This page intentionally left blank
THE ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964: 

EFFECTS ON THE HYDROLOGIC REGIMEN 

Hydrologic Effects of the 

Earthquake 

Of March 27,1964 

Outside Alaska 

By ROBERT C. VORHIS 

With Sections on 

HYDROSEISMOGRAMS FROM THE NUNN-BUSH SHOE CO. WELL 

WISCONSIN 

By ELMER E. REXIN and ROBERT C. VORHIS 

and 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE EFFECTS ON GROUND WATER IN IOWA 

By R. W. COBLE 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY PROFESSIONAL PAPER 544-C 
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR 

STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary 

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY 

William T. Pecora, Director 

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON 1967 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office 

Washington, D.C. 20402 - 45 cents (paper cover) 
THE 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE 

SERIES 

The U.S. Geological Survey is publishing the results of investigations of the Alaska earthquake of 

March 27, 1964, in a series of six Professional 

Papers. Professional Paper 544 describes the effects 

of the earthquake on the hydrologic regimen. 

Other Professional Papers describe the history of 

the field investigations and reconstruction effort; the 

effect of the earthquake on communities; the regional 

effects of the earthquake; and the effects on transportation, communications, and utilities. 
Page 

Abstract_______________________ C1 

Introduction____________________ 1 

Definition of terms_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 

Acknowledgments_____________ 2 

Previous investigations_________ 4 

Hydroseisms in wells_________ 4 

Hydroseisms on surface-water 

bodies__________________ 5 

Hydroseismic data_______________ 5 

Types of water-level recorders 

and charts___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 

Recordable hydroseismic data___ 6 

Hydroseisms in wells____ _ _ _ _ _ 6 

Hydroseisms from surfacewater gages_____________ 8 

Hydroseismograms from the N unoBush Shoe Co. well, Wisconsin, by Elmer E. Rexin 

and Robert C. Vorhis_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 10 

Geographic diRtribution of hydrologic effects_________________ 14 

Africa____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 14 

Libya______________________ 14 

Republic of South Africa_____ 14 

South-West Africa___________ 14 

United Arab Republic 

(Egypt)________________ 14 

Asia_________________________ 14 

IsraeL_____________________ 14 

Republic of the Philippines___ 14 

Australia ________________ "____ 14 

Europe_______________________ 15 

Belgium____________________ 15 

Denmark___________________ 15 

United Kingdom____________ 15 

CONTENTS 

Geographic distribution of hydrologic effects-Continued 

Canada ______________________ C15 

Alberta_____________________ 15 

British Columbia____________ 15 

Manitoba___________________ 16 

Northwest Territories________ 16 

Ontario____________________ 16 

Saskatchewan_______________ 16 

United States_________________ 16 

Alabama___________________ 16 

Alaska_____________________ 17 

Arizona____________________ 17 

Arkansas___________________ 18 

California__________________ 18 

Colorado___________________ 18 

Connecticut_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 19 

Delaware___________________ 19 

Florida___________________ _ _ 19 

Georgia____________________ 19 

Hawaii_____________________ 23 

Idaho______________________ 23 

Illinois_____________________ 23 

Indiana____________________ 23 

Iowa-Alaska earthquake effects on ground water, by 

R. W. Coble______________ 23 

Kansas_____________________ 27 

Kentucky__________________ 27 

Loui~ana __________________ 27 

Maine_____________________ 28 

Maryland__________________ 28 

Massachusetts_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 28 

Michigan___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 28 

Minnesota__________________ 28 

Geographic distribution of hydrologic effects-Continued 

United States-Continued 

Mississippi ________________ _ 

Missouri_ _________________ _ Montana __________________ _ 

Nebraska __________________ _ 

Nevada ___________________ _ 

New Hampshire ____________ _ 

New Jersey ________________ _ 

New Mexico _______________ _ 

New York _________________ _ 

North Carolina ____________ _ 

North Dakota _____________ _ Ohio ______________________ _ 

Oklahoma _________________ _ 

Oregon ____________________ _ 

Pennsylvania_- ____________ _ 

Puerto Rico __ - ____________ _ 

Rhode Island ______________ _ 

South Carolina _____________ _ 

South Dakota ______________ _ 

Tennessee _________________ _ 

Texas _____________________ _ 

Utah _____________________ _ 

Vermont __________________ _ 

Virginia ___________________ _ 

Virgin Islands ______________ _ 

Washington ___ - ___________ _ 

West Virgima ______________ _ 

Wisconsin _________________ _ 

Wyoming _________________ _ 

Hydroseisms from aftershocks ____ _ 

Conclusion ____________________ _ 

References cited ________________ _ 

v 

Page 

C28 

28 

29 

29 

29 

29 

29 

29 

30 

30 

30 

30 

30 

31 

31 

31 

31 

32 

32 

32 

32 

33 

33 

33 

33 

33 

33 

33 

34 

34 

36 

36 
VI 

II .. LUSTRATIONS 

FIGURES 

Page 

1. Hydroseismic chart of a well in Mitchell County, Ga __________________________________________________ C7 

2. Typical records of hydroseisms caused by the Alaska earthquake_______________________________________ 8 

3. Record of a hydroseism at the National Reactor Testing Station, Idaho_________________________________ 9 

4. Record of seismically induced decline in stage____________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 9 

5. Bubbler-gage record at Tendal, La__________________________________________________________________ 9 

6. Bubbler-gage records at three Kansas gages__________________________________________________________ 9 

7. Record of stage of Paxton Creek, Pa., showing possible seismically induced discharge______________________ 9 

8. Hydroseismogram of Alaska earthquake from Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. welL________________________________ 11 

9-13. Records: 

9. Hydroseismograms of aftershocks of the Alaska earthquake from the Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. welL______ 12 

10. Hydroseism at Heibaart, Belgium_____________________________________________________________ 15 

11. Two dissimilar hydroseisms from two aquifers tapped by adjacent piezometers______________________ 18 

12. Two similar hydroseisms from two aquifers tapped by adjacent piezometers _______ -_______________ 18 

13. Part of a 4-foot decline in waterlevel of a Clay County, Fla., welL__________________________________ 20 

14. Stage and deflection records of the Alaska earthquake_________________________________________________ 21 

15. Index map of Georgia showing locations of gaging stations and size of seiches recorded from the Alaska earthquake_________________________________________________________________________________________ 22 

16. Index map of Iowa showing location of reported ground-water disturbances caused by the Alaska earthquake__ 24 

17-21. Water-level records from wells: 

17. Redfield Dome, Iowa________________________________________________________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 25 

18. Vincent Dome, Iowa _________________________________ "_______________________________________ 25 

19. Dakota Sandstone in northwest Iowa_________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26 

20. Lohrville, Iowa___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 26 

21. Elkader and Clinton, Iowa___________________________________________________________________ 27 

22. Water-level record showing effect of the Alaska earthquak,e on a surface-water pooL______________________ 31 

23. Record of hydroseism from well in York County, Pa ______________________ - ___ - ___ -- __ -- __ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 31 

24. Record of seismic seiche and wind seiches at Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake at Grand Coulee Dam, Wash_______ 33 

TABLES 

Page 

1. Gage-height ratio and time scales of 421 float-type recorders that registered the 

Alaska earthquake______________________________________________________ C6 

2. Chronological list of hydroseismic data from the Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. well at 

Milwaukee, Wis., March 28-30, 1964_____________________________________ 10 

3. Number and maximum hydroseisms recorded in the United States from the 

Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964_____________________________________ 17 

4. Summary of ground-water disturbances in Iowa caused by the Alaska earthquake_ 24 

5. Earthquakes recorded in seismically sensitive observation wells, March 27-

April4, 1964----------------------------------------------------------- 34 

6. Seismic fluctuations in sensitive wells, March 28-April4, 1964_________________ 35 

7. Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake_____ 39 
THE ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27,1964: EFFECTS ON THE HYDROLOGZC REGIMEN 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OF THE EARTHQUAKE 

OF MARCH 27, 1964, OUTSIDE ALASKA 

The Alaska earthquake of March 27, 

1964, had widespread hydrologic effects 

throughout practically all of the United 

States. More than 1,450 water-level 

recorders, scattered throughout all the 

50 States except Connecticut, Delaware, 

and Rhode Island, registered the earthquake. Half of the water-level records 

were obtained from ground-water observation wells and half at surfacewater gaging stations. The earthquake 

is also known to have registered on 

water-level recorders on wells in Canada, England, Denmark, Belgium, 

Egypt, Israel, Libya, Philippine Islands, 

South-West Africa, South Africa, and 

Northern Territory of Australia. 

The hydrologic response to the 

Alaska earthquake of March 2'7, 

1964, was the most widespread of 

all previously registered seismic 

events. Some 716 wells in the 

United States recorded water-level 

fluctuations caused by the quake. 

Outside the United States, wells in 

Canada, England, Belgium, Denmark, Libya, Israel, South-West 

Africa, South Africa, and Australia recorded the earthquake. 

This worldwide response results 

By Robert C. Vorhis 

ABSTRACT 

The Alaska earthquake is the first for 

which widespread surface-water effects 

are known. The effects were recorded 

at stations on flowing streams, rivers, 

reservoirs, lakes, and ponds. The 755 

surface-water stations recording effects 

are spread through 38 States, but are 

most numerous in the south-central and 

southeastern States, especially in Florida and Louisiana. Most of the fluctuations recorded can be referred to more 

precisely as seismic seiches; however, 

a few stations recorded the quake as 

a minor change in stage. The largest 

recorded seiche outside Alaska was 1.83 

feet on a reservoir in Michigan. The 

INTRODUCTION 

next largest was 1.45 feet on Lake 

Ouachita in Arkansas. 

The largest fluctuation in a well was 

23 feet registered by a pressure recorder near Belle Fourche, S. Dak. 

Fluctuations of more than 10 feet were 

reported from wells in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Missouri, and 

Pennsylvania. A 3.40-foot fluctuation 

was recorded in a well in Puerto Rico. 

The Alaska earthquake was registered by about seven times as many 

watei-level recorders as recorded the 

Hebgen Lake, Mont., earthquake of 

August 19, 1959. 

from the great magnitude of the 

quakethe largest to occur in 

North America in this century. 

Of the previous large earthquakes 

recorded widely in the United 

States, the Assam, India, earthquake of August 15,1950, affected 

at least 161 wells, and the Hebgen 

Lake, Mont., earthquake of August 1'7,1959, was recorded in 185 

wells. 

Another important response was 

registered as water-level fluctuations on streams, reservoirs, ponds, 

and lakes. At most of the gaging 

stations the charts show upward 

and downward motions that were 

about equal and that generally 

recovered to a normal level within 

a few minutes. On some lakes 

and reservoirs the fluctuations continued for an hour or more. 

A third effect caused by the 

earthquake was roiling or muddying of well and spring water. 

This phenomenon, when reported 

C1 
C2 

by well users, generally occurred 

in wells that required long-continued pumping to clear the water 

at the time the well was drilled. 

The roiling is presumably limited 

to wells and springs tapping aquifers that contain considerable colloidal material. 

The purpose of this report is to 

assemble the hydrologic effects of 

the Alaska earthquake that were 

recorded outside Alaska. The nature and geographic distribu1

tion 

of the hydrologic effects are described, the seismic fluctuations in 

water wells in the United States 

are tabulated, ·and data on seismic 

seiches in North America ·and well 

fluctuations outside the United 

States are summarized. Thus, the 

report is a compil'ation of both 

published ·and unpublished data on 

known hydrologic effects throughout the world. Furt:hermore, a 

background of previous work, a 

discussion of several water-level 

recording instruments, and observations of fluctuations during 

other earthquakes are presented in 

order to provide 1a suitable basis 

for future interpretive studies. It 

is hoped that this framework will 

encourage further studies so that 

the discrepancies th·a:t exist between earthquake theory and observed effects can be narrowed and 

ultimately bridged. 

DEFINITION OF TERMS 

The term "hydroseism" is here 

introduced as convenient to include 

all seismically induced water-level 

fluetuations other than tsunamis. 

Although this type of fluctuation 

has been described in many previous papers, no one term nor one 

phrase has been used consistently. 

Terms and phrases which have 

been used to describe hydroseisms 

in wells include: 

1. Pressure fluctuations produced 

by seismic waves. 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

2. Seismically induced fluctuations 

of water level. 

3. Water-level fluctuations. 

4. Earthquake-induced fluctuations. 

5. Fluctuations in well water levels 

(the title under which hydroseismic data have been published annually in the U.S. 

