evaluación 

de la ciudadanía para con sus gobiernos (locales, 

regionales, nacionales). Un buen manejo integrado 

(credibilidad, comunicación, respuesta, nivel técnico, integración de comunidad, flujo de la información en una doble dirección) puede resultar en 

un trampolín político de primer nivel. Lo contrario 

puede resultar en un salto al vacío. Conversando 

con una colega del grupo, comenté a ella que sería 

interesante poder identificar en el parlamento a 

algún Diputado y/o Senador que le interesen estos 

temas y vea en ello la potencialidad política que 

tiene. En un país como Chile, carente de discurso 

político y de propuestas, algo como esto puede 

transformarse para un político en algo distintivo 

e interesante para su región. Ese o esos políticos dispuestos a trabajar sobre esto debieran ser 

incluidos en intercambios y talleres de trabajo 

en estas materias. Institutional change—I do not 

know details of how emergency management operates in Chile or how it is structured in institutional 

frameworks, but what I do know is that I have 

heard a lot of criticism [about how emergency 

management works in Chile] and that there is a 

deep feeling that [emergency-management efforts] 

are often more obstructive than helpful. Moreover, emergency management has a great impact 

on citizens’ opinions of their governments (local, 

regional, national). A good integrated management [system] ([having] credibility, communication, accountability, technical [competence], and 

integration of the community through a two-way 

flow of information) can result in a political giveand-take of the first order. Otherwise it can be a 

political catastrophe. In talking with a colleague 

in our group, I mentioned to her that it would be 

interesting to identify in the parliament any deputy 

or senator who might be interested in these issues 

and to see what political potential such a connection might have. In a country like Chile, where 

political discourse and proposals are generally 

lacking, a motivated politician whose views have 

been transformed could do some interesting things 

for his/her region. Politicians willing to work 

on this [vertical integration of emergency management] should be included in exchanges and 

workshops covering these topics. 

• Sin duda los Alcaldes que decidan adentrarse en 

estas materias y sinceramente trabajar en mejorar sus manejos de emergencias podrían ayudar 

a encontrar a los políticos antes mencionados, 

al fin y al cabo, son generalmente miembros de 

colectividades políticas y pueden sondear en 

mejor forma que un chileno común y corriente.

Certainly the mayors who commit to making such 

changes and are sincerely working on improving 

emergency management in their areas could help 

find such interested politicians, because at the end 

of the day, they are also members of political communities and can fathom [and present] the issues 

better than an ordinary Chilean.

• Capacitación, entrenamiento, profesionalismo: Sin 

duda la capacitación en estas materias mejorará 

nuestro entendimiento y nuestro accionar. Influenciar sobre paradigmas hasta lograr el cambio es 

un largo camino que a veces parase no avanzar. 

Escuché en nuestro viaje algunos comentarios 

como por ejemplo que se ha invitado a numerosas 

personas, jefes de servicios, etc a capacitaciones 

sobre el tema y no se ven cambios... se debe 

insistir en ello, tanto va el cántaro al agua que al 

final se rompe, de todas maneras no sería un error 

si las personas que toman la decisión de quienes 

asisten a un curso se toman un trabajo/tiempo 

extra y analizan cuales son los nodos críticos en 

la institucionalidad y enfocan sus recursos en 

ello, a la vez de enfocar capacitaciones a nivel 

de base (masa). Capacity, training, professionalism—Certainly training enhances our understanding and our actions. To have influence on 

existing paradigms and to achieve change is a 

long-term commitment, and sometimes progress 

doesn’t seem evident. I heard some comments on 

our journey that invitations for training classes 

had been sent to several agency directors but that 

no involvement from them had been seen . . . but 
Appendix 2. Posttrip Questionnaires 43

their involvement should be insisted on. However, people who decide to take a training course 

should put in extra time to analyze the critical 

nodes, focus resources on those issues, and get 

training to the grassroots level.

• Parque Pumalín: La pasantía ha sido muy interesante 

y aclaradora en cuanto a cómo enfrentar distintas 

situaciones bajo un mismo concepto de comando 

de emergencias. En Pumalín desarrollé protocolos 

de emergencia muy simples, pero todos tienen un 

mismo problema y, en cierta forma, son reflejo de 

nuestra sociedad y de nuestros paradigmas. También 

en Pumalín, la decisión de qué hacer y cómo proceder la concentraba en el jefe de cada área y luego 

en la administración general. La idea de un comando 

de gestión me parece lejos mejor. Aunque, en cierto 

modo, para emergencias grandes e importantes para 

nuestra escala ha operado una especie de comando, 

conformado por la administración general y colegas 

de la oficina central en Puerto Varas, entre estas personas en conjunto se van tomando las decisiones que 

son comunicadas al público por sólo una persona. 

Con esta pasantía me resulta mucho más claro ver de 

mejor forma el cómo organizar una respuesta. Las 

recomendaciones de Kristin me ayudaron a definir 

cuantos ejercicios de simulación son necesarios al 

año para un equipo como el de Pumalín. También, 

soluciones tan simples como las tarjetas individuales 

con lo básico del protocolo en ellas me ha sido de 

gran ayuda. Para Pumalín sería muy útil y creo que 

para el gobierno local y los encargados de emergencias del gobierno también, dada la magnitud 

geográfica que tiene el Parque, el conectar a Pumalín 

con ONEMI, ser uno de los informantes capacitados y a la vez recibir a tiempo alertas que puedan 

ayudarnos a manejar, por ejemplo en verano, posible 

situaciones de emergencia con los miles de visitantes 

que tenemos dentro. Pumalin Park—The exchange 

was very interesting and clarifying as to how to deal 

with different situations under the unified command 

concept for handling emergencies. In Pumalín, I 

developed very simple emergency protocols, but 

they all have the same problem and, in a way, are a 

reflection of our society and of our paradigms. Also 

in Pumalín, the decisions for what to do and how to 

proceed are limited to the heads of each area and 

then [above them] in the general administration. The 

idea of a unified command seems to me far better. 

Although, in a way, for emergencies that are large 

and important to us, we have operated under a kind 

of command, which consists of the general administration and colleagues from the headquarters in 

Puerto Varas. Decisions reached by these people as 

a whole are communicated to the public by only one 

spokesperson. With this internship, I have gotten a 

much clearer view of how best to organize an [emergency] response. Kristin[Kirschner]’s recommendations helped me define how simulation exercises are 

needed each year for a team like ours at Pumalín. 

Also, solutions as simple as individual cards with the 

basics of the protocol printed on them I found very 

helpful. At Pumalín, given the huge size of the park, 

it would be very useful for the local government and 

emergency managers from the national government 

to connect Pumalin officially with ONEMI, so that 

the park would directly receive official alerts. This 

would greatly help park management, particularly in 

summer when possible emergency situations could 

involve thousands of park visitors.
Menlo Park Publishing Service Center, California

Manuscript approval date May 15, 2017

Edited by James W. Hendley II

Design and layout by Suzanne C. Roberts
Back cover. An explosive eruptive pulse from Chaitén Volcano, Chile, viewed from town of Chaitén 

during the first week of its eruption in May 2008. (Photograph courtesy of Servicio Nacional de 

Geología y Minería de Chile.)
Pierson and others—United States-Chile Binational Exchange for Volcanic Risk Reduction, 2015—Activities and Benefits—Circular 1432

ISSN 1067-084X (print) 

ISSN 2330-5703 (online)

https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1432