California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Point 

Conception, California

By Samuel Y. Johnson, Peter Dartnell, Guy R. Cochrane, Stephen R. Hartwell, Nadine E. Golden, Rikk G. Kvitek, 

and Clifton W. Davenport 

(Samuel Y. Johnson and Susan A. Cochran, editors)

Pamphlet to accompany

Open-File Report 2018–1024

2018 

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, Deputy Director

 exercising the authority of the Director

U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, Virginia: 2018 

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

http://www.usgs.gov/ or call 1–888–ASK–USGS (1–888–275–8747).

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

visit http://store.usgs.gov/ 

To order USGS information products, visit http://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:

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Hartwell, S.R., Golden, N.E., Kvitek, R.G., and Davenport, C.W. (S.Y. 

Johnson and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 2018, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Point Conception, 

California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2018–1024, pamphlet 36 p., 9 sheets, scale 1:24,000, 

https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20181024. 

ISSN 2331-1258 (online)
iii

Contents

Preface...........................................................................................................................................................................1

Chapter 1. Introduction...................................................................................................................................................3

By Samuel Y. Johnson

Regional Setting .........................................................................................................................................................3

Publication Summary..................................................................................................................................................5

Chapter 2. Bathymetry and Backscatter-Intensity Maps of the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area (Sheets 1, 2, 

and 3).............................................................................................................................................................................9

By Peter Dartnell and Rikk G. Kvitek

Chapter 3. Data Integration and Visualization for the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area (Sheet 4)....................11

By Peter Dartnell

Chapter 4. Seafloor-Character Map of the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area (Sheet 5) ....................................12

By Guy R. Cochrane and Stephen R. Hartwell

Chapter 5. Marine Benthic Habitats of the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area (Sheet 6).....................................17

By Guy R. Cochrane and Stephen R. Hartwell

Map Area Habitats....................................................................................................................................................17

Chapter 6. Subsurface Geology and Structure of the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area and the Santa Barbara 

Channel Region (Sheets 7 and 8)................................................................................................................................19

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell

Data Acquisition........................................................................................................................................................19

Seismic-Reflection Imaging of the Continental Shelf ................................................................................................19

Geologic Structure and Recent Deformation ............................................................................................................20

Thickness and Depth to Base of Uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene Deposits ...................................................21

Chapter 7. Geologic and Geomorphic Map of the Offshore of Point Conception Map Area (Sheet 9) .........................23

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell

Geologic and Geomorphic Summary........................................................................................................................23

Description of Map Units ..........................................................................................................................................26

Offshore Geologic and Geomorphic Units ............................................................................................................26

Onshore Geologic and Geomorphic Units ............................................................................................................27

Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................................29

References Cited .........................................................................................................................................................30

Figures

Figure 1–1. Physiography of Santa Barbara Channel region......................................................................................... 6

Figure 1–2. Coastal geography of Offshore of Point Conception map area................................................................... 7

Figure 1–3. Map of Santa Barbara Channel region, showing selected faults and folds ................................................. 8

Figure 4–1. Detailed view of ground-truth data, showing accuracy-assessment methodology.................................... 14

Tables

Table 4–1. Conversion table showing how video observations of primary substrate, secondary substrate, and 

abiotic seafloor complexity are grouped into seafloor-character-map Classes I, II, and III for use in 

supervised classification and accuracy assessment in Offshore of Point Conception map area .............. 15

Table 4–2. Accuracy-assessment statistics for seafloor-character-map classifications in Offshore of Point 

Conception map area ............................................................................................................................... 16
iv

Table 5–1. Marine benthic habitats from Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard mapped in 

Offshore of Point Conception map area.................................................................................................... 18

Table 6–1. Area, sediment-thickness, and sediment-volume data for California's State Waters in Santa Barbara 

Channel region, between Point Conception and Hueneme Canyon areas, as well as in Offshore of 

Point Conception map area ...................................................................................................................... 22

Table 7–1. Areas and relative proportions of offshore geologic map units in Offshore of Point Conception map 

area .......................................................................................................................................................... 25

Map Sheets

Sheet 1. Colored Shaded-Relief Bathymetry, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California

By Peter Dartnell and Rikk G. Kvitek

Sheet 2. Shaded-Relief Bathymetry, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Peter Dartnell and Rikk G. Kvitek

Sheet 3. Acoustic Backscatter, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Peter Dartnell and Rikk G. Kvitek

Sheet 4. Data Integration and Visualization, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Peter Dartnell 

Sheet 5. Seafloor Character, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Stephen R. Hartwell and Guy R. Cochrane 

Sheet 6. Marine Benthic Habitats from the Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard, Offshore of 

Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Guy R. Cochrane, Stephen R. Hartwell, and Samuel Y. Johnson 

Sheet 7. Seismic-Reflection Profiles, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, California 

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell

Sheet 8. Local (Offshore of Point Conception Map Area) and Regional (Offshore from Point Conception to 

Hueneme Canyon) Shallow-Subsurface Geology and Structure, Santa Barbara Channel, California 

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell

Sheet 9. Offshore and Onshore Geology and Geomorphology, Offshore of Point Conception Map Area, 

California 

By Samuel Y. Johnson, Stephen R. Hartwell, and Clifton W. Davenport
1

California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Point 

Conception, California

By Samuel Y. Johnson,1 Peter Dartnell,1 Guy R. Cochrane,1 Stephen R. Hartwell,

1 Nadine E. Golden,1 Rikk G. 

Kvitek,2 and Clifton W. Davenport3

(Samuel Y. Johnson1 and Susan A. Cochran,1 editors)

Preface 

In 2007, the California Ocean Protection Council initiated the California Seafloor Mapping 

Program (CSMP), designed to create a comprehensive seafloor map of high-resolution bathymetry, 

marine benthic habitats, and geology within California’s State Waters. The program supports a large 

number of coastal-zone- and ocean-management issues, including the California Marine Life Protection 

Act (MLPA) (California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008), which requires information about the 

distribution of ecosystems as part of the design and proposal process for the establishment of Marine 

Protected Areas. A focus of CSMP is to map California’s State Waters with consistent methods at a 

consistent scale.

The CSMP approach is to create highly detailed seafloor maps through collection, integration, 

interpretation, and visualization of swath sonar bathymetric data (the undersea equivalent of satellite 

remote-sensing data in terrestrial mapping), acoustic backscatter, seafloor video, seafloor photography, 

high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, and bottom-sediment sampling data (Johnson and others, 

2017a). The map products display seafloor morphology and character, identify potential marine benthic 

habitats, and illustrate both the surficial seafloor geology and shallow subsurface geology. It is 

emphasized that the more interpretive habitat and geology maps rely on the integration of multiple, new 

high-resolution datasets and that mapping at small scales would not be possible without such data. 

This approach and CSMP planning is based in part on recommendations of the Marine Mapping 

Planning Workshop (Kvitek and others, 2006), attended by coastal and marine managers and scientists 

from around the state. That workshop established geographic priorities for a coastal mapping project and 

identified the need for coverage of “lands” from the shore strand line (defined as Mean Higher High 

Water; MHHW) out to the 3-nautical-mile (5.6-km) limit of California’s State Waters. Unfortunately, 

surveying the zone from MHHW out to 10-m water depth is not consistently possible using ship-based 

surveying methods, owing to sea state (for example, waves, wind, or currents), kelp coverage, and 

shallow rock outcrops. Accordingly, some of the maps presented in this series commonly do not cover 

the zone from the shore out to 10-m depth; these “no data” zones appear pale gray on most maps. 

This map is part of a series of online U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) publications, each of 

which includes several map sheets, some explanatory text, and a descriptive pamphlet. Each map sheet 

is published as a PDF file. Geographic information system (GIS) files that contain both ESRI4 ArcGIS 

raster grids (for example, bathymetry, seafloor character) and geotiffs (for example, shaded relief) are 

also included for each publication. For those who do not own the full suite of ESRI GIS and mapping 

software, the data can be read using ESRI ArcReader, a free viewer that is available at 

 

1 U.S. Geological Survey 2 California State University, Monterey Bay, Seafloor Mapping Lab

3 California Geological Survey

4 Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.
2

http://www.esri.com/software/arcgis/arcreader/index.html (last accessed March 27, 2016). Web services, 

which consist of standard implementations of ArcGIS REST Service and OGC GIS Web Service 

(WMS), also are available for all published GIS data. All CSMP web services were created using an 

ArcGIS service definition file, resulting in data layers that are symbolized as shown on the associated 

map sheets. Both the ArcGIS REST Service and OGC WMS Service include all the individual GIS 

layers for each map-area publication. Data layers are bundled together in a map-area web service; 

however, each layer can be symbolized and accessed individually after the web service is ingested into a 

desktop application or web map. CSMP web services enable users to download and view CSMP data, as 

well as to easily add CSMP data to their own workflows, using any browser-enabled, standalone or 

mobile device. 

The California Seafloor Mapping Program (CSMP) is a collaborative venture between numerous 

different federal and state agencies, academia, and the private sector. CSMP partners include the 

California Coastal Conservancy, the California Ocean Protection Council, the California Department of 

Fish and Wildlife, the California Geological Survey, California State University at Monterey Bay’s 

Seafloor Mapping Lab, Moss Landing Marine Laboratories Center for Habitat Studies, Fugro Pelagos, 

Pacific Gas and Electric Company, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA, 

including National Ocean Service—Office of Coast Surveys, National Marine Sanctuaries, and National 

Marine Fisheries Service), U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 

the National Park Service, and the U.S. Geological Survey. 
3

Chapter 1. Introduction

By Samuel Y. Johnson

Regional Setting

The map area offshore of Point Conception, California, which is referred to herein as the 

“Offshore of Point Conception” map area (figs. 1–1, 1–2), is located at the transition between the eastwest-trending Santa Barbara Channel region of the Southern California Bight (see, for example, Lee and 

Normark, 2009) and the northwest-trending central California coast. Within this region, the offshore part 

of the map area lies south of the steep south and west flanks of the Santa Ynez Mountains. The crest of 

the range, which lies about 5 km north and east of the arcuate shoreline, has a maximum elevation of 

about 340 m in the map area. 

This geologically complex region also forms a major biogeographic transition zone (see, for 

example, Briggs, 1974; Blanchette and others, 2007). North of Point Conception, the coast is subjected 

to high wave exposure from the north, west, and south, as well as consistently strong upwelling that 

brings cold, nutrient-rich waters to the surface (see, for example, Brink and Muench, 1986; Cudaback 

and others, 2005). Southeast of Point Conception, the Santa Barbara Channel is largely protected from 

strong north swells by Point Conception and from south swells by the Channel Islands; surface waters 

are warmer, and upwelling is weak and seasonal. 

The onland part of the coastal zone is remote and sparsely populated (fig. 1–2). The road to 

Jalama Beach County Park provides the only public coastal access in the entire map area. North of this

county park, the coastal zone is part of Vandenberg Air Force Base, which functions primarily as a 

space and missile testing facility. South of Jalama Beach County Park, most of the coastal zone is part of 

the Cojo-Jalama Ranch, purchased by the Nature Conservancy in December 2017. A relatively small 

part of the coastal zone in the eastern part of the map area lies within the privately owned Hollister 

Ranch. The nearest significant commercial centers are Lompoc (population, about 42,000), about 10 km 

north of the map area, and Goleta (population, about 30,000), about 50 km east of the map area. The 

Union Pacific railroad tracks run west and northwest along the coast through the entire map area, within 

a few hundred meters of the shoreline. 

The Offshore of Point Conception map area lies in the west-central part of the Santa Barbara 

littoral cell (fig. 1–1), which is characterized by west-to-east transport of sediment from Point Arguello 

on the northwest to Hueneme and Mugu Canyons on the southeast (see, for example, Griggs and others, 

2005; Hapke and others, 2006). Sediment supply to the western and central parts of the littoral cell (west 

of Carpinteria) is mainly from relatively small coastal watersheds, which have an estimated cumulative 

annual sediment flux of 640,000 tons/yr between Point Arguello and the Ventura River (fig. 1–1; see 

also, Warrick and Farnsworth, 2009). Consistent with this estimate, Griggs and others (2005) reported 

dredging records from the harbor at Santa Barbara that range from about 160,000 to 800,000 tons/yr, 

averaging 400,000 tons/yr, providing a proxy for longshore drift rates. 

The Jalama Creek–Espada Creek drainage basin is the largest coastal watershed (about 63 km2; 

Warrick and Mertes, 2009) between the Ventura River and Point Arguello, and it is inferred to be the 

largest terrestrial sediment source in the map area. Smaller watersheds in the Offshore of Point 

Conception map area include Cañada del Jolloru, Black Canyon, Wood Canyon, Cañada del Cojo, and 

Barranca Honda (fig. 1–2). The much larger Santa Ynez and Santa Maria Rivers, the mouths of which 

are 25 to 60 km northwest of the map area (following the coast; fig. 1–1), are not considered to be 

significant sediment sources because Point Arguello (fig. 1–1) provides an obstacle to downcoast, 

southeastward sediment transport and also because, at present, much of their sediment load is trapped in 

dams (Griggs and others, 2005). 
4

Coastal-watershed discharge and sediment load are highly variable, characterized by brief large 

events during major winter storms and long periods of low (or no) flow and minimal sediment load 

between storms. In recent (recorded) history, the majority of high-discharge, high-sediment-flux events 

have been associated with El Niño phases of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) climatic pattern 

(Warrick and Farnsworth, 2009). 

Narrow beaches that have thin sediment (sand and pebbles) cover above bedrock platforms, 

backed by low (10- to 20-m-high) cliffs that are capped by a narrow coastal terrace, characterize much 

of the shoreline in the Offshore of Point Conception map area. Beaches are subject to wave erosion 

during winter storms, followed by gradual sediment recovery or accretion in the late spring, summer, 

and fall months during the gentler wave climate. Hapke and others (2006, their fig. 33) suggested that 

essentially no net change (accretion or erosion) to the beaches in the map area has occurred in the long 

term (since the mid- to late-1800s); however, the beaches have been eroding at an average rate of about 

1 m/yr in the short term (1976 to 1998). Hapke and Reid (2007, their fig. 29) also indicated that coastal 

bluffs in the map area are eroding at a rate of about 0.2 to 0.3 m/yr. As with stream discharge and 

sediment flux, coastal erosion has been most acute during El Niño phases of the ENSO climatic pattern. 