Coast and Geod. Survey series 

"United States Earthquakes"). 

The following terms have been 

used to describe hydroseisms m 

surface-water bodies: 

1. "Disturbances [as recorded] at 

stream-gaging stations" 

(U.S. Coast and Geod. Survey, 1946, p. 26). 

2. "Range of stage recorded in 

stilling wells * * * as the result of earth tremors" ( Stermitz, 1964, p. 144). 

3. Seismic seiches. 

The term "hydroseism" is derived from the Greek words v8wp 

meaning water and uetup.o<> meaning earthquake. As defined and 

used in this report, hydroseism applies to seismically induced fluctuations in wells, streams, lakes, 

ponds, and reservoirs. As such, it 

is identical in meaning with any 

and all of the expressions listed 

above. 

"Hydroseismic data" includes 

both the charts that record hydroseisms and the information taken 

from the charts. 

"Hydroseismogram" is a hydroseism recorded at an expanded 

time scale. 

"Seiche" is a term first used in 

Switzerland by Forel (1895) to 

apply to standing waves set up on 

the surface o:f Lake Geneva by 

wind and by changes in barometric pressure. Richter (1958, p. 

109) points out that seiches may 

occur not only in closed "bodies of 

water but also in partially closed 

bodies such as harbors or channels 

and as lateral oscillations in 

rivers, canals, or ditches. It is 

only necessary that the geometry 

o:f the water boundary define a 

natural period o:f oscillation. 

Where there are currents, part o:f 

a seiche may be transformed into 

a progressing wave. 

To restrict the term "seiches" to 

those events caused by earthquakes, Kvale (1955) qualified the 

phenomenon as seismic seiches. 

Following his usage, in this paper 

"seismic seiches" refer to symmetrical fluctuations (that is, those 

fluctuations where the water-level 

ris~ is exactly equal to the waterlevel decline) typical o:f standing 

waves set up on rivers, reservoirs, 

ponds, and lakes at a time corresponding with the passage o:f 

seismic waves :from the Alaska 

earthquake. Where the record 

does not correspond to what would 

be expected :from a standing wave, 

the more general term "hydroseism" is used. 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 

The material on which this report is based has come :from many 

sources and has been the work of 

hundreds o:f persons engaged in 

various aspects o:f water-resource 

investigations. Most of these people are known to the writer only 

by their affiliation with the organization which transmitted the 

data. 

The :following organizations outside the United States have :furnished data on hydrologic effects 

of the Alaska earthquake in their 

countries, and their help is gratefully acknowledged: 

Geological Survey of Canada 

Canadian National Committee for the International 

Hydrologic Decade 

Canada, Ontario Water Resources Commission 

Canada, Saskatchewan Department of Agriculture 
United Kingdom of Libya, 

Ministry of Agriculture 

State of Israel, Hydrological 

Service of M i n i s t r y of 

Agriculture 

South-West Africa, Geological Survey 

Republic of South Africa, 

Geological Survey 

Commonwealth of Australia, 

Northern Territory Administration 

New South Wales, Snowy 

Mountains Hydro-Electric 

Authority 

Victoria, S t a t e Electricity 

Commission 

Belgian Ministry of Public 

Works, Hydraulic Research 

Laboratory 

United Kingdom, Geological 

Survey and Museum, Water 

Department 

Denmark Geological Survey 

Republic of the Philippines, 

Bureau of Public Works 

United Arab Republic, U.S. 

AID Mission 

Most of the records of hydroseisms in the United States were 

compiled and sent to the author by 

members of the Water Resources 

Division of the U.S .. Geological 

Survey. The following organizations in the United States have 

also made their records and data 

available for use, and the author 

is grateful to them for this help: 

Orange County [Calif.] 

Water District 

Los Angeles County [Calif.] 

Flood Control District 

Idaho Bureau of Mines and 

Geology 

Illinois State Water Survey 

Gas storage companies in Illinois, Iowa, and Ohio 

Missouri Geological Survey 

and Water Resources 

Division of Water, Ohio Department of Natural Resources 

Tennessee Department of 

Conservation, Division of 

Water Resources 

Virginia Geological Survey 

229-356 0-6~2 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

The author is also grateful to 

the many organizations which examined their recorder charts for 

the period of the Alaska earthquake and verified that no fluctuations caused by the earthquake 

had been recorded. The countries and names of the organizations in which recorded charts 

were found to show no apparent 

reaction to the quake are the 

following: 

Afghanistan : 

Water and Soil Survey 

Authority 

U.S. AID Mission 

Australia: 

Sydney Metropolitan 

Water, Sewerage, and 

Drainage Board 

Irrigation and Water 

Supply Commission 

South Australia Engineering and Water 

Supply Department 

South Australia Director 

of Mines 

Victoria Rivers and 

Water Supply Commission 

Austria: 

Hydrografisches Zentralburo. 

British Guiana: Geological 

Survey Department 

Cyprus: 

Ministry of Commerce 

and Industry 

Geological Survey Department 

Denmark: Meteorological Institute 

Ethiopia: Water Resources 

Department 

Ghana: National Construction Corp. 

Greece: Institute for Geology 

and Subsurface Research 

Hungary: Research Institute 

for Water Resources 

Jamaica : Geological Survey 

Department 

Indonesia : Geological Survey 

C3 

Kenya: Water Development 

Department 

Mozambique: Service for Geology and Mines 

Nepal: 

Hydrologic.al Survey Department 

U.S. AID Mission 

Netherlands: Archives of 

Ground-Water Levels 

New Guinea: Australia Department of Public Works 

New Zealand: 

Ministry of Works 

Geological Survey 

Nigeria: 

Geological Survey 

U.S. AID Mission 

Norway : Water Resources 

and Electricity Board 

Papua: Australia Department of Public Works 

Portugal: Geological Survey 

Rhodesia: 

Ministry of Water Development, Hydrological Branch 

Ministry of Mines and 

Lands, Geological Survey Office 

Saudi Ambia: Ministry of 

Petroleum and Mineral Resources 

Spain : Institute of Geology 

and Mines 

Sudan : Geological Survey 

Switzerland: Federal Office 

for Water Economy 

Syria: Ministry of Industry 

Taiwan: Geological Survey 

Tasmania: 

Rivers and Water Supply Commission 

Hydro Electric CommissiOn 

Turkey: State Hydraulic 

Works 

Uganda: Water Development 

Department 

Union of Soviet Socialist Republics: Hydrometeorological Service 

Zambia: Ministry of Lands 

and Nat ural Resources 
C4 

During the preparation of this 

paper, the author has benefited 

immensely from the help, encouragement, and advice given by colleagues in the Geological Survey. 

Among the many who have been 

helpful are 0. M. Hackett, J. T. 

Callahan, J. A. Adamson, S. M. 

Lang, Gerald Meyer, Melvin Williams, A. N. Cameron, and H. 

B. Counts. The manuscript has 

profited from reviews by J. H. 

Feth, J. F. Poland, and Leo 

Heindl. 

Similarly, the members of the 

Hydrology Panel of the Committee on the Alaska Earthquake 

have been of great assistance to 

the author. Among these are 

Richard P. Goldthwait, chairman, 

W. L. Petrie, coordinator, Roger 

Waller, Troy Pewe, and W. 0. 

Field. 

PREVIOUS 

INVESTIGATIONS 

Hydrologic effects of earthquakes have been previously compiled from observation wells and 

at surface-water gaging stations. 

In some studies, recorders with expanded time scales have been operated to ascertain the types of seismic waves that produce hydrologic 

effects. The Richter scale of earthquake magnitudes has been applied 

to hydroseisms, and theoretical 

studies have been developed to account for hydrologic responses to 

seismic ~waves. No single study, 

however, has considered both the 

effects recorded by observation 

wells and those recorded at surface-water gaging stations. 

HYDROSEISMS IN WELLS 

Data on hydroseisms in wells are 

published annually by the U.S. 

Coast and Geodetic Survey (1945, 

1946, 1951-65). The years for 

which these data are now available 

include 1943, 1944, and 1949 

through 1963. Only one publication ( da Costa, 1964) lists hyALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

droseisms in wells throughout the 

United States from a single major 

earthquake, the Hebgen Lake, 

Mont., earthquake of August 17, 

1959. 

Other published reports describe 

hydroseisms that have been recorded in a single well. Parker 

and Stringfield (1950, p. 456-458) 

list earthquakes and their hydroseisms as recorded in a limestone 

well at Miami, Fla. Eaton and 

Takasaki (1959) made a similar 

study of a well in basalt at Honolulu, Ha·waii, and were the first to 

attempt to correlate earthquake 

magnitudes ·with hydroseismic 

data. Vorhis (1964a), using the 

same approach, made a study of 

hydroseisms recorded in a well 

penetrating crystalline rocks in 

Dawson County, in the Piedmont 

of northern Georgia. 

Hydroseisms from one or a few 

selected earthquakes as recorded in 

wells scattered through a rather 

restricted geographic area have 

been described in many publications: Austin (1960) for wells in 

New Jersey; Davis, Worts, and 

Wilson ( 1955) for hydroseisms in 

California wells caused by the 

Kern County earthquake of 1952; 

Hopkins and Simpson (1960) for 

the effects of the Hebgen Lake 

earthquake in mine-water pools in 

Pennsylvania; LaMoreaux ( 1953) 

for the effects in Alabama wells of 

the Kamchatka. earthquake of November 4, 1952; LaRocque (1941) 

for hydroseisms in California wells 

caused by five different quakes 

from 1933 to 1940; Leggette and 

Taylor (1935) for hydroseisms in 

1J tah wells; Piper ( 1933) for hydroseisms recorded in the Moke}y 

umne area of California from the 

December 20, 1932, earthquake at 

Lodi, Calif.; Piper, Thomas, and 

Robinson (1939) for later hydroseisms recorded in the Mokelumne 

area of California; Stearns ( 1928) 

and Stearns, Robinson, and Taylor (1930, p. 145-151) for hydroseisms in California wells; Stewart 

( 1958) for hydroseisms in Georgia 

wells; Thomas (1940) for hydroseisms recorded in California by 

earthquakes of November 10, 1938 

(in Alaska), and January 24, 1939 

(in Chile) ; and Vorhis ( 1955) for 

hydroseisms in a Wisconsin well. 

The theoretical effect of earthquake waves on a water well was 

originally studied from a seismological point of view by Blanchard 

and Byerly (1935). A reexamination of this theory was made 

by Rexin, Oliver, and Prentiss 

(1962) who related the magnification in the well to the period of 

the seismic surface waves causing 

the fluctuation. The A l ask a 

earthquake reawakened interest in 

the subject. Subsequent reports 

hold much promise for providing 

a theoretical understanding of 

hydroseismic data. Papers containing a development of theory 

with emphasis on the hydrologic 

controls have been prepared by 

Cooper and others (1965) and 

Bredehoeft and others (1965). 

The Richter scale of earthquake 

magnitudes has been applied to 

hydroseisms (Eaton and Takasaki, 1959; Vorhis, 1964a, 1965a), 

but the many variables relating to 

a well, to earthquake waves, and 

to their travel paths prevent a rigorOlis application of this method, 

at least for the present. 

Hydrologic effects of the Alaska 

earthquake have been discussed or 

mentioned in many publications. 

Fluctuations in Canadian wells 

were described for Alberta by 

Gabert (1965) and for Ontario 

and Saskatchewan by Scott and 

Render (1965). Widespread hydrologic effects of the quake as 

recorded in the United States were 

published by Peterson ( 1964), 

Waller, Thomas, and V or his 

(1965), and V or his (1964b, 

1965b). Local hydrologic effects 

within the United States were 
discussed by Coble (1967), Fellows (1965), Fuller (1964), Wilson (1964), Hassler (1965), Miller and Reddell (1964), The Cross 

Section (1964), Mills (1964), 

Rexin ( 1963, 1964a, b), Cooper 

and others ( 1965), and Bredehoeft 

and others (1965). 

HYDROSEISMS ON SURFACEWATER BODIES 

Earthquake effects on river 

gages were first mentioned by 

Piper (1933, p. 475, fig. 2). Two 

of six gages on the Mokelumne 

River in California showed pronounced dots on the traces of the 

water surface that were caused by 

the December 20, 1932, earthquake 

at Lodi, Calif. Two other gages 

on a nearby diversion canal showed 

double amplitudes of 0.08 and 

0.04 foot for the same quake. Although they were not designated 

as such by Piper, they can properly be called seismic seiches. 

The U.S. Coast and Geodetic 

Survey (1946, p. 26) lists 18 "Disturbances at stream-gaging staTYPES OF WATER-LEVEL 

RECORDERS AND CHARTS 

The water-level recorders currently in operation on observation 

wells throughout the United States 

meet a wide variety of needs; they 

are adapted to fit all types of well 

construction, are selected to fit economical servicing schedules, and 

must respond to many different 

ranges in water-level fluctuation. 

~\sa result, each well tends to give 

a record characteristic of itself. 

Consequently, when charts from 

many >Yells are gathered as they 

have been in this study, they present an amazing variety of records. 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

tions in New York on September 

5, 1944, from an earthquake in the 

St. Lawrence Valley." Most of 

these may be seismic seiches but, 

not knowing whether they are 

standing waves, it seems safer to 

refer to them as hydroseisms. 

For the Hebgen Lake earthquake of August 17, 1959, Stermitz 

(1964, p. 144, table 10) lists 54 

records for "Range of stage recorded in stilling wells * * * as 

the result of earth tremors." 

The hydroseisms mentioned 

above were all recorded within a 

few hundred miles of the epicenter 

of the quakes. In Stermitz's list, 

the most distant event recorded 

was 340 miles northwest of the 

epicenter. The events discussed 

below are unusual in that they 

were recorded thousands of miles 

distant from the epicenter. 

Kvale (1955) discusses seismic 

seiches in 29 fiords and lakes in 

Norway caused by the Assam 

earthquake of August 15, 1950, but 

does not mention that any seiches 

were recorded in rivers. 

HYDROSEISMIC DATA 

The hydroseismic data on waterlevel recorder charts are affected 

by the time scale and the vertical 

or gage-height. ratio. Those recorders equipped with 1::30, 1:24, 

anrl 1: 12 gage-height gears are 

most likely to record the extreme 

upper and lower limits of the fluctmttion. Those recorders with 1 : 1 

anrl 1 : 2 ratios are most likely to 

record the aftershocks. Thus there 

is no one ratio that is best for recording hydroseisms. Those recorders with a time scale of 2.4 

inrhes per day are more likely to 

show hydroseismic detail than are 

those with a time scale of 0.3 inch 

per day. 

05 

Seismic seiches from the Alaska 

quake, recorded on the west coast 

of Canada in lakes, rivers, and 

tidal waters, are mentioned by 

Wigen and White (1964a, b). 

Some seismic seiches on rivers and 

lakes in central Canada are described by Strilaeff (1964). 

Donn (1964) mentions reports 

of waves as much as 6 feet high 

on the gulf coast caused by the 

Alaska earthquake. He suggests 

that these waves and the fluctuations on the Freeport, Tex., tide 

gage are probably seismic seiches 

generated in resonance with the 

seismic waves. 

McGarr ( 1965) formulated a 

theory to explain the generation, 

occurrence, and damping of seismic seiches. The theory was then 

applied to a marigram at Freeport, Tex., that showed the Alaska 

earthquake. 

Thus, seismic seiches represent a 

type of hydroseism that has received little attention previously, 

especially such seiches recorded in 

rivers. 

Of the 716 wells for which data 

have been tabulated, copies of 

charts from 433 wells showing the 

earthquake record have been received by the author. Of these, 

12 were from pressure recorders 

and 4-21 were from float-type recorders. Table 1 (next page) 

shows the various gage-height ratios and time scales at >vhich these 

421 records were made. The gageheight scale is chosen to give a 

record that mmimizes "ba,ck:-

ground noise" such as pumping 

effects and tides, and emphasizes 

wa.ter-level trends. The time scale 

is chosen primarily to get the 
06 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 19 6 4 

TABLE 1.-Gage-height ratio and time scales of 421 float-type recorders that registered 

the Alaska earthquake 

Gage-height ratio 

Recorder time scale, in inches per day 

0.3 1. 0 1. 2 1.8 2.3 2.4 9. 6 576 

----------1------------------------

1:30 ____________________ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 3 ------ ------

1: 24 ___ ----------------- ------ ------ 1 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 1: 12____________________ 2 19 ------ ------ 9 ------ ------ 1:10____________________ 28 20 3 ------------ ------

1 : 6.-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 2 --- - - - 39 - - - -- - - - - - - - 58 - - - - - - - - - - - - 1:5_____________________ 54 2 10 ------ ------ 1 ------ ------ 1:3 _____________________ ------ ------ 2 ------ ------ 1 ------ ------

1 : 2.4_ - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - --- --- - - - - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - 2 - - - - - - - - -- - - 1: 2 __ ------------------- 50 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 1:1.2 __________________ • 1 ------ ------------ ------ 8 ------------ 1 : L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 73 1 20 _ _ _ _ _ _ 5 1 1 _____ _ 5:L.___________________ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ ______ 1 

maximum of reoord with a minimum cost. From the recorders 

operating with a time scale of 2.4 

inches per day, the arrival time 

of a seismic disturbance can be determined at best to the nearest 10 

minutes. For recorders operating 

at 1.2 inches per day, time can be 

read only to the nearest 20 minutes. 

On recorders operating at 0.3 inch 

per day it is extremely difficult to 

determine a time closer than 1 to 2 

hours. 

The time-compressed record of 

water-level recorders in normal use 

has prompted the development and 

operation of several recorders 

operating at a greatly expanded 

time scale. Blanchard and Byerly 

(1935, 1936; Byerly and Blanchard, 1935) were the first to install 

such a recorder. By maintaining 

it on a well in California, they were 

the first to obtain a hydroseismic 

record similar to a seismogram. 

From it, they identified several 

types of waves (P, PP, PPP, S, 

L,andM). 

Since 1947, an expanded-scale 

water-level recorder has been developed and maintained by E. E. 

Rexin on a well at Milwaukee, 

Wis. Details on this instrument 

have been published previously 

(Rexin, 1952, 1960; Rexin, Oliver, 

and Prentiss, 1962), and a few of 

the records have received detailed 

seismological study. Through 

this, Rexin, Oliver, and Prentiss 

( 1962) identified nine types of 

waves additional to those reported 

by Blanchard and Byerly. These 

waves were PKS, SKS, PS, PPS, 

SS, SSS, LQ, LR1, and LR2. This 

recorder was in operation at the 

time of the Alaska earthquake, 

and its hydroseismogram is the 

only one known from this earthquake. The record is discussed in 

"Hydroseismograms from the 

Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. well," (p. 

C10). 

In recent years the Rensselaer 

Polytechnic Institute has built 

and operated expanded-scale recorders on several shallow and 

deep wells in New York State as 

part of a research program in explosion detection (Katz, 1961, 

1962, 1963; Katz, Carragan, and 

Michalko, 1962a, b ; Carragan, 

Katz, and Michalko, 1963; and 

Carragan, Michalko, and Katz, 

1964). Their work is of great interest, and the equipment they assembled is the most advanced of 

any used at present. Lack of 

funds caused operation of these 

recorders to be discontinued 

shortly before the Alaska earthquake. 

The U.S. Geological Survey operated sensitive expanded-scale recorders on a well in Arizona and a 

well near St. Augustine, Fla., but 

lack of funds caused operation to 

be discontinued about a month before the Alaska earthquake. No 

data obtained from these recorders have been published. 

RECORDABLE 

HYDROSEISMIC DATA 

HYDROSEISMS IN WELLS 

The water-level recorders currently maintained on observation 

wells can at best record only limited data from any seismic event. 

Recordable hydroseismic data include the following: 

1. The depth to water in the well 

at the start of the seismic 

record. 

2. The maximum seismically 

caused water-level rise. 

3. The maximum seismically 

caused water-level decline. 

4. For the largest seismic events, 

some wells record a coda portion during a period of 1-2 

hours following the maximum fluctuation during 

which the fluctuations decrease to static level. 

5. In especially sensitive wells, the 

surface wave that took the 

long way around the world 

(the W2 wave) may record as 

a distinct fluctuation, and, 

likewise, the wave traveling 

in the opposite direction (the 

Wa wave) may record as a 

still smaller but distinct fluctuation. These waves have 

been identified for the first 

time on records from the 

Alaska earthquake. 

6. A change in water-level trend 

due presumably to seismically caused changes in the 

aquifer such as increase or 

decrease in transmissibility 

and enlargement or contraction of fractures. 

7. The water level at the end of 

the seismic disturb an c e s, 
40 

41 

1-

w 

w 

LJ... 

z 

_j 

w 42 > w 

...J 

0:: 

w 

1-

<( 

~ 

43 

44 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

Alaska earthquake 

main shock 

28 

Alaska earthquake 

aftershocks 

29 30 

MARCH 1964 

Queen Charlotte 

Island earthquake 

Times are Greenwich civil time 

31 2 3 

APRIL 1964 

Alaska earthquake 

aftershocks 

4 

\0 \D .... <:tN 

r-...N 

5 

C7 

1.-Hydroseismic chart of a well in Mitchell County, Ga. 

which may be quite different 

from the level at the start for 

any of a number of reasons: 

Seismically induced change in 

aquifer stress, change in barometric pressure, change in 

tidal cycle, pumping effects, 

or recharge. 

8. The approximate time of the 

disturbance. 

One of the more detailed hydroseismic charts (fig. 1) shows the 

very large fluctuation of water 

level that occurred due to the 

Alaska earthquake, seven aftershocks, and the Queen Charlotte 

Island earthquake of March 31. 

On the type of recorder in operation, the pen reverses when it 

reaches the edge of the chart, so the 

size of the fluctuation is known to 

have been in excess of 5 feet with 

at least 3.5 feet presumably accounted for in the rise. Because 

many wells tend to have a waterlevel rise equal to the decline, it 

is reasonable to assume that water 

in this well fluctua,ted more than 

7 feet. From examination of this 

chart, one can see how relatively 
cs ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 19 6 4 

I 

I 1 FOOT Wind seiche/ 

l, ~ UJ I 

"- A 

LJ 1 FOOT _J 

< 

(.) 

(/) 

fJ: 

Q 

UJ 

J: 

' UJ 

(!) 

< (!) 

0 

B 

Vertical scale same as B 

c MARCH 27 

I 

vSeismic seiche 

l 

r 

I 

Seismic seiche 

MARCH 28 

2.-Typical record.s of hydroseisms caused by the Alaska earthquake. A, Record at 

Blakely Mountain Dam on Lake Ouachita, Ark. Record furnished by U.S. Corps 

of Engineers. B, Record at Oastor Creek near Grayson, La. G, Record at St. Francis 

River at Marked Tree, Ark. Central standard time. 

few data can be taken from any 

one chart. From the above list of 

possible data that. can be recorded, 

only items 1, 4, 7, and 8 can be read 

from the record shown in figure 1. 

The most detailed of all the hydroseismic records are from the 

Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. well in Milwaukee, Wis. From March 27 to 

30, the water levels fluctuated in 

response to the arrival of P, S, and 

L waves from the Alaska earthquake and aftershocks. The records (figs. 8, 9) are discussed in 

detail on page ClO. 

HYDROSEISMS FROM SURFACEWATER GAGES 

SEISMIC SEICHES 

)lost of the 753 surface-water 

hydroseisms were recorded as 

seismic seiches. Included in this 

category are the fluctuations starting with a maximum oscillation 

tlmt gradually diminished to a 

steady \Yater level (fig. 2A). A 

variant type includes some seiches 

that began with a small oscillatory 

rise and fall, increased with time, 

and then died back to normal (fig. 

2B). Another variant is a sudden 

rise and fall of water level consisting of only one or a few oscillations. That the number of oscillations is small is known from the 

narrow width of the pen line on 

the chart (fig. 20). 

One of the largest of the seismic 

seiches was recorded by the U.S. 

Corps of Engineers on Lake Ouaehita in Arkansas at the Blakely 

Dam Headwater Gorge (fig. 2A). 

This record shows 1.45 feet of fluctuation gradually diminishing to 

"normal" over about 21;2 hours. 
jjj 4920 ~-----------, 

Gj 

..J 

~ 

"' w 

i5 

Ill 

<( 

t;; 

w 

u. 

:!: 

_j 

w 

Gj 

..J 

0 

z 

~ 4918 L_ __________ _j 

3.-Hydroseism caused by the Alaska 

earthquake, recorded at the disposal 

pond of the National Reactor Testing 

Station, Idaho. 

One of the best recorded seiches 

was from a pond at the National 

Reactor Testing Station in Idaho 

(fig. 3). Although the seiche had 

a maximum rise and fall in water 

level of only 0.56 foot, the oscillations continued over a period of 

2 hours. The pond bottom is in 

alluvial sand and gravel of the 

Big Lost River. The sand and 

gravel overlie basalt. This geologic setting seemingly is favorable for the generation of a seismic 

seiche in the pond. 