Following the coastline, the shelf bends to the north and northwest around Point Conception, and 

the trend of the shelf break (which is mostly outside California’s State Waters) changes from about 298° 

to 241° azimuth. Shelf width ranges from about 5 km south of Point Conception to about 11 km 

northwest of it; the slope ranges from about 1.0° to 1.2° to about 0.7° south and northwest of Point 

Conception, respectively. Southwest of Point Conception, the shelf break and upper slope are incised by 

a 600-m-wide, 20- to 30-m-deep, south-facing trough, one of five heads of the informally named 

Arguello submarine canyon (fig. 1–2; Greene and others, 1991; Eichhubl and others, 2002; Monterey 

Bay Aquarium Research Institute, 2002).

Significant parts of the shelf are underlain by bedrock or by bedrock that has a very thin (<1m) 

sediment cover (see sheets 7, 8); mean and maximum sediment thicknesses are 2.7 and 18 m, 

respectively. The thickest sediment is found west of Point Conception along the axis of Government 

Point Syncline (see sheets 7, 8, 9) and also offshore of the mouth of Jalama Creek. 

Seafloor habitats in the broad Santa Barbara Channel region consist of significant amounts of 

soft, unconsolidated sediment interspersed with isolated areas of rocky habitat that support kelp-forest 

communities in the nearshore and rocky-reef communities in deeper water. The potential marine benthic 

habitat types mapped in the Offshore of Point Conception map area are directly related to its Quaternary 

geologic history, geomorphology, and active sedimentary processes. These potential habitats lie 

primarily within the Shelf (continental shelf) but also partly within the Flank (basin flank or continental 

slope) megahabitats of Greene and others (2007). The fairly homogeneous seafloor of sediment and lowrelief bedrock provides characteristic habitat for groundfish, crabs, shrimp, and other marine benthic 

organisms, and the bedrock outcrops are potential benthic habitats for rockfish (Sebastes spp.) and other 

groundfish that forage and seek refuge in such habitats. In addition, several areas of smooth sediment 

that form nearshore terraces that have relatively steep, smooth fronts may provide interfaces attractive to 

certain species of groundfish. Below the steep shelf break, within the basin flank or continental slope 

megahabitat, the seafloor is composed of soft, unconsolidated sediment interrupted by the heads of 

several submarine canyons, gullies, and rills; this steep relief also provides good potential habitat for 

rockfish. The map area includes the large (58.3 km2) Point Conception State Marine Reserve (fig. 1–2). 

The Offshore of Point Conception map area is in the westernmost part of the Western Transverse 

Ranges geologic province, which is north of the California Continental Borderland5 (Fisher and others, 

2009). Significant clockwise rotation—at least 90°—since the early Miocene has been proposed for the 

Western Transverse Ranges province (Luyendyk and others, 1980; Hornafius and others, 1986; 

 

5 The California Continental Borderland is defined as the complex continental margin that extends from Point Conception 

south into northern Baja California.
5

Nicholson and others, 1994), and this region is presently undergoing north-south shortening (see, for 

example, Larson and Webb, 1992; Marshall and others, 2013). Regional cross sections (Redin and 

others, 2005) have suggested that the south flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains is a large, south-dipping 

homocline that overlies the north-dipping Pitas Point–North Channel Fault system (fig. 1–3; see also, 

Sorlien and Nicholson, 2015). The homoclinal section extends upward from the Cretaceous strata 

exposed high in the mountains to the Pliocene strata beneath the continental shelf, encountered at 

shallow depths in offshore wells. Smaller folds related to local faulting (see sheets 7, 8, 9; see also, 

Fischer, 1998) are superimposed on the regional homocline, including the 22-km-long Government 

Point Syncline (fig. 1–3). 

Coastal cliffs mainly consist of fine-grained, folded strata of the Miocene Monterey Formation 

and the upper Miocene and lower Pliocene Sisquoc Formation (Dibblee, 1988a,b). Estimated rates of 

shoreline uplift that are based on the elevations of late Quaternary marine terraces are highly variable, 

ranging from about 0.25 to 1.8 mm/yr (Muhs and others, 1992; Rockwell and others, 1992; Metcalf, 

1994; Duvall and others, 2004; Gurrola and others, 2014). 

The map area has a long history of petroleum exploration, and the seafloor notably includes large 

asphalt mounds and pockmarks that result from petroleum seepage (see sheets 6, 9). Several offshore 

gas and oil fields were discovered, and some were developed in and on the margins of California’s State 

Waters (Yerkes and others, 1969; Galloway, 1998). Offshore petroleum platforms were installed in 

adjacent federal waters west of Point Conception in the Point Arguello unit in 1985 and 1986 (platforms 

“Hidalgo,” “Hermosa,” and “Harvest”) and to the southeast in 1989 in the western part of the Santa 

Ynez unit (platform “Heritage”). 

Publication Summary 

This publication about the Offshore of Point Conception map area includes nine map sheets that 

contain explanatory text, in addition to this descriptive pamphlet and a data catalog of geographic 

information system (GIS) files. Sheets 1, 2, and 3 combine data from two different sonar surveys to 

generate comprehensive high-resolution bathymetry and acoustic-backscatter coverage of the map area. 

These data reveal a range of physiographic features (highlighted in the perspective views on sheet 4) 

such as the relatively flat, sediment-covered Santa Barbara shelf interspersed with faulted and folded 

bedrock outcrops, sand ridges, submarine canyon heads, asphalt mounds, and pockmarks. 

To validate the geological and habitat interpretations of the sonar data shown on sheets 1, 2, and 

3, the U.S. Geological Survey towed a camera sled over specific offshore locations, collecting both 

video and photographic imagery; this “ground-truth” surveying imagery is available at Golden and 

Cochrane (2013). Sheet 5 is a “seafloor character” map, which classifies the seafloor on the basis of 

depth, slope, and rugosity (ruggedness), and backscatter intensity and which is further informed by the 

ground-truth-survey imagery. Sheet 6 is a map of “potential habitats,” which are delineated on the basis 

of substrate type, geomorphology, seafloor process, or other attributes that may provide a habitat for a 

specific species or assemblage of organisms. Sheet 7 compiles representative seismic-reflection profiles 

from the map area, providing information on the subsurface stratigraphy and structure of the map area. 

Sheet 8 shows the distribution and thickness of young sediment (deposited over the last about 21,000 

years, during the most recent sea-level rise) in both the map area and the larger offshore Santa Barbara 

Channel region (offshore from Point Conception to Hueneme Canyon), interpreted on the basis of the 

seismic-reflection data. Sheet 9 is a geologic map that merges onshore geologic mapping (compiled 

from existing maps by the California Geological Survey) and new offshore geologic mapping that is 

based on integration of high-resolution bathymetry and backscatter imagery (sheets 1, 2, 3), seafloorsediment and rock samples (Reid and others, 2006), digital camera and video imagery (Golden and 

Cochrane, 2013), and high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles (sheet 7). 
6

The information provided by the map sheets, pamphlet, and data catalog has a broad range of 

applications (Johnson and others, 2017a). High-resolution bathymetry, acoustic backscatter, groundtruth-surveying imagery, and habitat mapping all contribute to habitat characterization and ecosystembased management by providing essential data for delineation of marine protected areas and ecosystem 

restoration. Many of the maps provide high-resolution baselines that will be critical for monitoring 

environmental change associated with climate change, coastal development, or other forcings. Highresolution bathymetry is a critical component for modeling coastal flooding caused by storms and 

tsunamis, as well as inundation associated with longer term sea-level rise. Seismic-reflection and 

bathymetric data help characterize earthquake and tsunami sources, critical for natural-hazard 

assessments of coastal zones. Information on sediment distribution and thickness is essential to the 

understanding of local and regional sediment transport, as well as the development of regional sedimentmanagement plans. In addition, siting of any new offshore infrastructure (for example, pipelines, cables, 

or renewable-energy facilities) will depend on new high-resolution mapping. Finally, this mapping will 

both stimulate and enable new scientific research and also raise public awareness of, and education 

about, coastal environments and issues.

Figure 1–1. Physiography of Santa Barbara Channel region. Box shows Offshore of Point Conception map area. 

Arrows show direction of sediment transport in Santa Barbara littoral cell, which extends from Point Arguello 

(PA) to Hueneme Canyon (HC) and Mugu Canyon (MC). Other abbreviations: B, Buellton; C, Carpinteria; CC, 

Calleguas Creek; G, Goleta; GoL, Goleta landslide complex; L, Lompoc; O, Oxnard; PC, Point Conception; SB, 

Santa Barbara; SBB, Santa Barbara Basin; SM, Santa Monica Mountains; SMB, Santa Monica Basin; SMR, 

Santa Maria River; SR, Santa Clara River; SYM, Santa Ynez Mountains; SYR, Santa Ynez River; V, Ventura; 

VR, Ventura River.
7

Figure 1–2. Coastal geography of Offshore of Point Conception map area. Yellow line shows 3-nautical-mile limit

of California’s State Waters. Blue line shows boundary of Point Conception State Marine Reserve (PCSMR). 

Other abbreviations: ASC, one head of Arguello submarine canyon; BC, Black Canyon; BH, Barranca Honda; 

CC, Cañada del Cojo; CJ, Cañada del Jolloru; C-JR, Cojo-Jalama Ranch; EC, Espada Creek; GP, Government 

Point; HR, Hollister Ranch; JC, Jalama Creek; JCP, Jalama Beach County Park; PC, Point Conception; VAFB, 

Vandenberg Air Force Base; WC, Wood Canyon. 
8

 

Figure 1–3. Map of Santa Barbara Channel region, showing selected faults and folds. Black lines show faults (solid 

where location is known; dashed where location is approximate or inferred); barbs on faults show thrust faults 

(barbs on upper plate); locations of blind Pitas Point–North Channel Fault (PNF) and Oak Ridge Thrust Fault 

(ORF) systems are projected vertically from tips of faults. Magenta lines show folds (solid where location is 

known; dashed where location is approximate or inferred); diverging arrows show anticlines; converging arrows 

show synclines. Yellow box shows outline of Offshore of Point Conception map area. White boxes show 

outlines of maps and datasets published by U.S. Geological Survey’s California Seafloor Mapping Program 

(CSMP), listed from east to west (map area names shown in brackets): Johnson and others, 2012 [Hueneme 

Canyon], 2013b [Ventura], 2013c [Carpinteria], 2013a [Santa Barbara], 2014 [Coal Oil Point], 2015 [Refugio 

Beach], 2018 [Gaviota]. Fault locations are from Sorlien and others (2006), Chaytor and others (2008), Minor 

and others (2009), Sorlien and Nicholson (2015), and U.S. Geological Survey and California Geological Survey

(2016), as well as from CSMP publications listed above. Other abbreviations: A, Anacapa Island; C, 

Carpinteria; CF, Conception fan; CP, Coal Oil Point; CT, Channel Islands Thrust Fault; G, Gaviota; GoL, Goleta 

landslide complex; GPS, Government Point Syncline; HC, Hueneme Canyon; MA, Molino Anticline; MC, MidChannel Fault; MCA, Mid-Channel Anticline; MF, Montalvo Fault; O, Oxnard; P, Pitas Point; PA, Point Arguello; 

PC, Point Conception; RB, Refugio Beach; RCF, Rincon Creek Fault; RMF, Red Mountain Fault; SB, Santa 

Barbara; SCF, Santa Cruz Island Fault; SCI, Santa Cruz Island; SCR, Santa Clara River; SMI, San Miguel

Island; SRF, Santa Rosa Island Fault; SRI, Santa Rosa Island; SS, south strand of Santa Ynez Fault; SYF,

Santa Ynez Fault; SYM, Santa Ynez Mountains; V, Ventura; VB, Ventura Basin; VF, Ventura Fault; VR, 

Ventura River; VRA, Ventura Avenue–Rincon–South Ellwood Anticline. 
9

Chapter 2. Bathymetry and Backscatter-Intensity Maps of the Offshore 

of Point Conception Map Area (Sheets 1, 2, and 3)

By Peter Dartnell and Rikk G. Kvitek

The colored shaded-relief bathymetry (sheet 1), the shaded-relief bathymetry (sheet 2), and the 

acoustic-backscatter (sheet 3) maps of the Offshore of Point Conception map area in southern California 

were generated from bathymetry and backscatter data collected by Fugro Pelagos (fig. 1 on sheets 1, 2, 

3) in 2008, using a combination of 400-kHz Reson 7125, 240-kHz Reson 8101, and 100-kHz Reson 

8111 multibeam echosounders. In addition, bathymetric- and topographic-lidar data was collected in the 

nearshore and coastal areas by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) Joint Lidar Bathymetry

Technical Center of Expertise in 2009 and 2010. These mapping missions combined to provide 

continuous bathymetry (sheets 1, 2) from the shoreline to the 3-nautical-mile limit of California’s State 

Waters, as well as acoustic-backscatter data (sheet 3) from about the 10-m isobath to beyond the 3-

nautical-mile limit.

During the Fugro Pelagos mapping missions, an Applanix POS-MV (Position and Orientation 

System for Marine Vessels) was used to accurately position the vessels during data collection, and it 

also accounted for vessel motion such as heave, pitch, and roll, with navigational input from GPS 

receivers. Smoothed Best Estimated Trajectory (SBET) files were postprocessed from logged POS-MV 

files. Sound-velocity profiles were collected with an Applied Microsystems (AM) SVPlus sound 

velocimeter. Soundings were corrected for vessel motion using the Applanix POS-MV data, for 

variations in water-column sound velocity using the AM SVPlus data, and for variations in water height 

(tides) and heave using the postprocessed SBET data (California State University, Monterey Bay, 

Seafloor Mapping Lab, 2016). The Reson backscatter data were postprocessed using Geocoder software. 

The backscatter intensities were radiometrically corrected (including despeckling and angle-varying gain 

adjustments), and the position of each acoustic sample was geometrically corrected for slant range on a 

line-by-line basis. After the lines were corrected, they were mosaicked into 0.5-m resolution images 

(California State University, Monterey Bay, Seafloor Mapping Lab, 2016). The mosaics were then 

exported as georeferenced TIFF images, imported into a geographic information system (GIS), and 

converted to GRIDs at 2-m resolution. 

Nearshore bathymetric-lidar data and acoustic-bathymetric data from within California’s State 

Waters were merged together as part of the 2013 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) Coastal California TopoBathy Merge Project (National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, 2013). Merged bathymetry data from within the Offshore of Point Conception map area 

were downloaded from this dataset and resampled to 2-m spatial resolution. An illumination having an 

azimuth of 300° and from 45° above the horizon was then applied to the bathymetric surface to create 

the shaded-relief imagery (sheets 1, 2). In addition, a modified “rainbow” color ramp was applied to the 

bathymetry data for sheet 1, using reds to represent shallower depths, and greens to represent greater 

depths (note that the Offshore of Point Conception map area requires only the shallower part of the fullrainbow color ramp used on some of the other maps in the California State Waters Map Series; see, for 

example, Kvitek and others, 2012). This colored bathymetry surface was draped over the shaded-relief 

imagery at 60-percent transparency to create a colored shaded-relief map (sheet 1). Note that the ripple 

patterns and parallel lines that are apparent within the map area are data-collection and -processing 

artifacts. These various artifacts are made obvious by the hillshading process.

Bathymetric contours (sheets 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9) were generated at 10-m intervals from a modified 2-

m-resolution bathymetric surface. The most continuous contour segments were preserved; smaller 

segments and isolated island polygons were excluded from the final output. The contours were 
10

smoothed using a polynomial approximation with exponential kernel algorithm and a tolerance value of 

60 m. The contours were then clipped to the boundary of the map area. 

The acoustic-backscatter imagery from each different mapping system and processing method 

were merged into their own individual grids. These individual grids, which cover different areas, were 

displayed in a GIS to create a composite acoustic-backscatter map (sheet 3). On the map, brighter tones 

indicate higher backscatter intensity, and darker tones indicate lower backscatter intensity. The intensity

represents a complex interaction between the acoustic pulse and the seafloor, as well as characteristics 

within the shallow subsurface, providing a general indication of seafloor texture and composition. 

Backscatter intensity depends on the acoustic source level; the frequency used to image the seafloor; the 

grazing angle; the composition and character of the seafloor, including grain size, water content, bulk 

density, and seafloor roughness; and some biological cover. Harder and rougher bottom types such as 

rocky outcrops or coarse sediment typically return stronger intensities (high backscatter, lighter tones), 

whereas softer bottom types such as fine sediment return weaker intensities (low backscatter, darker 

tones). Ripple patterns and straight lines in some parts of the map area are data-collection and 

-processing artifacts.

The onshore-area image was generated by applying an illumination having an azimuth of 300° 

and from 45° above the horizon to 2-m-resolution topographic-lidar data from National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management’s Digital Coast (available at 

http://www.csc.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/data/coastallidar/) and to 10-m-resolution topographic-lidar data 

from the U.S. Geological Survey’s National Elevation Dataset (available at http://ned.usgs.gov/).
11

Chapter 3. Data Integration and Visualization for the Offshore of Point 

Conception Map Area (Sheet 4) 

By Peter Dartnell

Mapping California’s State Waters has produced a vast amount of acoustic and visual data, 

including bathymetry, acoustic backscatter, seismic-reflection profiles, and seafloor video and 

photography. These data are used by researchers to develop maps, reports, and other tools to assist in the 

coastal and marine spatial-planning capability of coastal-zone managers and other stakeholders. For 

example, seafloor-character (sheet 5), habitat (sheet 6), and geologic (sheet 9) maps of the Offshore of 

Point Conception map area may be used to assist in the designation of Marine Protected Areas, as well 

as in their monitoring. These maps and reports also help to analyze environmental change owing to sealevel rise and coastal development, to model and predict sediment and contaminant budgets and 

transport, to site offshore infrastructure, and to assess tsunami and earthquake hazards. To facilitate this 

increased understanding and to assist in product development, it is helpful to integrate the different 

datasets and then view the results in three-dimensional representations such as those displayed on the 

data integration and visualization sheet for the Offshore of Point Conception map area (sheet 4). 

The maps and three-dimensional views on sheet 4 were created using a series of geographic 

information systems (GIS) and visualization techniques. Using GIS, the bathymetric and topographic 

data (sheet 1) were converted to ASCIIRASTER format files, and the acoustic-backscatter data (sheet 3) 

were converted to geoTIFF images. The bathymetric and topographic data were imported in the 

Fledermaus software (QPS). The bathymetry was color-coded to closely match the colored shadedrelief bathymetry on sheet 1 in which reds and oranges represent shallower depths and greens represent 

deeper depths. Onshore topographic data were shown in gray shades. Acoustic-backscatter geoTIFF 

images also were draped over the bathymetry data (fig. 6). The colored bathymetry, topography, and 

draped backscatter were then tilted and panned to create the perspective views such as those shown in 

figures 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 on sheet 4. These views highlight the seafloor morphology in the Offshore of Point 

Conception map area, which includes asphalt mounds, differentially eroded bedrock, and pockmarks 

along the outer shelf. 

Video-mosaic images created from digital seafloor video (for example, fig. 3 on sheet 4) can 

display the geologic (rock, sand, mud, and asphalt; see sheet 9) and biologic complexity (see Golden and 

Cochrane, 2013) of the seafloor. Whereas photographs capture high-quality snapshots of smaller areas 

of the seafloor, video mosaics capture larger areas and can show transition zones between seafloor 

environments. Digital seafloor video is collected from a camera sled towed approximately 1 to 2 meters 

above the seafloor, at speeds of less than 1 nautical mile/hour. Using standard video-editing software, as 

well as software developed at the Center for Coastal and Ocean Mapping, University of New 

Hampshire, the digital video is converted to AVI format, cut into 2-minute sections, and desampled to 

every second or third frame. The frames are merged together using pattern-recognition algorithms from 

one frame to the next and converted to a TIFF image. The images are then rectified to the bathymetry 

data using ship navigation recorded with the video and layback estimates of the towed camera sled. 

Block diagrams that combine the bathymetry with seismic-reflection-profile data help integrate 

surface and subsurface observations, especially stratigraphic and structural relations (for example, fig. 2 

on sheet 4). These block diagrams were created by converting digital seismic-profile data (Johnson and 

others, 2016) into TIFF images, while taking note of the starting and ending coordinates and maximum 

and minimum depths. The images were then imported into the Fledermaus software as vertical images 

and merged with the bathymetry imagery. 
12

Chapter 4. Seafloor-Character Map of the Offshore of Point Conception

Map Area (Sheet 5)

By Guy R. Cochrane and Stephen R. Hartwell

The California State Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) calls for protecting representative types 

of habitat in different depth zones and environmental conditions. A science team, assembled under the 

auspices of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), has identified seven substratedefined seafloor habitats in California’s State Waters that can be classified using sonar data and seafloor 

video and photography. These habitats include rocky banks, intertidal zones, sandy or soft ocean 

bottoms, underwater pinnacles, kelp forests, submarine canyons, and seagrass beds. The following five 

depth zones, which determine changes in species composition, have been identified: Depth Zone 1, 

intertidal; Depth Zone 2, intertidal to 30 m; Depth Zone 3, 30 to 100 m; Depth Zone 4, 100 to 200 m; 

and Depth Zone 5, deeper than 200 m (California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008). The CDFW 

habitats, with the exception of depth zones, can be considered a subset of a broader classification 

scheme of Greene and others (1999) that has been used by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 

(Cochrane and others, 2003, 2005). These seafloor-character maps are generalized polygon shapefiles 

that have attributes derived from Greene and others (2007). 

 A 2007 Coastal Map Development Workshop, hosted by the USGS in Menlo Park, California, 

identified the need for more detailed (relative to Greene and others’ [1999] attributes) raster products 

that preserve some of the transitional character of the seafloor when substrates are mixed and (or) they 

change gradationally. The seafloor-character map, which delineates a subset of the CDFW habitats, is a 

GIS-derived raster product that can be produced in a consistent manner from data of variable quality 

covering large geographic regions. 

The following five substrate classes are identified in the Offshore of Point Conception map area:

• Class I: Fine- to medium-grained smooth sediment 

• Class II: Mixed smooth sediment and rock 

• Class III: Rock and boulder, rugose 

• Class IV: Medium- to coarse-grained sediment (in scour depressions) 

• Class V: Anthropogenic material (rugged) 

The seafloor-character map of the Offshore of Point Conception map area (sheet 5) was 

produced using video-supervised maximum-likelihood classification of the bathymetry and intensity of 

return from sonar systems, following the method described by Cochrane (2008). The two variants used 

in this classification were backscatter intensity and derivative rugosity. The rugosity calculation was 

performed using the Terrain Ruggedness (VRM) tool within the Benthic Terrain Modeler toolset v. 3.0 

(Wright and others, 2012; available at http://esriurl.com/5754).

Classes I, II, and III values were delineated using multivariate analysis. Class IV (medium- to 

coarse-grained sediment, in scour depressions) values were determined on the basis of their visual 

characteristics, using both shaded-relief bathymetry and backscatter (slight depression in the seafloor, 

very high backscatter return). Class V (rugged anthropogenic material) values were determined on the 

basis of their visual characteristics and the known location of man-made features. The resulting map 

(gridded at 2 m) was cleaned by hand to remove data-collection artifacts (for example, the trackline 

nadir). 

 On the seafloor-character map (sheet 5), the five substrate classes have been colored to indicate 

the California MLPA depth zones and the Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard 

(CMECS) slope zones (Madden and others, 2008) in which they belong. The California MLPA depth 
13

zones are Depth Zone 1 (intertidal), Depth Zone 2 (intertidal to 30 m), Depth Zone 3 (30 to 100 m), 

Depth Zone 4 (100 to 200 m), and Depth Zone 5 (greater than 200 m); in the Offshore of Point 

Conception map area, only Depth Zones 2, 3, and 4 are present. The slope classes that represent the 

CMECS slope zones are Slope Class 1 = flat (0° to 5°), Slope Class 2 = sloping (5° to 30°), Slope Class 

3 = steeply sloping (30° to 60°), Slope Class 4 = vertical (60° to 90°), and Slope Class 5 = overhang 

(greater than 90°); in the Offshore of Point Conception map area, only Slope Classes 1 and 2 are present. 

The final classified seafloor-character raster map image has been draped over the shaded-relief 

bathymetry for the area (sheets 1 and 2) to produce the image shown on the seafloor-character map on 

sheet 5.

The seafloor-character classification also is summarized on sheet 5 in table 1. Fine- to mediumgrained smooth sediment (sand and mud) makes up 83.0 percent (107.1 km2

) of the map area: 13.2 

percent (17.0 km2) is in Depth Zone 2, 64.5 percent (83.3 km2) is in Depth Zone 3, and 5.3 percent (6.8 

km2) is in Depth Zone 4. Mixed smooth sediment (sand and gravel) and rock (that is, sediment typically 

forming a veneer over bedrock, or rock outcrops having little to no relief) make up 7.9 percent (10.1 

km2) of the map area: 3.1 percent (4.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 2, 4.7 percent (6.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 3, 

and 0.1 percent (0.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 4. Rock and boulder, rugose (rocky outcrops, boulder fields, 

and asphalt mounds having high surficial complexity) makes up 8.8 percent (11.4 km2) of the map area: 

4.7 percent (6.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 2, 2.2 percent (2.9 km2) is in Depth Zone 3, and 1.9 percent (2.4 

km2) is in Depth Zone 4. Medium- to coarse-grained sediment (in scour depressions consisting of 

material that is coarser than the surrounding seafloor) makes up 0.2 percent (0.3 km2) of the map area: 

less than 0.1 percent (0.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 2, 0.2 percent (0.2 km2) is in Depth Zone 3, and less 

than 0.1 percent (<0.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 4. Rugged anthropogenic material makes up 0.1 percent 

(0.1 km2) of the map area: less than 0.1 percent (<0.1 km2) is in Depth Zone 2, and 0.1 percent (0.1 km2) 

is in Depth Zone 3. 

A small number of video observations and sediment samples were used to supervise the 

numerical classification of the seafloor. All video observations (see Golden and Cochrane, 2013) are 

used for accuracy assessment of the seafloor-character map after classification. To compare observations 

to classified pixels, each observation point is assigned a class (I, II, or III) according to the visually 

derived, major or minor geologic component (for example, sand or rock) and the abiotic complexity 

(vertical variability) of the substrate recorded during ground-truth surveys (table 4–1; see also, Golden 

and Cochrane, 2013). Class IV values were assigned on the basis of the observation of one or more of a 

group of features that includes both larger scale bedforms (for example, sand waves), as well as 

sediment-filled scour depressions that resemble the “rippled scour depressions” of Cacchione and others 

(1984), Hallenbeck and others (2012); and Davis and others (2013) and also the “sorted bedforms” of 

Murray and Thieler (2004), Goff and others (2005), and Trembanis and Hume (2011). On the geologic 

map (see sheet 9 of this report), they are referred to as “marine shelf scour depressions.” Class V values 

are determined from the visual characteristics and known locations of man-made features.

Next, circular buffer areas were created around individual observation points using a 10-m radius 

to account for layback and positional inaccuracies inherent to the towed-camera system. The radius 

length is an average of the distances between the positions of sharp interfaces seen on both the video 

(the position of the ship at the time of observation) and sonar data, plus the distance covered during a 

10-second observation period at an average speed of 1 nautical mile/hour. Each buffer, which covers 

more than 300 m2, contains approximately 77 pixels. The classified (I, II, III) buffer is used as a mask to 

extract pixels from the seafloor-character map. These pixels are then compared to the class of the buffer. 