SEISMICALLY INDUCED CHANGE 

IN STAGE 

An unusual record is the one 

from Little Haw Creek near Seville, Fla. (fig. 4). At the time 

the seismic waves reached the gage, 

the water stage began to decline 

and dropped 0.33 foot in about 15 

minutes. Then the trend reversed 

and the water level began to rise. 

Another unusual record was obtained on Tensas River at Tendal, 

La. (fig. 5). The water level sud-

:!: 

t-= 

J: 6.0 Cl 

iii 

J: 

w 

Cl 

<( Cl 5.5 L_ ___________ ___J 

27 

MARCH 1964 

fi.-Bubbler-gage r e co r d of Alaska 

earthquake for Tensas River at Tend:al 

La. Central standard time. ' 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C9 

5 ~------~---- ---.. ·-~-·-·· -l 

~ 4 

w 

...J 

Alaska earthquake\ 

<( 

u 

"' 

3L_ ______ _L __________________ ~---------~ 

26 27 28 

MARCH 1964 

4.-Seismically induced decline in stage at Little Haw Creek near Seville, Fla. 

Eastern standard time. 

denly declined 0.20 foot, then rose 

only 0.15 foot and remained level 

for 7 hours even though the trend 

before and after the quake was a 

slow steady rise. Because the bubbler-type gage on which this was 

registered has a built-in delay, 

rapid fluctuations do not record. 

The first motion detected by the 

instrument was a water-level 

decline. 

Three surface-water recorders in 

Kansas also registered the quake 

as a temporary decline in stage. 

A s.mall sharp decline in water 

level was followed by a slightly 

less rapid rise to the preearthc 27 28 

MARCH 1964 

6.-Bubbler-gage records of the Alaska 

earthquake from Kansas. A, Big Blue 

River near Manhattan. B, Neosho 

River near Chanute. C, Neosho River 

near Burlington. Central standard 

time. 

quake level (fig. 6). Inasmuch as 

all three charts were recorded by 

bubbler gages, the traces may not 

represent a true decline in stage. 

The author has not yet been able to 

establish whether rise or fall is 

related either to the location of 

the gage on the cross section of 

the stream or to the seismic waves. 

SEISMICALLY INDUCED FLOW(?) 

Among the 755 charts examined, 

only one appears to show what 

may be seismically induced flow. 

The hydrogra ph from March 25-

29, 1964, of Paxton Creek in Pennsylvania shows (fig. 7) the effect 

of a rain in the basin on March 

26. On March 28 a smaller rise 

1.4 I 

1.3 

.... 

"' 1.2 "' ... 

~ 1.1 ..,· 

"' " .... 1.0 r------.. 

"' 0.9 

0.8 I 

25 

1\ I I 

I\ 

\ 

I~ 

~J\ 

26 

I 

27 

MARCH 1964 

I 28 

I 

-I 

29 

7.-Stage of Paxton Creek, Pa., showing increased flow on March 26 from 

0.36-inch rainfall and possible seismically induced discharge from an aquifer 

on March 28, 1964. Eastern standard 

time. 
Cl,O 

is shown, but the rise seems quite 

rapid and is followed by a gradual 

decline to or below the preearthquake trend. There was no known 

rainfall thatcouldhavecaused this 

rise. The time is inconclusive, 

for the rise occurred 13 hours after 

the earthquake. This increased 

flow has been interpreted by Louis 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

Carswell (oral commun., September, 1964) as reflection of a slug 

of ground water squeezed out of 

an aquifer into the creek some 

miles upstream. H this supposition is true, the slug then retained 

its identity for 13 hours during its 

travel to and past the gage. 

The hydrologic effects recorded 

at surface-water gages, although 

far smaller in size than many of 

the hydroseisms in wells, are of 

interest because they are so unusual. Never before, to the author~s knowledge, have seismic 

seiches been reported in flowing 

streams at great (teleseismic) distances from an epicenter. 

HYDROSEISMOGRAMS FROM THE NUNN-BUSH SHOE CO. WELL, WISCONSIN 

BY ELMER E. RExiN and RoBERT C. VoRHIS 

The most detailed of all hydroseismic records of the Alaska 

earthquake are from the NunnBush Shoe Co. well in Milwaukee, 

Wis. These were obtained from a 

recorder built and maintained on 

the well by Rexin. The recorder 

operates with a chart speed of 576 

inches per day and magnifies the 

fluctuations to five times their 

natural size. 

The well, which is at Fifth and 

Hadley Streets in Milwaukee, was 

drilled in 1925. It has a 10-inch 

casing with welded joints to a 

depth of 107 feet, an 8-inch casing 

from 104 to 215 feet, and an 8-inch 

open hole from 215 feet to the bottom at 400 feet. 

The artesian aquifer penetrated 

by this well is formed by the Waubakee and Niagara Dolomites of 

Silurian age. This aquifer characteristically is not uniformly permeable, and water occurs chiefly 

in joints and along bedding planes. 

On the night of March 27, 1965, 

as the watchman marked 22 : 00 

hours on the chart of the waterlevel recorder, he found that something quite violent was being recorded. He immediately called 

Rexin to report that the float was 

banging down in the well, the water was gurgling, and the pen was 

flying back and forth from end to 

end of the recording drum. 

The senior author arrived 20 

minutes later and verified that the 

chart (fig. 8) was recording a major earthquake. The preliminary 

movement was recorded at 21 : 43 : 

20 c.s.t., March 27 (03: 43:20 

G.c.t., March 28) with a clear and 

distinct initial drop in water level 

of 0.005 foot. Movement continued small and somewhat indecisive 

for 2% minutes, then the water 

level quickly rose 0.034 foot. This 

was followed by a decline, and 

rhythmical movements were recorded for the next 4% minutes. 

Then movement became more violent (apparently owing to arrival 

of the S wave) for a period of less 

than a minute. A lesser motion (in 

the sense that the motion was 

barely within the recording limits 

of the instrument) followed for a 

3-minute period. Immediately 

thereafter the water level began to 

fluctuate so violently that the range 

of movement exceeded the limits of 

the recorder. The period of these 

violent fluctuations was about 15 

seconds each. The maximum 

movement during this phase could 

not be measured but was estimated 

to have been about 12-14 feet. 

Large waves with periods measured in minutes, in addition to the 

15-second waves, are suggested if 

one sketches in a line that connects the midpoints of fluctuations. 

The more significant details shown 

on these hydroseismograms (figs. 

8, 9) are tabulated below (table 2) 

along with the epicentral times of 

the quake and the aftershocks that 

were recorded. 

The hydroseismograms from 

this well are truly unique in that 

they are the only expanded-scale 

records showing in detail the effect 

of the Alaska earthquake on water 

levels. As such, they will undoubtedly be subjected to much detailed study in the years ahead. 

Rexin's observations of the many 

earthquakes recorded in this well 

have shown that the long-period 

waves such as followed the Alaska 

quake are invariably associated 

with major earthquakes that also 

generate tsunamis. He believes 

that this aspect may have an importance in itself that will make 

further study worthwhile. 

TABLE 2.-Chronological list of hydroseismic data from the Nunn-Bush Shoe 

Co. well at Milwaukee, Wis., March 

28-30, 1964 

[Greenwich civil time] 

March 27, 1964 

20: 20_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Measured depth to 

water was 99.20 feet. 

March 28, 1964 

03: 36: 13_ _ _ _ _ _ [Time of Alaska earthquake, at epicenter.] 

03: 43_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Arrival of P wave (fig. 

8). 

03:49 _________ Arrival of S wave (fig. 

8). 

012 

TABLE 2.-Chronological list of hydroseismic data from the Nunn-Bush 

Shoe Co. well at Milwaukee, Wis., 

March 28-30, 1964-Continued 

Ma1·ch 28, 1964-Continued 

03: 52 _________ Start of L(?) wave 

(fig. 8). 

03: 55_________ Start of major waterlevel oscillations. 

04:24 _________ Pen ran out of ink and 

had to be refilled. 

04: 28_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ As recording resumed, 

the oscillations began to decrease in 

amplitude. The 

record suggests that 

there was a "superwave" of about 24 

minutes in period 

and, as the record 

continued, the period 

gradually lessened to 

about 4 minutes. 

05:12 __________ Water level began a 

slow steady rise that 

continued to 11 : 18 

G.c.t. and, as measured from the charts, 

represents a mimmum rise of 1.64 

feet. 

06: 17 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A distinct water-level 

rise and decline that 

occurred over a 2~~­

minute interval. 

End of chart 1. 

09: 26_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Start of distinct train 

of 16-second waves 

with maximum double amplitude of 

0.008 foot superimposed on long continuing waves of 4-

minute period (fig. 

9A). 

09: 52: 54______ Aftershock of magnitude 6.2 (as determined at Pasadena, 

Calif.). 

10:14%-10: 20 __ Record of aftershock, 

with wave of 16-

second period and 

maximum double 

amplitude of 0.016 

foot (fig. 9 B). 

10:35: 39 _____ .. Aftershock of magnitude 6.3 (Pasadena). 

11 : 00_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Aftershock recorded as 

a distinct train of 

IS-second waves 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

WATER LEVEL. 

IN FEEl 

0.01 

0.02 

/

12:40on 

Mar 28 

D 

E 15:09:50· ~ -~:11/ 15:09 on 

Mar 28 

H 

I 

0 5 

• __ L ____ i _L.-' __ 1

TIME.. IN MINUTES 

04:46 on Mar 29\ Unidentified surface wave; 

period 16 sec; double amp I 0.002 ft 

17:20 

H.-(above and on p. C13) .-Hydroseismograms of aftershocks of the Alaska 

earthquake recorded in the Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. well. Greenwich civil time. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

~------------------------------ - -----------------------~ 

0 2 3 

WATER LEVEL. 

IN FEET L_ I l __j 

TIME. IN MINUTES 

K 07:35 on Mar 

13:30 on Mar 30 

L 

16:34 

March 28, 1964-Continued 

with maximum double amplitude of 

0.046 foot (fig. 9C). 

12: 20 : 48.8 _ _ _ _ Aftershock of magnitude 6.5 (Pasadena). 

12:44-13:02 ___ Aftershock recorded as 

a distinct train of 18-

second waves with 

maximum double 

amplitude of 0.037 

foot (fig. 9D). 

End of chart 2. 

14:47:38.7 and Two aftershocks of 

14:49:15.0. magnitudes 6.3 and 

6.5, respectively 

(Pasadena). 

15:02:40 ______ P? wave. 

15:09:50 ______ S? wave. 

15:1L ________ L wave. 

13:40 

March 28, 1964-Continued 

15:14 _________ L maximum with 

period of 13 seconds 

and double amplitude of 0.04 foot 

(fig. 9E). 

20:29:05.9 ____ Aftershock of magnitude 6.6 (Pasadena). 

20:50 _________ S? wave. 

20:53 _________ L wave. 

20:54 _________ L maximum with 

period of 16 seconds 

and double amplitude of 0.26 foot 

(fig. 9F). 

March 29, 1964 

04: 46 _________ Small surface wave of 

unidentified origin 

Cl3 

March 29, 1964-Continued 

with period of 16-

scconds and double 

amplitude of 0.002 

foot (fig. 9G). 

06:04: 43.4 ____ Aftershock of magnitude 5.8 (P:tsadcna). 

06:3L _____ . _ L maximum with 

period of 18 seconds 

and double amplitude of 0.0068 foot 

(fig. 9H). 

22: 10 _________ Measured depth to 

water was 87.07 

feet giving a waterlevel rise of 12.13 

feet since preearthquake measurement on :March 

27, 1964. 

End of chart 3. 

16:40: 59.3 ____ Aftershock of magnitude 5.8 (Pasadena). 

17: 11-17: 20 ___ Distinct wave train 

with waves of 16- · 

second period and 

double amplitude of 

0.02 foot (fig. 91). 

March 30, 1964 

02: 18:05.6 ____ Aftershock of magnitude 6.6 (Pasadena). 

02: 20_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ P? arrival. 

02: 357L ______ S? arrival. 

02:42-02: 56___ Surface waves with 

period of 17 seconds 

and maximum double amplitude of 

0.062 foot (fig. 9J). 

07: 09: 34_ _ _ _ _ _ Aftershock of magnitude 6.2 (Pasadena). 

07:35 _________ S? wave. 

07:39 _________ Surface waves with 12-

second period and 

maximum double 

amplitude of 0.048 

foot (fig. 9K). 