For example, if the shipboard-video observation is Class II (mixed smooth sediment and rock), but 12 of 

the 77 pixels within the buffer area are characterized as Class I (fine- to medium-grained smooth 

sediment), and 15 (of the 77) are characterized as Class III (rock and boulder, rugose), then the 

comparison would be “Class I, 12; Class II, 50; Class III, 15” (fig. 4–1). If the video observation of 
14

substrate is Class II, then the classification is accurate because the majority of seafloor pixels in the 

buffer are Class II. The accuracy values in table 4–2 represent the final of several classification 

iterations aimed at achieving the best accuracy, given the variable quality of sonar data (see discussion 

in Cochrane, 2008) and the limited ground-truth information available when compared to the continuous 

coverage provided by swath sonar. Presence/absence values in table 4–2 reflect the percentages of 

observations where the sediment classification of at least one pixel within the buffer zone agreed with 

the observed sediment type at a certain location.

The classification accuracies are shown in table 4–2. The weaker agreement in Class II (27.3 

percent accurate) likely is due to the relatively narrow and intermittent nature of transition zones from 

sediment to rock, as well as the size of the buffer. Percentages for presence/absence within a buffer also 

were calculated as a better measure of the accuracy of the classification for patchy rock habitat. The 

presence/absence accuracy was found to be significant for all classes that have video observations within 

the coverage of the seafloor-character map (90.8 percent for Class I, 84.8 percent for Class II, and 95.1 

percent for Class III). No video observations or sediment samples were retrieved of Class IV (scour 

depressions) and Class V (rugged anthropogenic material); therefore, no accuracy assessments were 

performed for those classes. 

Figure 4–1. Detailed view of ground-truth data, showing accuracy-assessment methodology. A, Dots illustrate 

ground-truth observation points, each of which represents 10-second window of substrate observation plotted 

over seafloor-character grid; circle around dot illustrates area of buffer depicted in B. B, Pixels of seafloorcharacter data within 10-m-radius buffer centered on one individual ground-truth video observation.
15

Table 4–1. Conversion table showing how video observations of primary substrate (more than 50 percent seafloor 

coverage), secondary substrate (more than 20 percent seafloor coverage), and abiotic seafloor complexity (in 

first three columns) are grouped into seafloor-character-map Classes I, II, and III for use in supervised 

classification and accuracy assessment in Offshore of Point Conception map area. 

[In areas of low visibility where primary and secondary substrate could not be identified with confidence, recorded observations of 

substrate (in fourth column) were used to assess accuracy]

Primary-substrate component Secondary-substrate component Abiotic seafloor complexity Low-visibility observations

Class I

mud mud low 

mud mud moderate

mud sand low 

sand mud low 

sand mud moderate 

sand sand low 

sand sand moderate 

sediment 

 ripples 

Class II

boulders cobbles moderate 

boulders mud moderate 

cobbles gravel moderate 

cobbles mud low 

cobbles rock low 

cobbles rock moderate 

cobbles sand moderate 

gravel mud low 

gravel rock low 

mud cobbles low 

mud gravel low 

mud rock low 

mud rock moderate 

rock gravel low 

rock mud low 

rock sand low 

rock rock low 

sand boulders moderate 

sand cobbles low 

sand cobbles moderate 

sand gravel low 

sand rock low 

sand rock moderate 

Class III

boulders boulders high

boulders cobbles high

boulders rock moderate 

boulders rock high

boulders sand high

boulders sand moderate 

mud rock high
16

Table 4–1. Conversion table showing how video observations of primary substrate (more than 50 percent seafloor 

coverage), secondary substrate (more than 20 percent seafloor coverage), and abiotic seafloor complexity (in first 

three columns) are grouped into seafloor-character-map Classes I, II, and III for use in supervised classification and 

accuracy assessment in Offshore of Point Conception map area.—Continued

Primary-substrate component Secondary-substrate component Abiotic seafloor complexity Low-visibility observations

Class III—Continued

rock boulders high

rock boulders moderate

rock cobbles moderate 

rock mud moderate 

rock rock high

rock rock moderate 

rock sand high

rock sand moderate 

sand rock high

Table 4–2. Accuracy-assessment statistics for seafloor-character-map classifications in Offshore of Point 

Conception map area. 

[Accuracy assessments are based on video observations (N/A, no accuracy assessment was conducted)]

Class Number of observations % majority % presence/absence

I—Fine- to medium-grained smooth sediment 196 76.0 90.8

II—Mixed smooth sediment and rock 66 27.3 84.8

III—Rock and boulder, rugose 41 73.2 95.1

IV—Medium- to coarse-grained sediment (in scour 

depressions) 0 N/A N/A 

V—Rugged anthropogenic material 0 N/A N/A 
17

Chapter 5. Marine Benthic Habitats of the Offshore of Point Conception

Map Area (Sheet 6) 

By Guy R. Cochrane and Stephen R. Hartwell

The map on sheet 6 shows physical marine benthic habitats in the Offshore of Point Conception 

map area. Marine benthic habitats represent a particular type of substrate and geomorphology that may 

provide a habitat for a specific species or assemblage of organisms. Marine benthic habitats are 

classified using the Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard (CMECS), developed by 

representatives from a consortium of Federal agencies. CMECS is the Federal standard for marine 

habitat characterization (available at https://www.fgdc.gov/standards/projects/FGDC-standardsprojects/cmecs-folder/CMECS_Version_06-2012_FINAL.pdf). The standard provides an ecologically 

relevant structure for biologic-, geologic-, chemical-, and physical-habitat attributes.

The map illustrates the geoform and substrate components of the CMECS standard and their

distribution in the Offshore of Point Conception map area. Geoform components describe the major 

geomorphic and structural characteristics of the coast and seafloor (that is, the tectonic and 

physiographic settings and the geological, biogenic, and anthropogenic features). The map was derived 

from the geologic and geomorphic map of the seafloor (see sheet 9) by translation of the map-unit 

descriptions into the best-fit values of the CMECS classes. A geoform is found in the CMECS 

description when the geologic map-unit description includes a geomorphologic element. Geologic map 

units that lack grain size information, such as anthropogenic features, will correspondingly lack a 

CMECS substrate classification. The map also includes a temporal attribute for each unit that indicates 

time period of persistence, as well as an induration attribute that allows resymbolization of the datacatalog shapefile into a simple map of hard-mixed-soft attributes essential for fish-habitat assessment.

CMECS codes are provided in the data-catalog shapefile and in table 5–1 (the CMECS coding 

system is described at https://coast.noaa.gov/digitalcoast/sites/default/files/files/publications/21072015/ 

CMECS_Coding_System_Approach_20140619.pdf). Note that the CMECS codes are designed to 

facilitate database searching and sorting but are not used for map symbolization on the benthic habitat 

map (sheet 6); instead, polygons are labeled with a letter that identifies the CMECS physiographic 

setting (S, continental shelf; L, continental slope) and a number for each map unit within that setting 

(table 5–1). 

Map Area Habitats

The Offshore of Point Conception map area includes the continental shelf and small parts of the 

upper slope, in a major transitional zone between the exposed, northwest-trending central California 

coast and the more protected, east-west-trending coast of the Santa Barbara Channel. Delineated on the 

map are 13 marine benthic habitat types: 11 types are located on the continental shelf, and 2 are located 

on the slope (table 5–1; see also table 1 on sheet 6). The habitats include soft, unconsolidated sediment 

(9 habitat types) such as fine sand and mud and also just sand, as well as dynamic features such as 

mobile sand sheets, sediment waves, and rippled sediment depressions; mixed substrate (1 habitat type) 

such as intermittent sands that overlie hard consolidated bedrock; and hard substrate (2 habitat types) 

such as bedrock. In addition, one habitat that contains anthropogenic features (a wreck) is mapped in the 

map area. 

Of the total of 137.1 km2 mapped in the Offshore of Point Conception map area, 131.1 km2 (95.6 

percent) is mapped in the continental shelf setting, and 6.0 km2 (4.4 percent) is mapped in the slope 

setting. In the continental shelf setting, “soft-induration” unconsolidated sediment is the dominant 

habitat type (map units S1, S4–S8, S14), covering 97.2 km2 (70.9 percent); “mixed-induration” 
18

substrate (map unit S2) covers 7.6 km2 (5.5 percent); and “hard-induration” rock and boulders (map 

units S3, S10) covers 26.4 km2 (19.2 percent) (terminology from Greene and others, 2007). On the 

continental shelf, anthropogenic substrate (map unit S12; a wreck) covers 0.003 km2 and, thus, is not 

significant. In the slope setting, soft substrate is the only habitat type (map units L1, L2), covering 6.0 

km2 (4.4 percent). 

Table 5–1. Marine benthic habitats from Coastal and Marine Ecological Classification Standard mapped in Offshore 

of Point Conception map area, showing description and total area, in square meters, of each.

Map-unit 

label

CMECS code Description Area, in square 

meters

S1 Gt8p6g1.49S1.2.2.2.3SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Ripples.

Medium Sand. Soft Substrate Induration. Decades Persistence

79,521,877

S2 Gt8p6g1.49g1.64S1.2.2.2S1.1.1SI2P8 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Ripples. Rock 

Outcrop. Sand. Bedrock. Mixed Substrate Induration. Years Persistence

7,569,000

S3 Gt8p6g1.50S1.1.1SI1P10 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Rock Outcrop.

Bedrock. Hard Substrate Induration. Centuries Persistence

23,757,954

S4 Gt8p6g1.46S1.2.2SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Pockmark 

Field. Fine Unconsolidated Substrate. Soft Substrate Induration. 

Decades Persistence

4,200,360

S5 Gt8p6g1S1.2.1.2.1SI2p9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Sandy Gravel.

Soft Substrate Induration. Decades Persistence

233,981

S6 Gt8p6g1S1.2.2.4.2SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Sandy SiltClay. Soft Substrate Induration. Decades Persistence

11,751,758

S7 Gt8p6g1.14.1S1.2.1.3.1SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Scour 

Depression. Gravelly Sand. Soft Substrate Induration. Decades 

Persistence

253,503

S8 Gt8p6g1.53S1.2.2.1.1SI3P8 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Sediment 

Wave Field. Slightly Gravelly Sand. Soft Substrate Induration. Years 

Persistence

1,152,962

S10 Gt8p6g1.39.1S1.1SI1P10 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Tar Mound.

Rock Substrate. Hard Substrate Induration. Centuries Persistence

2,591,274

S12 Gt8p6g3.17P10 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Wreck.

Centuries Persistence

3,496

S14 Gt8p6g1.1S1.2.1.3.1SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Shelf. Apron.

Gravelly Sand. Soft Substrate Induration. Decades Persistence

77,285

L1 Gt8p8g1.52S1.2.2.3.1SI3P9 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Slope. Runnel/Rill.

Silty Sand. Soft Substrate Induration. Decades Persistence

585,047

L2 Gt8p8g1S1.2.2.4.2SI3P8 Transform Continental Margin. Continental/Island Slope. Sandy SiltClay. Soft Substrate Induration. Years Persistence

5,385,351
19

Chapter 6. Subsurface Geology and Structure of the Offshore of Point 

Conception Map Area and the Santa Barbara Channel Region (Sheets 7 

and 8) 

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell

The seismic-reflection profiles presented on sheet 7 provide a third dimension—depth beneath 

the seafloor—to complement the surficial seafloor-mapping data already presented (sheets 1 through 6) 

for the Offshore of Point Conception map area. These data, which are collected at several resolutions,

extend to varying depths in the subsurface, depending on the purpose and mode of data acquisition. The 

seismic-reflection profiles (sheet 7) provide information on sediment character, distribution, and 

thickness; the profiles also provide information on potential geologic hazards, which include active 

faults, areas that are prone to strong ground motion, and areas that have potential for tsunamigenic slope 

failures. The information on faults provides essential input to national and state earthquake-hazard maps 

and assessments (see, for example, Petersen and others, 2014). 

The maps on sheet 8 show the following interpretations, which are based on the seismicreflection profiles on sheet 7: the thickness of the composite uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene 

sediment unit; the depth to base of this uppermost unit; and both the local and regional distribution of 

faults (includes new data from this report, as well as from Jennings and Bryant, 2010; U.S. Geological 

Survey and California Geological Survey, 2016; and Johnson and others, 2017b) and earthquake 

epicenters (U.S. Geological Survey, 2016). 

Data Acquisition

Most profiles displayed on sheet 7 (figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12) were collected in 2014 on 

U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) cruise S–01–13–SC, using the SIG 2Mille minisparker system. This 

system used a 500-J high-voltage electrical discharge fired 1 to 2 times per second, which, at normal 

survey speeds of 4 to 4.5 nautical miles per hour, gives a data trace every 1 to 2 m of lateral distance 

covered. The data were digitally recorded in standard SEG-Y 32-bit floating-point format, using Triton 

Subbottom Logger (SBL) software that merges seismic-reflection data with differential GPS-navigation 

data. After the survey, a short-window (20 ms) automatic gain control algorithm was applied to the data, 

along with a 160- to 1,200-Hz bandpass filter and a heave correction that uses an automatic seafloordetection window (averaged over 30 m of lateral distance covered). These data can resolve geologic 

features a few meters thick (and, hence, are considered “high-resolution”), down to subbottom depths of 

as much as 400 m. 

Figure 10 on sheet 7 shows a migrated, multichannel seismic-reflection profile collected in 1984 

by WesternGeco on cruise W–37–84–SC. This profile and other similar data were collected in many 

areas offshore of California in the 1970s and 1980s when these areas were considered a frontier for oil 

and gas exploration. Much of these data have been publicly released and are now archived at the U.S. 

Geological Survey National Archive of Marine Seismic Surveys (Triezenberg and others, 2016). These 

data were acquired using a large-volume air-gun source that has a frequency range of 3 to 40 Hz and 

recorded with a multichannel hydrophone streamer about 2 km long. Shot spacing was about 30 m. 

These data can resolve geologic features that are 20 to 30 m thick, down to subbottom depths of as much 

as 4 km. 