13:03: 34.7_ ___ Aftershock of magnitude 5.3 (Pasadena). 

13:30--13:40 ___ Very faint waves with 

period of 14 seconds 

and maximum double amplitude of 

0.002 foot (fig. 9L). 

16:09:27.2 ____ Aftershock of magnitude 5.5 (Pasadena). 

16:34-16:45 ___ Waves with maximum 

period of 25 seconds 

and double amplitude of 0.0022 foot 

(fig. 9M). 

End of chart 4. 
C14 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS 

AFRICA 

LIBYA 

A good record of the Alaska 

earthquake was made on a recorder in Wadi Labdah near 

Homes, Libya (Fituri Deghaies, 

Libyan Ministry of Agriculture 0 ' written commun., Feb. 15, 1965). 

The well ( 3236-1417-B) is about 

4 kilometers from the Mediterranean Sea, has a depth of 77 

meters and a diameter of 8 inches. 

It yields 40 cubic meters per hour. 

The fluctuation had a double amplitude of 0.24 feet, and the rise 

was equal to the decline. Three 

other wells at Bir al Ghanam 

Wadi ' al Maganin, and Qa~r 

Khiar recorded the quake, but no 

other details have been furnished 

(Hadi Ali Tarhuni, Libyan Ministry of Agriculture, written commun., Dec. 25, 1964). 

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA 

About 100 charts from observation-well recorders in the Republic of South Africa were 

examined, but only three showed 

a fluctuation caused by the Alaska 

earthquake (0. R. Van Eeden, Di 

rector, Geol. Survey, written commun., Sept. 8, 1965). Two of the 

wells are on Hobben Island (lat 

33°49' S. and long 18°22' E.). 

They penetrate Malmesbury 

Hornfels of Precambrian age and 

are 135 and 74 feet deep. The 

Alaska earthquake caused a fluctuation at about 04 :00 G.c.t., 

March 28 of 0.23 foot in the shallower well and 0.20 foot in the 

deeper well. 

The third well, at Fauresmith 

(lat 29°45' S. and long 25°20' E.), 

penetrates shale and sandstone of 

the Beaufort Series of the Karroo 

System (Permian-Triassic in age) 

and is 130 feet deep, and the depth 

to water is about 13 feet. The 

Alaska earthquake caused a fluctuation of 0.60 foot. 

SOUTH-WEST AFRICA 

The Alaska earthquake was registered in an observation well at 

Windhoek (Dr. W. L. Van Wyk, 

Assistant Director, Geol. Survey 

of South-West Africa, written 

commun., Aug. 25, 1965). The recorder chart, with a time scale of 

12 mm per day and a gage-height 

ratio of 1 : 5, had a fluctuation of 

0.50 foot at about 05 : 00 G.c.t. 

The well is 600 feet deep, in 

quartzite and mica schist. The 

water was struck in a fault zone, 

and the water level is 100 feet below land surface. 

UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC 

(EGYPT) 

The Alaska earthquake was recorded in an artesian well in 

Kharga Oasis in the Western 

Desert of Egypt. The initial response was a fluctuation with a 

double amplitude of 0.079 meter 

( 0.24 ft) followed about 1% hours 

later by a fluctuation of 0.030 

meter ( 0.09 ft) ~ and 5 hours after 

the initial response by a fluctuation of 0.007 meter ( 0.02 ft). ( R. 

L. Cushman, U.S. AID-USGS 

engineer, written commun., .Tanuary 1966.) 

ASIA 

ISRAEL 

The Alaska earthquake was recorded in eight observation wells, 

of which three were in the mountains and five in the coastal plain 

of Israel (M. Jacobs, Director, 

Water Comm. Israel, written commun., May 19, 1965). The double 

amplitudes of fluctuations ranged 

from 0.003 to 0.075 meters (0.01-

0.25 ft) 0 

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES 

Hydroseisms from the Alaska 

earthquake were recorded in 17 of 

25 instrumentally equipped wells 

on the Island of Luzon, Republic 

of the Philippines. The hydroseisms ranged from 1 to 15 centimeters ( 0.03-0.46 ft) in double 

amplitude. (A. B. Delena, Bureau of Public Works, written 

commun., April 13, 1966.) 

AUSTRALIA 

In the Northern Territory, two 

observation well recorders, 16 miles 

southeast of Darwin, were in operation at the time of the Alaska 

earthquake and both registered 

hydroseisms (R.N. Eden, Director 

of Water Resources, written commun., Aug. 11, 1965). These two 

are 170 feet apart, are at lat 12°-

30'35" S. and long 131 °04'50" E. 

Well M1, with a depth of 114 feet, 

had a fluctuation at about 04:00 

G.c.t. of 0.10 foot. Well M2, with 

a depth of 227 :feet, had fluctuations of 2.25 feet at 04:20 G.c.t., 

0.98 foot at 06 :00 G.c.t., and 0.08 

foot at 07:20 G.c.t. 

A seismic seiche was recorded at 

gaging station 113A on the Victoria River at lat 16°22' S. and 

long 131 °06' E. This station was 

the only one of a large number in 

operation in the Northern Territory of Australia that registered 

any effect of the Alaska earthquake. The seiche had a double 
amplitude of 0.033 foot and was 

recorded at 04:20 G.c.t. 

A recorder on the Tatangara 

Reservoir in New South Wales, at 

lat 35°47'53" S. and long 148°-

39'44" E., recorded a seiche at 

04 :20 G.c.t. on March 28, 1964, 

that also was caused by the Alaska 

earthquake. 

Twelve charts from water-level 

recorders of the Victoria State 

Electricity Commission were examined closely for unusual movements on March 28, 1964, by G. 

Patterson, Engineer for Design 

and Construction (written commun., Oct. 19, 1965). On only 

one was there any discernible fluctuation. This gage on the Melicke 

Munjie River recorded a seismic 

seiche at about the time of the 

Alaska earthquake. 

EUROPE 

BELGIUM 

An extremely interesting and 

unusual hydroseism was recorded 

at Heibaart, Belgium (fig.10). A 

large fluctuation preceded the 

maximum one, whereas all the 

hydroseisms r e c o r d e d in the 

United States seemingly showed 

the maximum fluctuation at the 

start of the record. Another unusual feature of this hydroseism 

is that the waves that went the 

long \Vay around the world (W2 , 

w3, 0 0 0) were recorded distinctly. A copy of the hydroseismogram was received from A. 

Sterling, Director, Hydraulic Research Laboratory, Belgian Ministry of Public Works, and is 

reproduced as figure 10. 

DENMARK 

The Alaska earthquake was recorded in 7 of 14 observation wells 

in Denmark (Andersen, 1965, 

p. 40). The largest double amplitude was 0.12 meter ( 0.40 ft) in 

a well that is 66 meters deep, cased 

to 62 meters, and 10 inches in diameter. The well produces from 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

- -!" 

0 

28 

WATER~LEVEL 

CHANGE, IN 

CENTIMETERS 

0 

5 

12 24 

29 

MARCH 1964 

10.-Hydroseism of the Alaska earthquake recorded at Heibaart, Belgium. 

Greenwich civil time. 

015 

limestone in which the casing is 

seated. The water level in the 

well at the time of the quake was 

14 meters below land surface. 

UNITED KINGDOM 

The effect of the Alaska earthquake was recorded on 34 wells in 

England ( J. Ineson, Chief Geologist, Water Dept., Geol. Survey 

and Museum, written commun., 

Feb. 12, 1965). Of these, 25 are 

in Cretaceous chalk, 7 in Jurassic 

limestone, 1 in Permo-Triassic 

sandstone, and 1 in the Lower 

Greensand. The maximum fluctuation was 1.08 feet in the Lincolnshire Limestone of ,Turassic 

age. The maximum fluctuation in 

chalk wells was nearly as large, 

being 1.05 feet. These wells range 

in depth from 200 to 1,271 feet. 

CANADA 

ALBERTA 

Hydroseisms of the A 1 ask a 

quake 'vere recorded in 24 of 48 

observation w e 11 s in Alberta. 

Fluctuations ranged from greater 

than 5 feet to less than 0.02 foot. 

Three records showed a permanent 

change in water levels after the 

quake. One of these is interpreted 

by Gabert (1965) to result from 

stress induced in the aquifer by 

the quake and which was dissipated gradually with time. None 

of the records showed any of the 

aftershocks even though Alberta 

is closer to the epicenter than any 

other geographic area. from which 

hydroseisms were reported. 

Thirty seismic seiches from surface-water gages in Alberta were 

reported (R. H. Clark, Secretary, 

Canadian N atl. Comm. Internat. 

Hydrologic Decade, written commun., Sept. 21, 1965). These 

ranged from 0.01 to 0.32 foot. 

BRITISH COLUMBIA 

Three observation wells in British Columbia. that penetrate unconsolidated Pleistocene clay, till, and 
016 

sand :failed to record any effect of 

the Alaska quake (E. Carl Halstead, Canada Geol. Survey, written commun., Oct. 30, 1964). 

The Alaska earthquake was registered on many surface-water recorders in operation in British 

Columbia. On most o:f these the 

quake was recorded as a small jog 

on the chart. A total of 13 seismic 

seiches ranging in size :from 0.05 to 

1.25 :feet are reported :from British 

Columbia by R. H. Clark (written 

commun., Sept. 21, 1965). In addition, 10 others, of which 7 are illustrated, are given by 'Vigen and 

White ( 1964b, p. 6, figs. 2, 4). A 

peculiarity in the distribution of 

the seiches ~was noted by H. T. 

Samsden (District Engineer, Canada Dept. of Nat ural Resource, 

written commun., Dec. 1, 1964). 

None of the recorders on Vancouver Island or in the Koanagan 

River and Lake system in British 

Columbia registered any effect of 

the earthquake. 

MANITOBA 

Wells in the Red River Valley 

near Winnipeg, Manitoba, showed 

fluctuations greater than 1 :foot. 

These wells penetrate an artesian 

aquifer in the Red River Formation of Ordovician age. The aquifer is in :fractured carbonate rocks 

and is confined by till and glaciallake clay (Scott and Render, 1965, 

p. 264). 

In a tabulatiori of seiches in Canada (R. H. Clark, written commun., Sept. 21, 1965), seven are 

listed :from surface-water gages in 

Manitoba. The largest fluctuation, 

0.39 :foot, \Yas at a gage on Nelson 

River; the smallest, 0.03 foot, was 

at a gage on Lake Manitoba. 

NORTHWEST TERRITORIES 

Wigen and White ( 1964b, p. 6) 

list a seiche o:f 0.30 :foot at Cambridge Bay. R. H. Clark (written 

commun., Sept. 21, 1965) lists :four 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

other seiches in the Northwest Territories: Talston River ( 0.15 :ft), 

Willow lake River ( 0.03 :ft), Great 

Bear Lake ( 0.22 :ft), and Lockhart 

River ( 0.08 :ft). 

ONTARIO 

Three out of 20 instrumentally 

equipped wells of the Ontario Water Resources Commission recorded hydroseisms of the Alaska 

earthquake (B. A. Singh, Division 

of Water Resources, written commun., Jan. 3, 1966). Near Toronto, two wells in a gravel aquifer 

recorded hydroseisms with double 

amplitudes of 0.14 and 0.08 foot. 

The third, a well in a sand and 

gravel aquifer in the County of 

Perth, recorded a double amplitude 

o:f 0.08 foot. 

A well record in the Ottawa area 

also showed the Alaska earthquake. This well, which penetrates an unconfined aquifer, 

showed an initial increase of 0.20 

foot in water level followed by a 

decline of 1.1 :feet and a recovery 

to the original level after several 

days (Scott and Render, 1965, 

p. 267). 

Four small seismic seiches at 

stream gages in Ontario are reported by R. H. Clark (written 

commun., Sept. 21, 1905) : Gull 

River ( 0.03 ft), Skootamata River 

( 0.04 ft), Mississagi River ( 0.07 

ft), and French River (O.m ft). 

SASKATCHEWAN 

R H. Clark (written commun., 

Sept. 21, 1965) reported five seismic seiches :from surface-water 

gages in Saskatchewan: Buffalo 

Pound (0.06 ft), Fond-du-Lae 

River ( 0.07 ft), Weyburn Reservoir ( 0.05 ft), Deloraine Reservoir 

( 0.45 ft), and Long Creek ( 0.32 

ft). 

A farmer in Saskatchewan reports that on the day following the 

Alaska earthquake his well water 

had a distinctive purple color. 

Believing that the ejector was responsible for the discoloration, he 

opened the well and pulled the 

casing to check on the ejector. 