Seismic-Reflection Imaging of the Continental Shelf 

Sheet 7 shows seismic-reflection profiles in the offshore part of the Offshore of Point Conception 

map area, providing an image of the subsurface geology. The map area is characterized by a relatively 
20

flat shelf that decreases in slope (from about 1.1° to 0.7°) from southeast to northwest. The shelf is 

underlain by Neogene sedimentary rocks and uppermost Pleistocene to Holocene sediments (see sheet 

9). Neogene units include the Miocene Monterey Formation and the upper Miocene and lower Pliocene 

Sisquoc Formation. On high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles, these strata commonly yield parallel 

to subparallel, continuous, variable-amplitude, high-frequency reflections (terminology from Mitchum 

and others, 1977); however, these strata are cut by numerous faults and commonly are folded, in many 

places too steeply folded to be imaged on seismic-reflection profiles. Local zones that lack reflections 

probably also are the result of the presence of interstitial gas within the sediments. This effect has been 

referred to as "gas blanking," "acoustic turbidity," or "acoustic masking" (Hovland and Judd, 1988; 

Fader, 1997). The gas scatters or attenuates the acoustic energy, preventing penetration. Not 

surprisingly, this effect is especially prevalent where numerous large asphalt mounds (see figs. 5 through 

9 on sheet 7) and pockmark fields are present on the seafloor (see also, sheet 9).

Eustasy was an important control on latest Pleistocene to Holocene shelf deposition in the 

Offshore of Point Conception map area. Surficial and shallow sediments were deposited on the shelf in 

the last about 21,000 years during the sea-level rise that followed the last major lowstand and the Last 

Glacial Maximum (LGM) (Stanford and others, 2011). Global sea level was about 120 to 130 m lower 

during the LGM, at which time the shelf around Point Conception was emergent. The post-LGM sealevel rise was rapid (about 9 to 11 m per thousand years) until about 7,000 years ago, when it slowed 

considerably to about 1 m per thousand years (Peltier and Fairbanks, 2006; Stanford and others, 2011). 

The sediments deposited on the shelf during the post-LGM sea-level rise (above a transgressive surface 

of erosion) are shaded blue on the high-resolution seismic-reflection profiles (figs. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 

11, 12 on sheet 7), and their thicknesses are shown on sheet 8. On most profiles, the base of the postLGM depositional unit is a flat to concave, angular unconformity characterized by an obvious change in 

reflectivity. 

Geologic Structure and Recent Deformation

High-resolution seismic-reflection profiles in the Offshore of Point Conception map area (sheet 

7) primarily show Neogene strata that, on a larger scale, are folded within a large, east-west-striking 

homocline that extends from the south flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains (fig. 1–2) into the offshore to 

both the south and west. The homocline formed above the blind Pitas Point–North Channel Fault system 

(fig. 1–3), as indicated on nearby regional cross sections (Redin and others, 2005) and on industry 

seismic-reflection profiles (see fig. 10 on sheet 7; see also, Sorlien and Nicholson, 2015). The tip of the 

fault system is inferred to be buried to a depth of about 2 to 3 km below sea level (about 1.5 to 2 sec 

TWT6) about 4 to 6 km offshore, beneath the slope on the north flank of the Santa Barbara Basin. 

The hanging wall of the Pitas Point–North Channel Fault system (fig. 1–3) is inferred to include 

several blind splays that are structurally above the main fault, on the basis of the irregular pattern of 

shallow folds in the map area. Closely spaced seismic-reflection profiles reveal many shallow, westnorthwest-striking folds that have variable geometries, lengths, amplitudes, degrees of continuity, and 

wavelengths. The Government Point Syncline, which is the most prominent fold, has been mapped both 

onshore at Point Conception (Dibblee, 1988a) and offshore to the west and east of Point Conception; the 

syncline has a cumulative length of more than 22 km (see sheet 9). Local thickening of post-LGM 

sediments along the axis of the Government Point Syncline (see figs. 2, 3, 4 on sheet 7) could reflect 

syntectonic sedimentation. Onland at Point Conception, Rockwell and others (1992) also documented 

active folding of late Pleistocene marine terraces in the Government Point Syncline. This regionally 

extensive syncline and many shorter, east-west-striking folds and faults probably are rooted in blind 

 

6 Two-way travel time
21

thrust faults and back-thrust faults in the hanging wall above the Pitas Point–North Channel Fault 

system (fig. 1–3). 

The regional pattern of faults and earthquakes occurring between 1932 and June 14, 2016, that 

have inferred or measured magnitudes greater than 2.0 are shown on Map C on sheet 8. Although 

locations have been provided by the CalTech network since 1932, significantly greater precision began 

in 1969 with installation of a USGS seismographic network (see, for example, Lee and Vedder, 1973; 

Sylvester, 2001; U.S. Geological Survey, 2016). Epicentral data indicate that seismicity in the western 

and central Santa Barbara Channel is characterized by earthquake swarms, relatively frequent minor 

earthquakes, and infrequent major earthquakes. 

Three significant earthquakes affected the Santa Barbara Channel area prior to 1932 (the year of 

the earliest earthquake in the U.S. Geological Survey [2016] catalog): in 1812, 1857 (the Fort Tejon 

earthquake on the San Andreas Fault), and 1925 (Stover and Coffman, 1993). Sylvester and others 

(1970) reported a location in the northern Santa Barbara Channel for the 1925 event (M6.3), as well as

for a 1941 earthquake (~M5.5, 7/1/1941) about 7 km offshore and 15 km southeast of Santa Barbara, the 

largest earthquake shown on Map C (sheet 8). In addition, Sylvester and others (1970) documented a 

swarm of 62 earthquakes (M2.5–M5.2) that occurred between 6/26/1968 and 8/3/1968, which also were 

located 10 to 15 km south (offshore) of Santa Barbara. The largest recorded event in the Offshore of 

Point Conception map area (~M3.7) occurred on 9/10/2009, near the shoreline in the northwestern part 

of the map area (U.S. Geological Survey, 2016). 

Thickness and Depth to Base of Uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene Deposits

Maps on sheet 8 show the thickness and the depth to base (from sea level) of uppermost 

Pleistocene and Holocene (post-LGM) deposits both for the Offshore of Point Conception map area 

(Maps A, B) and, to establish regional context, for a larger area (about 130 km of coast) that extends 

from the vicinity of Hueneme Canyon northwest to Point Conception (Maps D, E). To make these maps, 

water bottom and depth to base of the uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene sediment layers were 

mapped from seismic-reflection profiles (see sheet 7). The difference between the two horizons was 

exported for every shot point as XY coordinates (UTM zone 10) and two-way travel time (TWT). The 

thickness of the uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene unit (Maps B, E) was determined by applying a 

sound velocity of 1,600 m/sec to the TWT. The thickness points were interpolated to a preliminary 

continuous surface, overlaid with zero-thickness bedrock outcrops (see sheet 9), and contoured, 

following the methodology of Wong and others (2012). Data within Hueneme Canyon were excluded 

from the contouring because the seismic-reflection data are too sparse to adequately image the highly 

variable changes in sediment thickness that characterize the canyon.

Several factors required manual editing of the preliminary thickness maps to make the final 

product. The Red Mountain Fault Zone, Pitas Point Fault, and Oak Ridge Fault disrupt the sediment 

sequence in the region (Maps D, E on sheet 8). In addition, the thickness data points are dense along 

tracklines (about 1 m apart) and sparse between tracklines (1 to 2 km apart), resulting in contouring 

artifacts. To incorporate the effect of the faults, to remove irregularities from interpolation, and to reflect 

other geologic information and complexity, the resulting interpolated contours were modified. Contour 

modifications and regridding were repeated several times to produce the final regional sedimentthickness map. Data for the depth to base of the uppermost Pleistocene and Holocene unit (Maps A, D) 

were generated by adding the thickness data to water depths determined by multibeam bathymetry (see 

sheet 1).

South and east of Point Conception, most of the shelf is underlain by bedrock that has a thin 

(<2.5 m) post-LGM sediment cover (Map B on sheet 8). West and northwest of Point Conception, 

thicker sediment (as much as 13 m) is found in the midshelf area along the axis of the regionally 

extensive (22-km-long) Government Point Syncline and also an unnamed syncline farther north. The 
22

post-LGM sediment unit has its maximum thickness (18 m) in the midshelf area adjacent to a large 

asphalt mound (see fig. 8 on sheet 7) about 1.75 km west of Point Conception. Mean sediment thickness 

on the shelf in the map area is 2.6 m, and the total sediment volume on the shelf is 1,248×106 m3 (table 

6–1). Small coastal watersheds that drain the western Santa Ynez Mountains are the inferred primary 

sediment source. It is also possible that the shelf in the map area receives sediment from the Santa Ynez 

River (fig. 1); however, this would require about 25 km of southward sediment transport around Point 

Arguello. 

Five different “domains” of sediment thickness, which are bounded either by faults or by 

Hueneme Canyon, are recognized on the regional maps (Maps D, E on sheet 8): (1) north of the south 

strand of the Red Mountain Fault Zone; (2) between the south strand of the Red Mountain Fault Zone 

and the Pitas Point Fault; (3) between the Pitas Point and Oak Ridge Faults; (4) between the Oak Ridge 

Fault and Hueneme Canyon; and (5) south of Hueneme Canyon. Table 6–1 shows the area of these five 

domains, along with estimates of their mean sediment thickness and total sediment volume. These data 

highlight the contrast among three general zones of sediment thickness: (1) the uplifted, sediment-poor 

Santa Barbara and Point Conception shelf (domain 1; mean sediment thickness of 4.2 m); (2) a 

transitional zone (domain 2; mean sediment thickness of 18.0 m); and (3) the subsiding, sediment-rich 

delta and shelf offshore of the Ventura and Santa Clara Rivers and Calleguas Creek (domains 3, 4, and 

5; mean sediment thicknesses of 39.2, 38.9, and 28.3 m, respectively). 

Table 6–1. Area, sediment-thickness, and sediment-volume data for California's State Waters in Santa Barbara 

Channel region, between Point Conception and Hueneme Canyon areas (domains 1–5), as well as in Offshore 

of Point Conception map area.

[Data from within Hueneme Canyon were not included in this analysis]

Regional sediment-thickness domains in Santa Barbara Channel region

Area (km2) Mean sediment 

thickness (m)

Sediment volume (106 

m3) 

(1) Point Conception to south strand of Red Mountain Fault Zone 597.9 4.2 2,507

(2) South strand of Red Mountain Fault Zone to Pitas Point Fault 67.1 18.0 1,205

(3) Pitas Point Fault to Oak Ridge Fault 68.6 39.2 2,688

(4) Oak Ridge Fault to Hueneme Canyon 75.4 38.9 2,933

(5) South of Hueneme Canyon 53.9 28.3 1,527

Sediment thicknesses in Offshore of Point Conception map area

Offshore of Point Conception map area 154.3 2.6 1,248
23

Chapter 7. Geologic and Geomorphic Map of the Offshore of Point 

Conception Map Area (Sheet 9) 

By Samuel Y. Johnson and Stephen R. Hartwell 

Geologic and Geomorphic Summary 

Marine geology and geomorphology were mapped in the Offshore of Point Conception map area 

from the shoreline to the 3-nautical-mile limit of California’s State Waters. The location of the 

shoreline, which is from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA’s) Shoreline 

Data Explorer, is based on their analysis of lidar imagery (National Geodetic Survey, 2016). Offshore 

geologic units were delineated on the basis of integrated analyses of adjacent onshore geology with 

multibeam bathymetry and backscatter imagery (sheets 1, 2, 3), seafloor-sediment and rock samples 

(Reid and others, 2006), digital camera and video imagery (Golden and Cochrane, 2013), and highresolution seismic-reflection profiles (sheet 7). Bathymetric lidar and aerial photographs taken in 

multiple years were used to map the nearshore area (0 to 10 m water depth) and to link the offshore and 

onshore geology. 

The onshore geology was compiled from Dibblee (1988a,b); unit ages, which are derived from 

these sources, reflect local stratigraphic relations. In addition, some Quaternary units were modified by 

C.W. Davenport on the basis of analysis of 2004 ifSAR and 2009 lidar imagery. 

The offshore part of the map area largely consists of a gently offshore-dipping shelf underlain by 

Neogene bedrock, as well as by Holocene sediments that are derived primarily from relatively small 

coastal watersheds that drain the Santa Ynez Mountains (fig. 1–2). The dip of the shelf gradually 

changes from about 1.1° south and east of Point Conception to about 0.7° on the broader shelf west of 

Point Conception. Holocene nearshore and shelf deposits are primarily sand (unit Qms). A distinct field 

(about 1.15 km2) of northeast-trending (~60° azimuth), low-relief sand ridges (unit Qmsr) is present in

the midshelf area about 1.5 to 3.0 km south of Point Conception, at water depths of 65 to 80 m; the 

crests of the sand ridges are as high as 60 cm and as long as 750 m, and they are spaced at intervals of 

about 125 to 200 m. 

Coarser grained sediments (units Qmsc, Qmsd) are mapped on the basis of their high 

backscatter and, in some cases, their moderate seafloor relief. Unit Qmsc, which ranges from coarse 

sand and gravel to possibly boulders, is found as (1) a southwest-trending lens about 650 m south of 

Point Conception, at depths of 15 to 40 m, and (2) along the margins of seafloor bedrock outcrops 

between Point Conception and Point Arguello, at depths of about 30 to 50 m. Unit Qmsd, inferred to 

consist of coarse sand and possibly gravel, is found as single depressions or in groups of depressions 

interspersed with elevated shelf sediments (unit Qms) adjacent to seafloor bedrock outcrops, at water 

depths of about 15 to 40 m. Areas in which unit Qmsd is found are not likely to change substantially, 

but the boundaries of unit(s) and locations of individual depressions (and intervening flat sheets) likely 

are ephemeral, changing during significant storm events.

Finer grained sediment—the very fine sand, silt, and clay of unit Qmsf—is mapped between 

depths of about 80 m and the shelf break, which is present only in the southwesternmost part of the map 

area, at a depth of about 100 m. The boundary between units Qms and Qmsf is based on observations 

and extrapolation from sparse sediment sampling (for example, Reid and others, 2006) and camera 

ground-truth surveying (Golden and Cochrane, 2013). Thus, the boundary between units Qms and 

Qmsf should be considered transitional and approximate and is expected to shift as a result of seasonalto annual- to decadal-scale cycles in wave climate, sediment supply, and sediment transport. 

Fine-grained deposits similar to unit Qmsf also are found below the shelf break on the upper 

slope, at water depths greater than 100 m, where they are mapped as a separate unit (unit Qmsl) on the 
24

basis of their location and geomorphology. Both the shelf break and upper slope are incised by a 600-mwide, 20- to 30-m-deep, south-facing trough, probably filled with sand and mud (unit Qmcr), that is one 

of five heads of the informally named Arguello submarine canyon (Greene and others, 1991; Eichhubl 

and others, 2002; Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, 2002). 

Bedrock exposures along the shoreline both north and east of Point Conception primarily consist 

of marine shale, claystone, and diatomite of the upper Miocene and lower Pliocene Sisquoc Formation 

(unit Tsq). Adjacent Tsq seafloor outcrops commonly have a “ribbed” appearance, reflecting the 

differential erosion of variably resistant interbeds. Unit Tsq overlies the Miocene Monterey Formation 

(Tm), which crops out on the seafloor in the nearshore on the west flank of Government Point, as well 

as in the nearshore to inner shelf areas in the northwestern part of the map area. Because of the lack of 

sampling and their relative lack of distinctive seafloor morphology, some seafloor bedrock outcrops 

cannot be confidently assigned to either unit Tm or unit Tsq; these areas are mapped as the undivided 

Tertiary bedrock unit (Tbu).

Bedrock is, in some places, overlain by a thin (less than 1 m?) veneer of sediment, recognized on 

the basis of high backscatter, flat relief, continuity with moderate- to high-relief bedrock outcrops, and 

(in some cases) high-resolution seismic-reflection data; these areas, which are mapped as composite 

units Qms/Tm, Qms/Tsq, Qms/Tbu, Qmsf/Tbu, or Qmsl/Tbu, are interpreted as ephemeral sediment 

layers that may or may not be continuously present, whose presence or absence is a function of the 

recency and intensity of storm events, seasonal and (or) annual patterns of sediment movement, or 

longer term climate cycles. 

The Santa Barbara Channel region is a mature hydrocarbon province (Kunitomi and others, 

1998) that is well known for hydrocarbon-induced seafloor topography (Keller and others, 2007). 

Geomorphic features associated with petroleum seepage on the shelf and upper slope, which are 

prevalent near Point Conception (Draut and others, 2009; Lorenson and others, 2009, 2014), include 

fields of dense pockmarks (unit Qmp) and asphalt mounds (unit Qas). In the Offshore of Point 

Conception map area, pockmarks are predominantly grouped or, less commonly, solitary; are circular to 

elliptical; range in size from 50 to 150 m along their long axis; typically are 20 to 40 cm deep; and 

commonly have a central cone as much as 150 cm high. Grouped pockmarks cover about 4.2 km2 of the 

map area. The largest mapped asphalt mounds cover 675,856 m2 and 168,950 m2, and they have as much 

as about 12 m of relief above the seafloor. Draut and others (2009) noted that such large mounds likely 

consist of a mix of tar and sediment, and Lorenson and others (2014) calculated areas and volumes of 

asphalt in the Point Conception area and the larger Santa Barbara Channel region. The asphalt mounds 

in the Offshore of Point Conception map area, which are mainly found on the south flank of the Point 

Conception Anticline, cover about 2.6 km2. 

Pipelines through California’s State Waters, which are associated with petroleum platforms 

located farther offshore in federal waters, are mapped as unit af. The remains of two large (about 75 and 

60 m long) ships, mapped as unit ass, are located about 550 m northeast of Government Point, at a 

water depth of 10 m, and about 5.8 km east of Government Point, at a depth of 22 m. The relative 

proportions of all offshore map units are shown in table 7–1. 

Neogene strata are deformed in a fold belt that, on a regional scale, is located within a large, 

east-west-striking, south-dipping homocline that extends from the south flank of the Santa Ynez 

Mountains into the offshore to the south and west. Nearby regional cross sections (Redin and others, 

2005) and industry seismic-reflection profiles (see fig. 10 on sheet 7; see also, Sorlien and Nicholson, 

2015) showed that the homocline formed above the blind Pitas Point–North Channel Fault system,

which in the offshore extends westward for more than 100 km, from Pitas Point (10 km northwest of 

Ventura) to beyond Point Conception (fig. 1–3). South of Point Conception, the tip of the Pitas Point–

North Channel Fault is inferred to be buried beneath the slope about 5 to 6 km offshore, to a depth of 

about 2 to 3 km below sea level. 
25

In the offshore part of the map area, closely spaced seismic-reflection profiles (see sheet 7) 

image many shallow, west-northwest-striking folds that have variable geometries, lengths, amplitudes, 

degrees of continuity, and wavelengths. The Government Point Syncline, which is the most prominent

fold, has been mapped both onshore at Point Conception (Dibblee, 1988a) and in the offshore both to the 

west and east; it has a cumulative length of more than 22 km. Local thickening of post-LGM sediments 

along the axis of the Government Point Syncline (see figs. 2, 3, 4 on sheet 7) could reflect syntectonic 

sedimentation. Onland at Point Conception, Rockwell and others (1992) also documented active folding 

of late Pleistocene marine terraces in the Government Point Syncline. This regionally extensive syncline 

and many shorter, east-west-striking folds and faults probably are rooted in blind thrust faults and backthrust faults in the hanging wall above the Pitas Point–North Channel Fault system (fig. 1–3). 

Table 7–1. Areas and relative proportions of offshore geologic map units in Offshore of Point Conception map area.

Map Unit Area (m2) Area (km2) Percent of total area

Marine shelf and upper slope sedimentary units

af 77,285 0.1 0.1

aw 3,496 0.0 0.0

Qms 79,521,877 79.5 58.0

Qmsc 233,981 0.2 0.2

Qmsf 11,751,758 11.8 8.6

Qmsd 253,503 0.3 0.2

Qmp 4,200,360 4.2 3.1

Qmsl 5,385,351 5.4 3.9

Qmcr 585,047 0.6 0.4

Qas 2,591,274 2.6 1.9

Qmsr 1,152,962 1.2 0.8

Total, shelf sediment units 105,756,894.0 105.8 77.1

Marine shelf bedrock and (or) shallow bedrock units

Qms/Tbu 3,623,793 3.6 2.6

Qms/Tm 59,867 0.1 0.0

Qms/Tsq 1,920,945 1.9 1.4

Qmsf/Tbu 1,860,865 1.9 1.4

Qmsl/Tbu 103,531 0.1 0.1

Tbu 1,108,739 1.1 0.8

Tsq 20,137,124 20.1 14.7

Tm 2,512,090 2.5 1.8

Total, shelf bedrock units 31,326,953.8 31.3 22.9

Total, Offshore of Point Conception map area 137,083,847.7 137.1 100.0
26

DESCRIPTION OF MAP UNITS

OFFSHORE GEOLOGIC AND GEOMORPHIC UNITS

[Note that, where older units (typically, bedrock) are overlain by thin (<1 m thick) unconsolidated

Quaternary deposits, composite units are mapped. These composite units, which are shown with gray, 

white, or black stipple pattern on older unit, are designated by composite label indicating both overlying 

sediment cover and lower (older) unit, separated by a slash (for example, Qms/Tm indicates that thin 

sheet of Qms overlies Tm)]

af Artificial seafloor (late Holocene)—Pipelines west of Point Conception; associated with 

offshore oil platforms 

ass Artificially modified seafloor (late Holocene)—Shipwreck(?)

Qms Marine nearshore and shelf deposits (late Holocene)—Mostly sand; ripples common. 

Found on gently seaward-dipping (about 0.7° to 1.1°) surface that extends from 

nearshore to water depths of as much as about 85 m

Qmsc Coarse-grained marine nearshore and shelf deposits (late Holocene)—Ranges from 

coarse sand and gravel to boulders. Found as southwest-trending lens about 650 m 

south of Point Conception, at depths of 15 to 40 m, and along margins of seafloor 

bedrock outcrops between Point Conception and Point Arguello, at depths of about 30 

to 50 m 

Qmsf Fine-grained marine shelf deposits (late Holocene)—Mostly clay, silt, and very fine sand; 

commonly bioturbated; found on outer shelf, at water depths of more than about 85 m

Qmsd Marine shelf scour depressions (late Holocene)—Inferred to be coarse sand and possibly 

gravel, in low-relief scour depressions; found as single depressions or in groups of 

depressions interspersed with elevated shelf sediments (unit Qms) adjacent to 

seafloor bedrock outcrops, at water depths of about 15 to 40 m. Acoustic-backscatter 

data show intensity contrasts that suggest depressions are filled with sediment that is 

coarser than bounding elevated, sandy shelf deposits. Areas in which unit is found are

not likely to change substantially, but boundaries of unit(s) and locations of 

individual depressions (and intervening flat sheets) likely are ephemeral, prone to 

change during significant storm events 

Qmsr Marine shelf sand ridges (late Holocene)—Field (about 1.15 km2) of low-relief sand ridges 

and intervening troughs about 1.5 to 3.0 km south of Point Conception, at water 

depths of 65 to 80 m. Crests of sand ridges trend northeast (~60° azimuth), are as 

much as 750 m long, are spaced at intervals of about 125 to 200 m, and have heights 

of as much as 60 cm

Qmsl Marine upper slope deposits (Holocene)—Predominantly clay, silt, and very fine sand; 

commonly bioturbated. Found below shelf break on seaward-dipping (about 2.5°) 

surface, at water depths of more than about 100 m 

Qmcr Marine slope canyons and rills (Holocene)—Probably sand and mud; forms incised trough, 

about 20 to 30 m deep and 600 m wide, into shelf break and outer shelf southwest of 

Point Conception; one of five heads of informally named Arguello canyon (Greene 

and others, 1991)

Qmp Marine pockmarks (Holocene)—Sand and mud, in circular to elliptical pockmarks. 

Pockmarks are solitary or grouped, and they range in size from 50 to 150 m on their 

long axis; they typically are 20 to 40 cm deep and ringed with convex rim as high as 

150 cm 
27

Qas Asphalt deposits (Holocene)—Asphalt (tar) mounds, probably mixed with sediment; 

weathered and biodegraded oil derived from underlying or nearby natural 

hydrocarbon seeps. Largest mounds cover 675,856 m2 and 168,950 m2 and have as 

much as about 12 m of relief above seafloor

Tbu Bedrock, undivided (Pliocene and Miocene)—Mainly mudstone and siltstone. Probably 

consists of the lower Pliocene and upper Miocene Sisquoc Formation and the 

Miocene Monterey Formation. Stippled areas are composite units where thin sheets of 

sediment (either Qms, Qmsf, or Qmsl) overlie bedrock: gray stipple indicates 

composite unit Qms/Tbu; white stipple, composite unit Qmsf/Tbu; and black 

stipple, composite unit Qmsl/Tbu

Tsq Sisquoc Formation (early Pliocene and late Miocene)—Marine, tan- to white-weathering, 

diatomaceous mudstone and shale, conglomerate, and subordinate dolomite. Stippled 

areas (composite unit Qms/Tsq) indicate where thin sheets of Qms overlie unit 

Tm Monterey Formation (Miocene)—Predominantly well-bedded, siliceous and calcareous 

mudstone and shale. Stippled areas (composite unit Qms/Tm) indicate where thin 

sheets of Qms overlie unit 

ONSHORE GEOLOGIC AND GEOMORPHIC UNITS

[Units compiled and modified from Dibblee (1988a,b); unit ages, which are from these sources, reflect 

local stratigraphic relations. In addition, some Quaternary units modified by C.W. Davenport on basis of 

analysis of 2004 ifSAR and 2009 lidar imagery] 

af Artificial fill (late Holocene)—Engineered and (or) nonengineered material deposited by 

humans 

Qb Beach deposits (late Holocene)—Unconsolidated, loose, fine- to coarse-grained sand, 

pebbles, and boulders; well sorted. Mapped in coastal band from shoreline to highest 

elevation of swash zone; may consist of thin veneer over bedrock platform 

Qsc Active stream-channel deposits (late Holocene)—Active stream channels that contain 

unconsolidated sand, silt, and gravel deposits 

Qd Dune-sand deposits (late Holocene)—Very well sorted, fine to medium sand; forms active 

dunes along coast

Qal Alluvial deposits, undivided (Holocene)—Sand, gravel, and silt deposits, adjacent to or 

near active stream channels. Locally, may include stream-terrace and -channel 

deposits too small to delineate at map scale

Qyf Alluvial fan deposits (Holocene)—Unconsolidated, heterogeneous layers of sand, silt, and 

gravel; relatively undissected; deposited by streams emanating from canyons onto 

alluvial plains; identified primarily by fan morphology and topographic expression. 

Internal contacts delineate individual alluvial fans

Qc Colluvium (Holocene)—Loose to firm, unsorted sand, silt, clay, gravel, rock debris, and 

organic material; includes slope wash and valley fill; may contain numerous small 

landslides and (or) coalesced alluvial fans

Qls Landslide deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene)—Deposits of diverse slope-movement 

processes; ranges from poorly sorted, disrupted mixtures of rock fragments and soil to 

relatively intact bedrock slump blocks; queried where identity is uncertain. Internal 

contacts delineate individual landslide bodies 

Qa Alluvial deposits, undivided (Holocene and Pleistocene)—Sand, gravel, and silt deposits. 