The :farm well is 6 inches in diameter, 111 feet deep, and had the 

ejector set at 90 feet. The static 

level normally was 44 :feet but 

when the well was opened the 

level was at 69 :feet, about 25 :feet 

lower than normal. Prior to the 

Alaska quake, the purple coloration had never appeared. men 

sampled on April 24, 1964, the 

~well water still had a purple color. 

The purple color faded gradually 

and by midsummer had disappeared. (W. Nemanishen, Saskatchewan Dept. of Agriculture, 

written commun., June 4, 1965). 

UNITED STATES 

Hydroseismic effects were reported virtually throughout the 

United States, although New England and the States east of the Appalachians did not register many 

hydroseisms. New Jersey, however, reported 40 hydroseisms in 

wells but only 1 :from surfacewater gages. Vermont reported 

none from a well but two from 

gages. Hydroseisms were most 

numerous and of largest size in the 

southeastern States, the ones, surprisingly, that are most distant 

from the epicenter. 

Hydroseisms in the U n i t e d 

States are listed by State in table 

3, and are broken d ow n into 

ground-water observation wells 

and surface-water gages. Listed 

also are the maximum well and 

gage fluctuations recorded in each 

State. 

Data on individual hydroseisms 

in wells caused by the Alaska 

earthquake are g1ven in table 7 

(p. C39). 

ALABAMA 

Hydroseisms from the Alaska 

earthquake were recorded in 20 observation wells scattered through-
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

TABLE 3.-Number and maximum hydroseisms recorded in the United 

States from the Alaska earthquake of March 27, 1964 

0 bservation wells Snrface-water gages 

Number 

recorded 

--------~--------- -----

Alabama _______________ 20 

Alaska ______ -- _________ 3 

Arizona ________________ 12 

Arkansas _______________ 5 

California ______________ 42 

Colorado. ______________ 1 

Connecticut ____________ 0 

Delaware ______________ No report Florida ________________ 92 

g:c:~t~-~= = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

24 

18 Idaho __________________ 24 

Illinois _________________ 21 

Indiana ________________ 22 

Iowa __________________ 13 ]{ansas ________________ 1 ]{en~~cky ______________ 20 

Lomsmna ______________ 37 ~aine _________________ 1 ~aryland ______________ 4 

Massachusetts __________ 1 

Michigan ______________ 48 

Minnesota _____________ 15 

Mississippi. ____________ 11 

Missouri_ ___ ---------- 31 

Montana _______________ 3 Nebraska ______________ 9 Nevada ________________ 5 

New Hampshire ________ 0 

New Jersey ____________ 40 

New Mexico ____________ 12 

New York _____________ 9 

North Carolina _________ 3 

North Dakota __________ 3 Ohio __________________ 32 

Oklahoma ______________ 6 

Oregon ________________ 1 

Pennsylvania ___________ 19 

Puerto Rico ____________ 4 

Rhode Island ___________ 0 

South Carolina _________ 8 

South Dakota __________ 4 

Tennessee ______________ 21 

Texas _________________ 28 Utah __________________ 14 

Vermont _______________ 0 

Virgin Islands. ____ 1 

Virginia ___ . _____________ 1 

Washington ____________ 7 

West Virginia ___________ 1 

Wisconsin ______________ 17 

Wyoming ______________ 2 

TotaL ___________ 716 

out the Valley and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal Plain provinces 

o:f the State. A water-level fluctuation o:f more than 10 :feet in one 

well in Jefferson County (Je:f-1) 

that is equipped with 1: 10 gagescale gears was indicated by the 

Maximum Number Maximum 

double recorded double 

amplitude amplitude (feet) (feet) 

>10 27 0. 22 

>24(?) 32 1. 53 

1. 1 9 . 35 

3. 3 41 1. 45 

2. 4 27 . 42 

3 14 30 

-------~-- 0 ----------

---------- No report ---------- 17 93 . 66 

>10 26 22 

4. 6 5 17 

>5 5 56 

>10 8 10 

8. 2 16 39 

4. 7 3 02 

4 12 34 

1.8 4 57 

>5 69 68 

2 0 

3 3 . 04 

.6 0 ----------

>5 16 1. 83 

4. 4 1 03 

2. 3 22 90 

>10 18 . 87 

2.9 16 10 

4. 1 14 18 

1. 7 0 ----------

---------- 1 Trace 

4.4 1 (?) 08(?) 

>s 27 26 

2. 1 4 Trace 

1.8 1 05 

1.9 3 06 

5. 8 25 25 

>I 37 44 . 055 8 14 

2. 2 2 05 

3. 4 0 ----------

---------- 0 ----------

9. 0 8 12 

23 6 14 

3. 9 32 42 

>5. 8 70 . 67 

3. 1 8 . 06 

---------- 2 23 . 05 0 

1. 6 0 ----------

3. 9 21 1. 04 

.3 0 

3. 5 6 02 

2. 0 12 08 

---------- 755 ----------

fact that the drum made more than 

one rotation. Drums in three 

other wells equipped with 1:2 

and 1: 1 gears also made complete 

rotations. In a well in Lawrence 

County (Law-2), the water motion was so severe that it caused 

C17 

the beaded cable to jump off the 

grooved pulley o:f the drum. 

Seismic seiches were recorded at 

25 gaging stations on rivers in 

Alabama. The maximum double 

amplitude o:f 0.22 :foot was recorded at Buttahatchee River below Hamilton, Ala. A double 

amplitude o:f 0.18 :foot was recorded at two gaging stations, one 

on the Tennessee River at Triana, 

the other on Locust Fork at Sayre. 

ALASKA 

For hydrologic effects in Alaska, 

see Waller (1966a, b). 

ARIZONA 

Water levels in wells in several 

areas in Arizona fluctuated as a 

result o:f the Alaska earthquake. 

The water level in a well in A vra 

Valley near Tucson, on the :fringe 

o:f a highly developed agricultural 

area where large amounts o:f 

ground water are withdrawn :for 

irrigation, fluctuated about 8 

inches, and lesser fluctuations continued :for several hours after the 

initial shock. The water level in 

another well near Phoenix fluctuated about 6 inches as a result o:f 

the earthquake. Other measurable changes in water level oceurred near Bowie where ground 

water is under artesian pressure. 

Hydroseisms were recorded in 10 

>veils in the Colorado River valley. 

The largest hydroseisms were in 

two of these wells; fluctuations exceeded 1 foot, but only one well 

recorded any aftershocks. 

The largest seiche in the State 

was recorded at Coolidge Dam on 

the San Carlos Reservoir. The 

maximum double amplitude was 

0.35 :foot, and fluctuations continued :for nearly 2 hours. Seiches 

were recorded at five other gages, 

a minor drop in stage was recorded 

:for the earthquake at two other 

gages, and a slight trace was recorded at another. 
Cl8 

ARKANSAS 

The hydroseisms reported from 

five wells in Arkansas were all 

rather large : Two that rotated the 

recorder drum showed movement 

in excess of 1 foot; the other three 

ranged from 1.49 to 3.30 feet in 

double amplitude. Even though 

the hydroseisms are large, none of 

the wells recorded any aftershocks. 

Nearly all the 41 hydroseisms 

from surface gages in Arkansas 

were recorded as seiches. The 

largest was 1.45 feet on Lake Ouachita near Hot Springs (fig. 2A). 

The record from Piney Creek near 

Dover seems to show a second 

seiche recorded an hour later than 

the main shock. The amplitudes 

were 0.24 foot for the first seiche 

and 0.03 foot for the second. The 

gage on South Fork of Ouachita 

River near Mount Ida recorded a 

seiche of 0.11 foot followed by a 

drop in stage of 0.015 foot. At 

Six Mile Creek subwatershed near 

Chismville, the earthquake was recorded as a brief 0.03-foot decline 

in stage. 

CALIFORNIA 

The hydroseisms recorded in 

California were rather uniformly 

small. The maximum reported 

was 2.39 feet, and only 3 ·wells out 

of 42 had movement greater than 

1 foot; however, some of the records are unusual. Two adjacent 

piezometers, 7E2 and 7E4, in T. 6 

S., R. 10 \V., Orange County, recorded hydroseisms, one from an 

aquifer (fig. 11A) at fl0-120 feet, 

the other from an aquifer (fig. 

11B) at 800-330 feet. The contrast between these two records is 

interesting because the upper 

aquifer registered a rise of only 

0.03 foot but a fall of 0.17 foot. 

In the lower aquifer the relative 

movement was the reverse-a rise 

of 0.11 foot and a fall of 0.06 foot. 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

11.-Two dissimilar hydroseisms recorded from two aquifers tapped by 

adjacent piezometers in Orange County, 

Calif. 

T-2A 

12.-Two similar hydroseisms recorded 

from two aquifers tapped by adjacent 

piezometers in Orange County, Calif. 

In two other similarly adjacent 

piezometers, 1Q4 and 1Q6, in T. 6 

S., R. 11 W., the hydroseisms recorded almost identically in both 

the upper aquifer (fig. 12A) at 

70-170 feet and the lower one (fig. 

12B) at 300-360 feet. These two 

wells are the only ones known to 

the author in which hydroseisms 

from the same quake have been recorded for two different aquifers. 

The second deepest well known 

from which a hydroseism has been 

recorded is in Fresno County 

(well19S/17E-35N1). It is 2,030 

fe~t deep (measured depth, 1,955 

£t) , and the casing is perforated 

from 608 feet to bottom. 

In California, 27 hydroseisms 

were recorded at gaging stations. 

On the chart from Lower Twin 

Lake near Bridgeport, the seiche 

was recorded during a 4-hour period. The gage at Lake Success 

nea.r Success, Cali£., registered a 

0.02-foot rise over ,~hout a 10-minnte period at the time when the 

quake was recorded at the other 

gages in the State. 

The gage on LaFayette Reservoir east of Berkeley showed fluctuations above the normal water 

leYel but none below. The earthquake-induced, water-lewl movement continued for possibly as long 

as 4 hours, but the maximum rise 

was only 0.02 foot. The Yuba 

River at Englebright Dam recorded a seiche that seemingly 

lasted about 8 hours. The gage at 

:Merced H.iwr diversion showed a 

0.01-foot permanent drop in water 

level at the time of the earthquake. 

The largest seiche, of 0.42 foot, was 

recorded on the gage at Chabot 

Reservoir, and fluctuations died 

down in about 3 hours. 

COLORADO 

Three recorders were in operation in Colorado wells, but only one 

recorded a hydroseism. It is on 

the flood plain of the Arkansas 

River in southeastern Colorado. 
The distribution of hydroseisms 

at Colorado gaging stations was 

unusual. Fourteen were recorded 

on the western slope of Colorado, 

but not one was recorded in the entire eastern half of the State. 

About 40 stations were out of operation due to ice conditions at the 

time of the quake. No doubt some 

of these stations would have recorded the earthquake if they had 

been operating. 'The largest seiche 

of 0.30 foot recorded at White 

River near Meeker was unusual; 

for so large a fluctuation, there was 

no coda portion. The water level 

returned instantaneously to normal level. 

CONNECTICUT 

Neither wells nor stream gages 

in Connecticut recorded the earthquake. 

DELAWARE 

No report received from Delaware. 

FLORIDA 

The Alaska earthquake gave 

Florida bvo distinctions. Even 

though it is the State farthest from 

the epicenter, more ~wells and more 

streams in Florida recorded the 

earthquake than in any other 

State. It furnished 92 ~well records 

compared with 48 from Michigan, 

which had the second largest number. Likewise, the fluctuation of 

17 feet in a well (Taylor 35) at 

Perry, Fla., is the second largest 

recorded fluctuation for any well 

outside Alaska and is the largest 

reported fluctuation in an openhole well. The earthquake evidently caused violent water movement in some >veils, especially in 

the Tampa area, for there one 

recorded pen was dislodged, and 

at six wells the beaded cable was 

thrown off the recorder pulley. 

Of the 92 •vells in which the earthquake was recorded, 49 had fluctuations with a double amplitude 

greater than 1 foot. Aftershocks 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

were recorded in only one well, 

that at Perry, Fla. 

A few wells in Florida were residually affected by the earthquake. A well in Clay County on 

the crest of a water-table high recorded a "normal" hydroseism of 

large size, but immediately afterward the water level began a slow 

decline (fig. 13). This deeline 

continued for several weeks until 

the water level finally stabilized 

about 4 feet below the preearthquake level. This prolonged decline may indicate that the earthquake caused water-table highs to 

be lowered slightly by somehow 

facilitating drainage. Water levels in other wells seemed to show 

a change in trend coincident in 

time with the earthquake. A well 

in Hardee County (731-145-1) 

showed a sudden drop of 0.4 foot 

coincident with the initial phase 

of the earthquake, and a "coda" 

portion then registered at the 

lower level. From the chart it 

would appear that the drop in 

level must have some physical 

significance. 