Mapped on gently sloping to level surfaces near stream channels, where relative ages 

are uncertain or where separate units could not be delineated at map scale
28

Qf Alluvial fan deposits (Holocene and Pleistocene)—Poorly consolidated silt, sand, and 

gravel deposits. Mapped either where older age is indicated by greater degree of 

dissection or where elevations are higher than that of adjacent Holocene alluvial fans 

Qof Alluvial fan deposits (Pleistocene)—Discontinuous or highly dissected deposits of 

semiconsolidated, moderately to poorly sorted layers of silty clay, silt, sand, and 

gravel 

Qmt Marine-terrace deposits, undivided (Pleistocene)—Semiconsolidated sand and local gravel 

deposits; on uplifted marine-abrasion platforms along coast; locally, may include 

fluvial and (or) colluvial deposits too small to delineate at map scale 

Tsq Sisquoc Formation (early Pliocene and late Miocene)—Marine shale, claystone, and 

diatomite; queried where identity is uncertain

Tm Monterey Formation, undivided (Miocene)—Marine, predominantly well-bedded, 

siliceous chert, mudstone, shale, diatomite, and conglomerate breccia. Locally 

divided into three subunits that are distinguished by stratigraphic position, lithology, 

and (or) age 

Tmc Chert (Miocene)

Tml Light-gray diatomite (Miocene)

Tmls Semisiliceous shale (Miocene)

Tt Tranquillon Volcanics (Miocene)—Rhyolitic tuff breccia 

Tr Rincon Shale (early Miocene)—Marine shale or claystone; queried where identity is 

uncertain

Tv Vaqueros Formation (late Oligocene)—Marine calcareous sandstone. Includes one subunit

Tvsc Sandstone and pebble conglomerate (late Oligocene)—Queried where identity is 

uncertain 

Ta Alegria Formation (Oligocene)—Marine, arkosic sandstone and greenish-gray siltstone; 

locally fossiliferous (Dibblee, 1988a) 

Tg Gaviota Formation (Oligocene and Eocene)—Marine arkosic sandstone, locally 

fossiliferous. Includes one subunit 

Tgs Concretionary siltstone and claystone (Oligocene and Eocene) 

Ts Sacate Formation (Eocene)—Marine arkosic sandstone that contains interbeds of 

micaceous, clayey shale

Tcd Cozy Dell Shale (Eocene)—Marine micaceous shale

Tma Matilija Sandstone (Eocene)—Marine arkosic sandstone 

Tan Anita Shale (Eocene and Paleocene)—Marine, micaceous, clayey shale; includes 

foraminiferal claystone (informally known as “Poppin shale”); queried where identity 

is uncertain. Also includes one mappable subunit 

Tasb Sierra Blanca limestone (Eocene and Paleocene)—Algal limestone lens

Kja Jalama Formation (Late Cretaceous)—Marine arkosic sandstone; includes three subunits 

Kjsl Siltstone (Late Cretaceous)

Kjsh Micaceous shale and siltstone (Late Cretaceous)

Kjss Arkosic sandstone and interbeds of micaceous shale (Late Cretaceous)
29

Acknowledgments

This publication was funded by the California Ocean Protection Council and the U.S. Geological 

Survey (USGS) Coastal and Marine Geology Program. We thank Robert Garrison and Hilde Schwartz 

(both University of California, Santa Cruz) for their critical reviews that greatly improved this report. 

We are grateful to USGS editor Taryn Lindquist for helping us develop the templates and formats for 

this series of publications, and for invaluable editorial review and suggestions. 
30

References Cited

Blanchette, C.A., Helmuth, B., and Gaines, S.D., 2007, Spatial patterns of growth in the mussel, Mytilus 

californianus, across a major oceanographic and biogeographic boundary at Point Conception, 

California, USA: Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology, v. 340, p. 126–148. 

Briggs, J.C., 1974, Marine zoogeography: New York, McGraw-Hill, 480 p. 

Brink, K.H., and Muench, R.D., 1986, Circulation in the Point Conception–Santa Barbara Channel 

region: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 91, p. 877–895. 

Cacchione, D.A., Drake, D.E., Grant, W.D., and Tate, G.B., 1984, Rippled scour depressions of the 

inner continental shelf off central California: Journal of Sedimentary Petrology, v. 54, p. 1,280–1,291. 

California Department of Fish and Wildlife, 2008, California Marine Life Protection Act master plan for 

marine protected areas—Revised draft: California Department of Fish and Wildlife [formerly 

California Department of Fish and Game], available at https://www.wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/ 

Marine/MPAs/Master-Plan. 

California State University, Monterey Bay, Seafloor Mapping Lab, 2016, Southern California 2008 

CSMP surveys: California State University, Monterey Bay, Seafloor Mapping Lab Data Library, 

accessed October 2016 at http://seafloor.otterlabs.org/SFMLwebDATA_SURVEYMAP.htm. 

Chaytor, J.D., Goldfinger, C., Meinter, M.A., Huftile, G.J., Rosmos, C.G., and Legg, M.R., 2008, 

Measuring vertical tectonic motion at the intersection of the Santa Cruz-Santa Catalina Ridge and 

Northern Channel Islands platform, California Continental Borderland, using submerged 

paleoshorelines: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 120, p. 1,053–1,071. 

Cochrane, G.R., 2008, Video-supervised classification of sonar data for mapping seafloor habitat, in

Reynolds, J.R., and Greene, H.G., eds., Marine habitat mapping technology for Alaska: Fairbanks, 

University of Alaska, Alaska Sea Grant College Program, p. 185–194, available at http://doc.nprb.org/ 

web/research/research%20pubs/615_habitat_mapping_workshop/Individual%20Chapters%20HighRes/Ch13%20Cochrane.pdf. 

Cochrane, G.R., Conrad, J.E., Reid, J.A., Fangman, S., and Golden, N., 2005, Nearshore benthic habitat 

GIS for the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and southern California state fisheries 

reserves, vol. II: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2005–1170, available at 

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2005/1170/. 

Cochrane, G.R., Nasby, N.M., Reid, J.A., Waltenberger, B., and Lee, K.M., 2003, Nearshore benthic 

habitat GIS for the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and southern California state fisheries 

reserves, vol. I: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 03–85, available at 

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2003/0085/. 

Cudaback, C.N., Washburn, L., and Dever, E., 2005, Subtidal inner-shelf circulation near Point 

Conception, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 110, C10007, available at

https://doi.org/10.1029/2004JC002608. 

Davis, A.C.D., Kvitek, R.G., Mueller, C.B.A., Young, M.A., Storlazzi, C.D., and Phillips, E.L., 2013, 

Distribution and abundance of rippled scour depressions along the California coast: Continental Shelf 

Research, v. 69, p. 88–100, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.csr.2013.09.010. 

Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 1988a, Geologic map of the Lompoc Hills and Point Conception quadrangles, Santa 

Barbara County, California (H.E. Ehrenspeck [1988] and J.A. Minch [2009], eds.): Dibblee Geological 

Foundation Map DF-18, scale 1:24,000. 

Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 1988b, Geologic map of the Point Arguello and Tranquillon Mountain quadrangles, 

Santa Barbara County, California (H.E. Ehrenspeck [1988] and J.A. Minch [2009], eds.): Dibblee 

Geological Foundation Map DF-19, scale 1:24,000. 

Draut, A.E., Hart, P.E., Lorenson, T.D., Ryan, H.F., Wong, F.L., Sliter, R.W., and Conrad, J.E., 2009, 

Late Pleistocene to Holocene sedimentation and hydrocarbon seeps on the continental shelf of a steep, 
31

tectonically active margin, southern California, USA: Marine Geophysical Research, p. 193–206, 

available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s11001-009-9076-y. 

Duvall, A., Kirby, E., and Burbank, D., 2004, Tectonic and lithologic controls on bedrock channel 

profiles and processes in coastal California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 109, 18 p., F03002, 

available at https://doi.org/10.1029/2003JF000086,2004. 

Eichhubl, P., Greene, H.G., and Maher, N., 2002, Physiography of an active transpressive margin 

basin—High-resolution bathymetry of the Santa Barbara basin, southern California continental 

borderland: Marine Geology, v. 184, p. 95–120. 

Fader, G.B.J., 1997, Effects of shallow gas on seismic-reflection profiles, in Davies, T.A., Bell, T., 

Cooper, A.K., Josenhaus, H., Polyak, L., Solheim, A., Stoker, M.S., and Stravers, J.A., eds., Glaciated 

continental margins—An atlas of acoustic images: London, Chapman & Hall, p. 29–30. 

Fischer, P.J., 1998, Structure and tectonics of northwestern Santa Barbara basin, in Kunitomi, D.S., 

Hopps, T.E., and Galloway, J.M., eds., Structure and petroleum geology, Santa Barbara Channel, 

California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, and Coast Geological 

Society, Miscellaneous Publication 46, p, 79–96. 

Fisher, M.A., Sorlien, C.C., and Sliter, R.W., 2009, Potential earthquake faults offshore southern 

California from the eastern Santa Barbara channel to Dana Point, in Lee, H.J., and Normark, W.R., 

eds., Earth science in the urban ocean—The Southern California Continental Borderland: Geological 

Society of America Special Paper 454, p. 271–290. 

Galloway, J.M., 1998, Chronology of petroleum exploration and development in the Santa Barbara 

channel area, offshore southern California, in Kunitomi, D.S., Hopps, T.E., and Galloway, J.M., eds., 

Structure and petroleum geology, Santa Barbara Channel, California: American Association of 

Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, and Coast Geological Society, Miscellaneous Publication 46, p. 

1–12, 1 sheet. 

Goff, J.A., Mayer, L.A., Traykovski, P., Buynevich, I., Wilkens, R., Raymond, R., Glang, G., Evans, 

R.L., Olson, H., and Jenkins, C., 2005, Detailed investigations of sorted bedforms or “rippled scour 

depressions,” within the Martha’s Vineyard Coastal Observatory, Massachusetts: Continental Shelf 

Research, v. 25, p. 461–484. 

Golden, N.E., and Cochrane, G.R., 2013, California Seafloor Mapping Program video and photograph 

portal: U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Geology Program data portal, available at

https://doi.org/10.5066/F7J1015K. 

Greene, H.G., and Bizzarro, J.J., 2003, Essential fish habitat characterization and mapping of the 

California continental margin: Final Report to Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission, CFDA 

#11-454, 14 p., available at http://marinehabitat.psmfc.org/files/source_docs/ 

EFH_report_with_Appendices.pdf. 

Greene, H.G., Bizzarro, J.J., O’Connell, V.M., and Brylinsky, C.K., 2007, Construction of digital 

potential marine benthic habitat maps using a coded classification scheme and its application, in Todd, 

B.J., and Greene, H.G., eds., Mapping the seafloor for habitat characterization: Geological Association 

of Canada Special Paper 47, p. 141–155. 

Greene, H.G., Clarke, S.H., Jr., and Kennedy, M.P., 1991, Tectonic evolution of submarine canyons 

along the California continental margin, in Osborne, R.H., ed., From shoreline to abyss: Society for 

Sedimentary Geology Special Publication 46, p. 231–248. 

Greene, H.G., Yoklavich, M.M., Starr, R.M., O’Connell, V.M., Wakefield, W.W., Sullivan, D.E., 

McRea, J.E., and Cailliet, G.M., 1999, A classification scheme for deep seafloor habitats: 

Oceanologica Acta, v. 22, p. 663–678. 

Griggs, G., Patsch, K., and Savoy, L., 2005, Living with the changing California coast: Berkeley, 

University of California Press, 540 p. 
32

Gurrola, L.D., Keller, E.A., Chen, J.H., Owen, L.A., and Spencer, J.Q., 2014, Tectonic geomorphology 

of marine terraces—Santa Barbara fold belt, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 

126, p. 219–233. 

Hallenbeck, T.R., Kvitek, R.G., and Lindholm, J., 2012, Rippled scour depressions add ecologically 

significant heterogeneity to soft-bottom habitats on the continental shelf: Marine Ecology Progress 

Series, v. 468, p. 119–133, available at https://doi.org/10.3354/meps09948. 

Hapke, C.J., and Reid, D.R., 2007, National assessment of shoreline change, part 4—Historical coastal 

cliff retreat along the California Coast: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2007–1133, 51 p., 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1133/.

Hapke, C.J., Reid, D., Richmond, B.B., Ruggiero, P., and List, J., 2006, National assessment of 

shoreline change, part 3—Historical shoreline change and associated coastal land loss along sandy 

shorelines of the California coast: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2006–1219, 72 p., 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1219/. 

Hornafius, J.S., Luyendyk, B.P., Terres, R.R., and Kamerling, M.J., 1986, Timing and extent of 

Neogene rotation in the western Transverse Ranges, California: Geological Society of America 

Bulletin, v. 97, p. 1,476–1,487. 

Hovland, M., and Judd, A.G., 1988, Seabed pockmark and seepages: London, Graham and Trotman, 

Inc., 293 p. 

Jennings, C.W., and Bryant, W.A., 2010, Fault activity map of California: California Geological Survey 

Geologic Data Map no. 6, scale 1:750,000, available at http://www.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/ 

cgs_history/Pages/2010_faultmap.aspx. 

Johnson, S.Y., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Dartnell, P., Hartwell, S.R., Cochran, S.A., and Watt, J.T., 

2017a, The California Seafloor and Coastal Mapping Program—Providing science and geospatial data 

for California’s State Waters: Ocean and Coastal Management, v. 140, p. 88–104, available at 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.02.004. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Greene, H.G., 

Krigsman, L.M., Kvitek, R.G., Dieter, B.E., Endris, C.A., Seitz, G.G., Sliter, R.W., Erdey, M.E., 

Gutierrez, C.I., Wong, F.L., Yoklavich, M.M., Draut, A.E., Hart, P.E., and Conrad, J.E. (S.Y. Johnson 

and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 2013a, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Santa Barbara, 

California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3281, pamphlet 45 p., 11 sheets, 

scale 1:24,000, available at https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3281. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Krigsman, L.M., 

Dieter, B.E., Conrad, J.E., Greene, H.G., Seitz, G.G., Endris, C.A., Sliter, R.W., Wong, F.L., Erdey, 

M.D., Gutierrez, C.I., Yoklavich, M.M., East, A.E., and Hart, P.E. (S.Y. Johnson and S.A. Cochran, 

eds.), 2015, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Refugio Beach, California: U.S. 

Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3319, pamphlet 42 p., 11 sheets, scale 1:24,000, 

available at https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3319. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Kvitek, R.G., 

Dieter, B.E., Conrad, J.E., Lorenson, T.D., Krigsman, L.M., Greene, H.G., Endris, C.A., Seitz, G.G., 

Finlayson, D.P., Sliter, R.W., Wong, F.L., Erdey, M.D., Gutierrez, C.I., Leifer, I., Yoklavich, M.M., 

Draut, A.E., Hart, P.E., Hostettler, F.D., Peters, K.E., Kvenvolden, K.A., Rosenbauer, R.J., and Fong, 

G. (S.Y. Johnson and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 2014, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of 

Coal Oil Point, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3302, pamphlet 57 

p., 12 sheets, scale 1:24,000, available at https://doi.org/10.3133/sim3302. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Kvitek, R.G., 

Greene, H.G., Endris, C.A., Seitz, G.G., Sliter, R.W., Erdey, M.D., Wong, F.L., Gutierrez, C.I., 

Krigsman, L.M., Draut, A.E., and Hart, P.E. (S.Y. Johnson and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 2013c, California 
33

State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Carpinteria, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Map 3261, pamphlet 42 p., 10 sheets, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3261/. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Kvitek, R.G., 

Greene, H.G., Krigsman, L.M., Endris, C.A., Clahan, K.B., Sliter, R.W., Wong, F.L., Yoklavich, 

M.M., and Normark, W.R. (S.Y. Johnson, ed.), 2012, California State Waters Map Series—Hueneme 

Canyon and vicinity, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3225, pamphlet 

41 p., 12 sheets, scale 1:24,000, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3225/. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, N.E., Phillips, E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Kvitek, R.G., 

Greene, H.G., Krigsman, L.M., Endris, C.A., Seitz, G.G., Gutierrez, C.I., Sliter, R.W., Erdey, M.D., 

Wong, F.L., Yoklavich, M.M., Draut, A.E., and Hart, P.E. (S.Y. Johnson and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 

2013b, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of Ventura, California: U.S. Geological Survey 

Scientific Investigations Map 3254, pamphlet 42 p., 11 sheets, scale, 1:24,000, available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3254/. 

Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Hartwell, S.R., Golden, N.E., Kvitek, R.G., and Davenport, 

C.W. (S.Y. Johnson and S.A. Cochran, eds.), 2018, California State Waters Map Series—Offshore of 

Gaviota, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2018–1023, pamphlet 41 p., 9 sheets, 

scale 1:24,000, available at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20181023. 

Johnson, S.Y., Hartwell, S.R., and Beeson, J.W., 2016, Marine geophysical data—Point Sal to Refugio 

State Beach, southern California: U.S. Geological Survey data release, available at

https://doi.org/10.5066/F7SX6BCD. 

Johnson, S.Y., Hartwell, S.R., Sorlien, C.C., Dartnell, P., and Ritchie, A.R., 2017b, Shelf evolution 

along a transpressive transform margin, Santa Barbara Channel, California: Geosphere, v. 13, p. 

2,041–2,077. 

Keller, E.A., Duffy, M., Kennett, J.P., and Hill, T., 2007, Tectonic geomorphology and hydrocarboninduced topography of the mid-Channel anticline, Santa Barbara basin, California: Geomorphology, v. 

89, p. 274–286. 

Kunitomi, D.S., Hopps, T.E., and Galloway, J.M., eds., 1998, Structure and petroleum geology, Santa 

Barbara Channel, California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, and 

Coast Geological Society, Miscellaneous Publication 46, 328 p. 

Kvitek, R., Bretz, C., Cochrane, G.R., and Greene, H.G., 2006, Final report, Statewide Marine Mapping 

Planning Workshop, December 12–13, 2005, Seaside, Calif.: California State University, Monterey 

Bay, 108 p., available at http://www.opc.ca.gov/webmaster/ftp/project_pages/mapping/2005 FINAL 

mapping report April 2006.pdf. 

Kvitek, R.G., Phillips, E.L., and Dartnell, P., 2012, Colored shaded-relief bathymetry, Hueneme Canyon 

and vicinity, California, sheet 1 in Johnson, S.Y., Dartnell, P., Cochrane, G.R., Golden, M.E., Phillips, 

E.L., Ritchie, A.C., Kvitek, R.G., Greene, H.G., Krigsman, L.M., Endris, C.A., Clahan, K.B., Sliter, 

R.W., Wong, F.L., Yoklavich, M.M., and Normark, W.R. (S.Y. Johnson, ed.), California State Waters 

Map Series—Hueneme Canyon and vicinity, California: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific 

Investigations Map 3225, pamphlet 41 p., 12 sheets, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3225/. 

Larson, K.M., and Webb, F.H., 1992, Deformation in the Santa Barbara Channel from GPS 

measurements 1987–1991: Geophysical News Letters, v. 19, p. 1,491–1,494. 

Lee, H.J., and Normark, W.R., eds., 2009, Earth science in the urban ocean—The Southern California 

Continental Borderland: Geological Society of America Special Paper 454, 481 p. 

Lee, W.H.K., and Vedder, J.G., 1973, Recent earthquake activity in the Santa Barbara Channel region: 

Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 63, p. 1,757–1,773. 

Lorenson, T.D, Hostettler, F.D., Rosenbauer, R.J., Peters, K.E., Kvenvolden, K.A., Dougherty, J.A., 

Gutmacher, C.E., Wong, F.L., and Normark, W.R., 2009, Natural offshore seepage and related tarball 

accumulation on the California coastline, Santa Barbara Channel and the southern Santa Maria 
34

Basin—Source identification and inventory: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2009–1225 

[also released as Minerals Management Service Report 2009–030], 116 p., available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2009/1225/. 

Lorenson, T.D., Wong, F.L., Dartnell, P., and Sliter, R.W., 2014, Greenhouse gases generated from the 

anaerobic biodegradation of natural offshore asphalt seepages in southern California: Geo-Marine 

Letters, v. 34, p. 281–295, available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-014-0359-1/. 

Luyendyk, B.P., Kamerling, M.J., and Terres, R.R., 1980, Geometric model for Neogene crustal 

rotations in southern California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 91, p. 211–217. 

Madden, C.J., Goodin, K.L., Allee, R., Finkbeiner, M., and Bamford, D.E., 2008, Draft Coastal and 

Marine Ecological Classification Standard: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

(NOAA) and NatureServe, v. III, 77 p. 

Marshall, S.T., Funning, G.J., and Owen, S.E., 2013, Fault slip rates and interseismic deformation in the 

western Transverse Ranges, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 118, 24 p., available at

https://doi.org/10.1002/jgrb.50312. 

Metcalf, J.G., 1994, Morphology, chronology, and deformation of Pleistocene marine terraces, 

southwestern Santa Barbara County, Santa Barbara, California: Santa Barbara, University of 

California, M.S. thesis, 168 p.

Minor, S.A., Kellogg, K.S., Stanley, R.G., Gurrola, L.D., Keller, E.A., and Brandt, T.R., 2009, Geologic 

map of the Santa Barbara coastal plain area, Santa Barbara County, California: U.S. Geological 

Survey Scientific Investigations Map 3001, scale 1:25,000, 1 sheet, pamphlet 38 p., available at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/sim/3001/. 

Mitchum, R.M., Jr., Vail, P.R., and Sangree, J.B., 1977, Seismic stratigraphy and global changes of sea 

level, part 6—Stratigraphic interpretation of seismic reflection patterns in depositional sequences, in

Payton, C.E., ed., Seismic stratigraphy—Applications to hydrocarbon exploration: Tulsa, Okla., 

American Association of Petroleum Geologists, p. 117–133. 

Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute, 2002, Santa Barbara multibeam survey: Monterey Bay 

Aquarium Research Institute Digital Data Series 4, 2 CD-ROMs. 

Muhs, D.R., Rockwell, T.K., and Kennedy, G.L., 1992, Late Quaternary uplift rates of marine terraces 

on the Pacific Coast of North America, southern Oregon to Baja California Sur: Quaternary 

International, v. 15/16, p. 121–133. 

Murray, A.B., and Thieler, E.R., 2004, A new hypothesis and exploratory model for the formation of 

large-scale inner-shelf sediment sorting and “rippled scour depressions:” Continental Shelf Research, 

v. 24, no. 3, p. 295–315. 

National Geodetic Survey, 2016, NOAA Shoreline Data Explorer: National Oceanic and Atmospheric 

Administration, National Geodetic Survey data viewer and database, accessed May 1, 2016, at 

http://www.ngs.noaa.gov/NSDE/. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2013, 2013 NOAA Coastal California TopoBathy 

Merge Project: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Centers for 

Environmental Information database, accessed August 2016 at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/docucomp/ 

page?xml=NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC/MGG/Lidar/iso/xml/2013_CA_TopoBathy_m2612.xml&view=ge

tDataView&header=none. 

Nicholson, C., Sorlien, C., Atwater, T., Crowell, J.C., and Luyendyk, B.P., 1994, Microplate capture, 

rotation of the western Transverse Ranges, and initiation of the San Andreas transform as a low-angle 

fault system: Geology, v. 22, p. 491–495. 

Peltier, W.R., and Fairbanks, R.G., 2006, Global glacial ice volume and Last Glacial Maximum duration 

from an extended Barbados sea level record: Quaternary Science Reviews, v. 25, p. 3,322–3,337. 

Petersen, M.D., Moschetti, M.P., Powers, P.M., Mueller, C.S., Haller, K.M., Frankel, A.D., Zeng, Y., 

Rezaeian, S., Harmsen, S.C., Boyd, O.S., Field, N., Chen, R., Rukstales, K.S., Luco, N., Wheeler, 
35

R.L., Williams, R.A., and Olsen, A.H., 2014, Documentation for the 2014 update of the United States 

national seismic hazard maps: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2014–1091, 243 p., available 

at https://doi.org/10.3133/ofr20141091. 

Redin, T., Forman, J., Kamerling, M., and Galloway, J., 2005, Santa Barbara Channel structure and 

correlation sections—CS-32 to CS-42: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific 

Section, Publication CS 36, 12 sheets. 

Reid, J.A., Reid, J.M., Jenkins, C.J., Zimmerman, M., Williams, S.J., and Field, M.E., 2006, 

usSEABED—Pacific Coast (California, Oregon, Washington) offshore surficial-sediment data release: 

U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 182, available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/2006/182/. 

Rockwell, T.K., Nolan, J., Johnson, D.L., and Patterson, R.H., 1992, Ages and deformation of marine 

terraces between Point Conception and Gaviota, Western Transverse Ranges, California, in

Wehmiller, J.F., and Fletcher, C., eds., Quaternary coasts of the United States—Marine and lacustrine 

systems: Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, p. 333–341. 

Sorlien, C.C., Kamerling, M.J., Seeber, L., and Broderick, K.G., 2006. Restraining segments and 

reactivation of the Santa Monica–Dume–Malibu Coast fault system, offshore Los Angeles, 

California: Journal of Geophysical Research, Solid Earth, v. 11, 22 p. 

Sorlien, C.C., and Nicholson, C., 2015, Post 1-Ma deformation history of the Pitas Point-North ChannelRed Mountain fault system and associated folds in Santa Barbara channel, California: U.S. Geological 

Survey National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program final report, Award G14AP00012, 24 p., 

available at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/cfusion/external_grants/reports/G14AP00012.pdf. 

Stanford, J.D., Hemingway, R., Rohling, E.J., Challenor, P.G., Medina-Elizalde, M., and Lester, A.J., 

2011, Sea-level probability for the last deglaciation—A statistical analysis of far-field records: Global 

and Planetary Change, v. 79, p. 193–203, available at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloplacha.2010.11.002. 

Stover, C.W., and Coffman, J.L., 1993, Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (revised): U.S. 

Government Printing Office, 418 p. 

Sylvester, A.G., 2001, Catalog of Santa Barbara earthquakes—1800 to 1960: Santa Barbara, University 

of California, Santa Barbara database, accessed March 2016 at http://projects.crustal.ucsb.edu/ 

sb_eqs/SBEQCatlog/SBEQCATINTRO.html. 

Sylvester, A.G., Smith, S.S., and Scholz, C.H., 1970, Earthquake swarm in the Santa Barbara Channel, 

California, 1968: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 60, p. 1,047–1,060. 

Trembanis, A.C., and Hume, T.M., 2011, Sorted bedforms on the inner shelf off northeastern New 

Zealand—Spatiotemporal relationships and potential paleo-environmental implications: Geo-Marine 

Letters, v. 31, p. 203–214, available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00367-010-0225-8. 

Triezenberg, P.J., Hart, P.E., and Childs, J.R., 2016, National Archive of Marine Seismic Surveys 

(NAMSS)—A USGS data website of marine seismic reflection data within the U.S. Exclusive 

Economic Zone (EEZ): U.S. Geological Survey data release, accessed June 29, 2015, at 

https://doi.org/10.5066/F7930R7P [formerly U.S. Geological Survey’s National Archive of Marine 

Seismic Surveys database, available at http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/NAMSS/].

U.S. Geological Survey, 2016, Earthquake catalog: U.S. Geological Survey database, accessed June 14, 

2016, at https://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/search/. 

U.S. Geological Survey and California Geological Survey, 2016, Quaternary fault and fold database of 

the United States: U.S. Geological Survey database, accessed April 5, 2016, at 

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults/. 

Warrick, J.A., and Farnsworth, K.L., 2009, Sources of sediment to the coastal waters of the Southern 

California Bight, in Lee, H.J., and Normark, W.R., eds., Earth science in the urban ocean—The 

Southern California Continental Borderland: Geological Society of America Special Paper 454, p. 39–

52. 
36

Warrick, J.A., and Mertes, L.A.K., 2009, Sediment yield from the tectonically active semiarid Western 

Transverse Ranges of California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 121, p. 1,054–1,070. 

Wong, F.L., Phillips, E.L., Johnson, S.Y, and Sliter, R.W., 2012, Modeling of depth to base of Last 

Glacial Maximum and seafloor sediment thickness for the California State Waters Map Series, eastern 

Santa Barbara Channel, California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2012–1161, 16 p., 

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1161/. 

Wright, D.J., Pendleton, M., Boulware, J., Walbridge, S., Gerlt, B., Eslinger, D., Sampson, D., and 

Huntley, E., 2012, ArcGIS Benthic Terrain Modeler (BTM), v. 3.0: Environmental Systems Research 

Institute, NOAA Coastal Services Center, Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management, 

accessed March 2016 at http://esriurl.com/5754. 

 Yerkes, R.F., Wagner, H.C., and Yenne, K.A., 1969, Petroleum development in the region of the Santa 

Barbara Channel: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 679–B, p. 11–21.