Practically every surface-water 

gage in Florida recorded the 

Alaska earthquake. The records 

were so numerous that copies of 

only the 93 best records were submitted. The maximum hydroseism at a gage was 0.66 foot. 

The gages on some tidal streams 

and canals of coastal Florida are 

equipped to record both stage and 

deflections of velocity vanes. 

From the record of the deflections, 

the changes in velocity and in direction of flo>v can be calculated. 

Two examples of such records are 

shown in figure 14. The records 

of these gages promise some interesting interpreta;tions if studied 

further. 

GEORGIA 

The hydroseism recorded m a 

Piedmont well at the Georgia 

Nuclear Laboratory, Dawson 

C19 

County, enabled the author to 

score a scientific "first." Upon 

examining the recorder chart on 

the day after the earthquake he 

realized from study of previous 

hydroseisms from this well that 

the earthquake was of great magnitude. He telephoned his findings to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, and the Sunday paper 

reported that the quake was 

greater than an 8.3 magnitude and 

"may be bigger than any quake yet 

recorded instrumentally." This is 

the first and only instance known 

where a hydroseism has provided 

an estimate of earthquake magnitude as quickly as one furnished 

by seismologists. 

Of the 24 hydroseisms recorded 

in Georgia wells, 20 were larger 

than 1 foot. Seismic seiches were 

also recorded at 26 gaging stations 

scattered throughout the Valley 

and Ridge, Piedmont, and Coastal 

Plain Provinces (fig. 15) . Most 

of these stations are on fairly 

deeply entrenched streams. The 

maximum double amplitude was 

0.18 foot. 

No seiches were recorded or reported from Brunswick or Savannah on the Atlantic coast. This 

absence was unexpected beca.use 

seiches were so large and numerous 

on the gulf coast. 

At Brunswick, the >vater levels 

began to rise in all the wells immediately after the quake, and a slmv 

steady rise continued for about 15 

days. The measured rise was 3.3 

feet in well E-143, 2.9 feet in well 

.T-35, 3.0 feet in well .T-36, and 2.6 

feet in well J-67. The water level 

in >Yell.T-67 continued to rise after 

the others leveled off. Residents of 

the area reported that after the 

earthquake their wells yielded water containing black sooty material. The earthquake seemingly 

produced a surge so violent that it 

loosened black iron sulfide that had 

gradually coated well casings, 
C20 

55 

56 

1- 57 

w 

w 

IJ... 

z 

_j 

w 

> w 

....J 

a:: 

w 

1- 58 <( 

3: 

59 

60 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

~ 

~ 

;--

I 

---

27 

/Alaska earthquake 

1\ 

\ 

\ 

--

28 

1\ ~ ~ 

1---

29 

MARCH 1964 

I _J 

~---

~ ~ 

30 31 

~--

APRIL 1964 

13.---Part of a 4-foot decline caused by the Alaska earthquake in water level in a 

well in Clay County, Fla. Eastern standard time. 
(/) 

w 

I 

iJ ;;! 0 z 

<( 

0 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

I 

c I 0 

0 

z 

Stage 

Deflection ,, 0.04 ft per sec { 0.10 ft per sec change 

decrease in in velocity 

velocity 

I/ 

A 

---.......... Stage .... 

.,.. 

11 

Deflection 0.15 ft per sec change 

in velocity 

B 

c 

0 

0 

z 

I I 

27 28 

MARCH 1964 

I 

c 

0 

0 

z 

... .---...r-- I 

c 

0 

0 

z 

I 

14.-Ala~ka earthquake ~hown on stage and deflection records. A, Bi~cayne canal near Miami, Fla. B, Snake Creek Canal at North Miami Beach, J!'la. Eastern 

standard time. 

C21 
C22 

N 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

EXPLANATION 

... Sites where seismic seiches were recorded 

!::,. 

Sites where no fluctuations of 

river stage were detected 

0.15 

Magnitude of recorded fluctuation caused by Alaska earthquake is shown in feet 

1770 

Gaging station identification 

number 

15.-Map of Georgia showing locations of gaging stations and size of seiches recorded 

from the Alaska earthquake. 
pipes, and iron fixtures of water 

systems. Others reported that former flowing wells began again to 

flow. Most of these were old wells 

that had been drilled to a waterbearing unit of sand and calcareous 

sand that lies above the principal 

artesian aquifer. These old wells 

are from 450 to 500 feet deep and 

obtain water from sand at depths 

of 350-450 feet. 

The rise in ground-water level 

due to the earthquake was seemingly a permanent change in the 

Brunswick area. When piezometric maps for the end of 1962 

and 1964 were drawn and compared, the seismic boost in water 

level made the two maps look similar despite increased consumption 

that normally would have caused a 

decline in regional water levels. 

The spring flow used as a public 

supply at Cave Spring and water 

from the city supply wells at 

Cedartown became turbid at the 

time of the earthquake and remained so for several days. The 

earthquake coincided with extremely heavy rainfall, so it is not 

certain whether one or the other or 

both were the cause of this temporary deterioration in water 

quality. 

HAWAII 

Sixteen hydroseisms reported 

from wells in Hawaii had recorded 

double amplitudes ranging from 

0.05 to 1.85 feet. A comparison of 

seven of these with the tidal efficiencies of the wells suggests that 

tidal efficiency of a well has no relation to the amplitude of a hydroseism. 

The largest fluctuation in Hawaii was not recorded in a well but 

in a horizontal tunnel 1,614 feet 

long. The tunnel, driven into a 

mountain for \Vater, has the innermost 24 feet shut off by a 10-foot 

bulkhead that holds water at 160-

180 feet of pressure. At the time 

of the Alaska earthquake the water was discharging and pressure 

229-356 0-66--4 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

was only 126 feet, or 55 p.s.i. 

(pounds per square inch) . It was 

this pressure that fluctuated 4.60 

feet owing to the earthquake. 

Five seiches were recorded at 

gages on the Islands of Kauai and 

of Hawaii, the largest having a 

double amplitude of 0.17 foot. 

The others were all small and 

hardly noticeable on the charts. 

No seiches were recorded at gaging 

stations on the Islands of Oahu, 

Maui, or Molokai. 

IDAHO 

A total of 24 hydroseisms was 

reported from Idaho. The most 

outstanding is from a well in Latah 

County where the double ampliture was more than 5 feet and 

where nine aftershocks were registered. No other well in the State 

is known to have recorded more 

than one of the aftershocks. 

The largest seiche reported from 

Idaho was recorded in a pond in 

Butte County (fig. 3). The depth 

of water in the pond at the time 

was 14.10 feet. The maximum 

double amplitude was 0.56 foot, 

and the fluctuations continued for 

about 2 hours and diminished 

slowly to a static level. The pond 

bottom is in alluvial sand and 

gravel of Big Lost River. Only 

four other seiches were reported 

from gages in Idaho. These were 

0.04 foot or less in size and were 

all in the Idaho Falls area. 

The earthquake worsened the 

pumping problem at the Clayton 

Silver Mines in Custer County, 

Idaho. After the earthquake the 

flow of water in the mine increased 

from 750 to 1,150 gallons per 

minute. 

ILLINOIS 

A total of 28 hydroseisms was 

reported from I ll i n o i s wells. 

Only two aftershocks were recorded, and both were registered 

in well DuPage ANL-10. 

Seismic seiches were recorded in 

Illinois at two lake stations: W ol£ 

C23 

Lake at Chicago and Money Creek 

at Lake Bloomington. T h e s e 

seiches were both recorded at 10 :00 

p.m. c.s.t. on March 27, 1964, and 

had a double amplitude of 0.08 foot 

at the former and 0.05 foot at the 

latter. The Illinois Water Survey reports that two river gages, 

one on the West Branch, the other 

on the East Branch of DuPage 

River, recorded seiches from the 

Alaska earthquake. The fluctuations were 0.04 foot and 0.03 foot, 

respectively. 

A well in Cook County ( 37N 

14E-22.1b), which taps a CambroOrdovician sandstone and has a 

depth of 1,648 feet, reportedly 

pumped sand following the quake. 

Two wells in Union County reportedly yielded muddy water after the quake. 

INDIANA 

Twenty-one hydroseisms having 

double amplitudes ranging from 

0.08 to 8.25 feet were reported from 

Indiana wells. Well Marion Ma32 was exceptional in that it recorded 12 aftershocks, one of the 

most complete records in any well 

in the United States. This well 

is equipped with a recorder operating with 1 : 1 vertical gears, so 

the Alaska earthquake itself was 

shown only as greater than 1 foot, 

but oscillations of this amount or 

more continued throughout at least 

a 2-hour period. 

Seismic seiches were recorded at 

16 stations in Indiana. Of these, 

the maximum fluctuation was 0.39 

foot at an auxiliary gage on the 

White River near Nora where 

fluctuations were recorded over a 

period of 55 minutes. Four of the 

seiches were on lakes and one was 

on a reserv01r. 

lOW A-ALASKA EARTHQUAKE 

EFFECTS ON GROUND WATER 

By R. W. COBLE 

The Alaska earthquake caused 

the water levels to fluctuate in 

many wells in Iowa. The earthquake occurred at 9 :36 p.m. c.s.t., 
C24 

and the L wave arrived in Iowa 

about 9 :50 p.m. The L wave was 

calculated to have arrived at Loras 

College Seismograph Station, Dubuque, Iowa, at 9 :52 p.m., c.s.t., or 

03 :52 G.c.t. (Dr. William Stauder, 

St. Louis Univ., written commun., 

Feb. 26, 1965). The timing mechanisms on the water-level recorders 

on wells in Iowa are not precise 

enough to determine the exact 

minute that the earthquake affected the aquifers in the State, 

but there were many indications 

that something happened just before 10 p.m. 

Aquifers in Iowa responded to 

the earthquake waves as shown by 

(1) the seismic fluctuations on 

some recorder charts; (2) turbid 

water in some wells and springs, 

probably caused by the disturbance 

and movement of silt, clay, and 

colloidal particles within the aquifers; and ( 3) in some wells a permanent change, either a rise or 

fa11, of the water level. These effects are summarized in figure 16 

and in table 4. 

At Redfield Dome, the water 

levels in several different aquifers 

showed various types and amounts 

of seismic fluctuations as is shown 

in figure 17. In this same area, 

two of the four observation wells 

drilled to the St. Peter Sandstone 

of Ordovician age showed a seismic 

fluctuation; the other two showed 

no effect. 1:Vhy some wells are affected and others are not is yet to 

be determined. 

The best record of a seismic fluctuation is shown on a recorder 

chart from an observation well in 

the Franconia Sandstone of Cambrian age at Vincent Dome (fig. 

18). A seismic fluctuation of 0.23 

foot occurred just before 10 p.m. 

.\ series of smaller ftuetuations 

were recorded after the main one. 

Many of these can be matched with 

some aftershocks; however, many 

aftershocks were not recorded. 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

.... Milford 

o Sioux Center 

• .6. Scarville 

Buffalo A Lake Mills 

Center 

Humbolt • 

Clairon 

... •Hampton 

Fort • • Aide.._ •• Ackley 

Dodge VDincent Iowa Falls .... orne 

Lohrville 

Redfield 

Dome e 

A 

Ames 

e •Laurel 

ADes Moines 

.A Norwalk 

StCharles e •Melcher 

..,stanton 

0 40 80 MILES 

I 

•Whittier 

ecedar 

Rapids 

16.-Location of reported ground-walter disturbances in Iowa caused by the Alaska 

earthquake. •, seismic fluctuation; J., permanent change; •, turbid water. 

TABLE 4.-Summary of ground-water disturbances in Iowa caused by the 

Alaska earthquake 

Aquifer Effect 

Locality 

System Lithology Se~smjc 

fluctuation 

(ft) 

Water-level change Turbid lasting more than water 1 week 

Ackley______________________________ __________________ __________ X Alden _____________ ------------------ ____________________________________ Lowered. Ames _____________ Quaternary _____ SandandgraveL 0.15 Buffalo Center ____ ------------------ __________________ __________ X 

Burlington ________ Mississippian Carbonate ________________ -------- Lowered2 ft. 

and Devonian. 

Ordovician ______ Sandstone _________________________ Lowered 1.8 ft. 

Cairo Dome'----- Silurian _________ Carbonate______ 1.2 _______ _ 

Cedar Rapids _____ ~i~~~~~~~~~::: :::::~~::::::::::: 4

: ~(+?) :::::::: Clarion __________________________________________________________________ Raised. 

Clayton ___________ ------------------__________________ __________ X 

Clinton ___________ Cambrian and Sandstone_______ (2) Raised 15ft.' 

Ordovician. Des Moines ___________ _do ________________ do ____________________________ Raised 18ft.' Elkader ________________ do ________________ do. ____________________________ Raised 40-50 ft.' Fort Dodge_____________________________________________________ X 

Hampton _________ ------------------____________________________ X Humboldt ________ Mississippian ___ Carbonate________________ X Iowa Falls______________________________________________________ X Lake Mill~!-------- __________________ __________________ _____ _____ ________ Several reported 

LaureL ___________ Mississippian ___ Carbonate_______ X 

Lohrville _______________ do ________________ do___________ _ X Melcher ___________ Quarternary ____ SandandgraveL .05 Milford_________________________________________________________ X 

Norwalk _______________________________________________________________ _ 

RedfieldDome•--- Ordovician ______ Carbonate______ .5 ___ _ _____ do ________________ do ____________________________ _ 

_____ do ___________ Sandstone_______ 1. 25 _____ do ________________ do .. _________ . 25 Cambrian ____________ do ____________________________ _ Rock Rapids ______ Cretaceous ______ ..... do ____________________________ _ 

St. Charles ________ Mississippian ___ Carbonate._____ 1.1 Scarville__________ Quaternary_____ Sand and graveL _________________ _ Sioux City ________ Cretaceous ______ Sandstone _______ '2. 5+ _______ _ Stanton _____________________________________________________ _ 

Vincent Dome •--- Cambrian_______ Sandstone _______ [ . 23 Whittier__________ Silurian_________ Carbonate._____ __ X 

lowered. Sev- eral reported 

raised. 

Lowered 10ft.' 

Lowered. 

Raised. 

Lowered 1 ft. 

Do. Raised 8ft.' 

Lowered 5 or 6 ft. Raised 5 ft.• 

Lowered 30 ft in 2 days. Raised 40ft after 7 days. 

'Data from Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America. • Known to have lasted more than 7 months. • Data from Northern Natural Gas flo. 2 Pumping rate fluctuated. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C25 

153 206 

154 

155 

156 

157 

158 1-

UJ 

UJ 

"- 159 ~ 

~ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ 

~ ~ 

Walker 2 well 

~ 

1 So-called Elgin Limestone 

208 

210 

212 

214 

1- 216 UJ 

UJ 

"-

~ 218 ci 

UJ 

"'---

~ 

~ 

~ 

I~ 

Galena 

Hummell 

Dolomite 

3 well ~ I 

ci 

UJ 

1-

1-

<( 

$: <( 

~ 194 

0 

1-

I 195 1-

(L 

UJ 

Cl 

196 

197 

10 p.m. L--= ~ 

~-= ""-~ 

216 0 

1-

I 

1-

(L 

218 UJ 

Cl 

220 

222 

~ - "'---

~ 10 p.m. 

I 

~ 

198 

~ 

~ --- ~ 224 

199 

200 

2m 

y~ 

Book 1 well ""' St. Peter Sandstone 

25 26 27 28 

226 

228 

230 

"\ 

Garrett 1 well 

Mount Simon Sandstone ~ 

25 26 27 

~ 28 

MARCH 1964 MARCH 1964 

17.-Water-level fluctuations at Redfield Dome, Iow.a. Central standard time. 

The seismic fluctuation was so 

rapid in observation 'veils drilled 

to the Dakota Sandstone of Cretaceous age at Sioux City and the 

Ordovician dolomite at Cairo 

[ I 1-

U.J 

U.J 

u. 

~ 

u..i 

(!l 

z 

<( 

I 

(.) 

...J 

U.J 

> U.J 

...J 

I 

a: 

U.J 

1-

~ 

26 28 29 

MARCH 1964 

18.-~eismic fluctuations in the Peter-

,son 1 well at Vincent Dome, Iowa. Central standard time. 

Dome that the recorder pens became disengaged from the floatpulley mechanisms. At Sioux 

City, the water-plant operator 

could feel air moving in and out 

of the well casing as the water level 

fell and rose. He noted that this 

"sucking and blowing'' of air, 

which gradually increased in intensity and then slowly diminished, lasted from 5 to 10 minutes. 

Several wells produced turbid 

water after the earthquake. The 

water generally became clear after 

a few hours or a few days of normal pumping. Similarly, water 

from several springs, the water 

supply for Humboldt, also became 

turbid. These springs, on the bank 

of the 'Vest Fork of the Des 

:\foines River, flow from limestone 

of Mississippian age. This water 

had always contained less than 5 

ppm (parts per million) of suspended matter. On the morning of 

March 28, the turbidity ranged 

from 70 to 80 ppm. Nearby, water 

from several small springs that 

discharge through the river bed 

was observed to be red, brown, or 

blackish brown. The turbidity diminished on March 30, but increased again after a few rainy 

days during the first part of April. 

It did not completely disappear for 

another 2% weeks. 

In several localities the groundwater levels seem to have been permanently changed. At Sioux City, 

the water level in an observation 

'vell, tapping the Dakota Sandstone, rose 6 feet and remained 
C26 

high £or at least the rest of the year 

(fig. 19). At Rock Rapids, 75 

miles north o£ Sioux City, the 

water level in another well drilled 

to the Dakota Sandstone rose 8 

£eet. A third well, bottoming in 

the same aquifer at Sioux Center, 

which is almost midway between 

Sioux City and Rock Rapids, 

showed no seismic fluctuation or 

perma11ent change whatsoever. 

Limestone o£ Mississippian age 

yields water to the municipal well 

at Lohrville. The nonpumping 

water level had been 97-98 feet 

below the land surface £or more 

than 1 year before the earthquake 

(fig. 20). On March 28, the water 

level had dropped 3 feet, and after 

1¥2 months the total drop was 10 

feet below the original level. This 

diminished level persisted through 

the rest o£ the year. 

The water level in a well in the 

,Jordan (Cambrian) and St. Peter 

(Ordovician) Sandstones at the 

Ford Motor Co. plant in Des 

Moines rose 18 feet (£rom 101 to 

83 £t) after the earthquake. The 

level was still high in June 1965. 

The town of Elkader has several 

wells that produce water £rom the 

.Tordan-St. Peter interval. Shock 

waves £rom the Alaska earthquake 

affected all o£ them in the same 

manner-the water level rose 40-

50 feet and has remained high 

(fig. 21). In the city o£ Clinton, 

adequate records are available £or 

two of the wells which produce 

water £rom the Cambrian and Ordovician interval (Mount Simon 

Sandstone and several overlying 

sandstone formations through the 

Prairie du Chien Group). Immediately following the initial 

shock, the water level rose more 

than 20 feet in city well 7 (fig. 21). 

Seismic fluctuation was inferred 

in city wells 3 and 7 in that the 

pumping-rate recorders show a 

total fluctuation o£ more than 1 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

15 

20 

25 

1-

w 

w 

u._ 

~ 30 

ci 

w 

1-

<( 

~ 269 

0 270 1-

I 271 1- 272 a.. 

w 

"0"' c.,,. ~ ,/·""·/·-·---.-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-.-·-·-·-·-.-·-·-·-·-·-·-·/·-·-·-·-·-·-· ....... ~ 

0 

100 

105 

---·-·------·--· 

110 

1962 1963 1964 

19.-Water levels in the Dakota Sandstone in northwest Iowa. 

percent just at 9:55 p.m. c.s.t. 

(03:55 G.c.t.) . 

A permanent change in water 

levels implies a change in the 

physical properties of the aquifers. A logical assumption is that 

the. porosity and thickness o£ the 

aquifers have decreased where the 

water levels rose and increased 

where they £ell. This change need 

1-

w 

w 

u._ 

~ 

not be large, even where the level 

increased as much as 50 feet as at 

Elkader. Such a change would 

require only a change o£ 22 psi 

in the hydrostatic pressure in the 

aquifer. Considering only the 

Jordan Sandstone, which is 100 

feet thick near Elkader, and assuming that it has a porosity o£ 

15 percent, the compression o£ the 

ci 

UJ -----~r--1--y 

1-

<( 

3: 

0 

1-

I 105 1-

a.. 

w 

Cl 

110 

Lohrville 3 well 

Mississippian limestone 

1963 1964 

20.-Water levels in the city well at Lohrville, Iowa. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

----

-t--j 

::~± 1--- r 

f-

~ 

~ .._ .--

!: 40, I 

~ 501 -+-: 

f.-__ 

f----- ... 

Elkader 3 well I 

I Prairie du Chien Group 

and Jordan Sandstone 

~ 

- -- --,_ __ --·-

'I', ·-t-' 

" ./ 

I 

I 

I 

' 

/Effect of Alaska 

earthquake 

. ·-----r----, 

I I - I I 

~ :: fll r J.J., _: . i 1'\t·-·\ -=1--- __ 0.. Prairie du Chien Group --J- f ~ . ·,_ -

0 150. . - - through Mount Simon r----- ---- --- - --~ -----1-~ 

Sandstone. Well 3 I ·-·,···,,/·.V ::: u-, -=±".,.! _-+--~i'-'.\ .c-t"~-"------/t-·--. j_-_ -A,\-+.-~\-.--\ -j-.:t----+- "- , = 

I 

J 

1962 1963 1964 1965 

21.-Water levels in wells at Elkader and Clinton, Iowa. 

water would have to be only about 

1.5 X 10-5 feet to raise the pressure 

20 psi. This amount of compression would decrease the thickness 

of the aquifer from 100.000000 

feet to 99.999985 feet and the 

porosity from 15.000000 percent to 

14.999985 percent. T:hese computations take into account only the 

compression of the water. If the 

sandstone itself were compressed, 

as it probably would be, the thickness of the aquifer would be decreased somewhat more than 1.5 X 

10-5 feet. This decrease in porosity is extremely small and can be 

considered insignificant with respect to the productivity of the 

aquifers. 

The earthquake was recorded at 

two surface-water gages in Iowa. 

Shell Rock River at Northwood 

declined 0.02 foot in stage between 

03: 00 and 04: 00 G.c.t. on March 

28. The stage was steady then until 05: 30 G.c.t. and rose 0.01 foot 

by 06:00 G.c.t. (midnight). A 

seiche of 0.02 foot was recorded on 

Lake Ahquabi. 

KANSAS 

In Kansas, in only 1 out of 12 observation wells is a hydroseism 

from the Alaska earthquake 

known to have been recorded, and 

it had a double amplitude of 0.37 

foot. Only 7 surface-water recorders out of 150 or so in operation gave noticeable evidence of 

the Alaska earthquake. Gaging 

stations close to those that were 

affected went through the period 

without recording the slightest 

change. Three gages that responded noticeably to the earthquake each showed (fig. 6) a sudden drop in stage with complete 

recovery in 15-30 minutes. There 

was no rise above normal level at 

any of the three stations. These 

three hydroseisms \vere recorded 

at stations equipped with bubbler 

gages, so the response probably reflects instrumental failure to record rapid fluctuations. Thus, 

some interesting-looking records 

of the earthquake may be worthless as far as indicating true 

water-level response to the seismic 

waves. 

KENTUCKY 

Twenty hydroseisms were recorded in a total of 60 observation 

wells in Kentucky, but only one 

well had a fluctuation greater than 

1 foot. This well is at Mammoth 

Cave National Park. 

Four seismic seiches were recorded by gages. The largest, 0.57 

C27 

foot, was recorded on Buckhorn 

Reservoir at Buckhorn. The next 

largest, 0.40 foot, was recorded 

on Nolin River Reservoir near 

Kyrock. 

The Louisville Courier-Journal 

(Mar. 31, 1964) carried an article 

describing the effect of seismic 

seiches on two other Kentucky 

lakes: 

Witnesses said water about 4 miles 

from Dix Dam at Lake Herrington 

slopped around like it does in a dishpan, but people at either end of the 

lake reported nothing unusual. 

The superintendent of Lake Cumberland State Park confirmed * * * reports by fishermen of a series of mysterious waves that swept across Lake 

Cumberland at about the time of the 

Alaska quake. Superintendent John 

Flanagan said the waves were a foot 

to 18 inches high, and snapped two 

cables on the Jamestown boat dock. 

Other reports told of the lake falling 

and rising from 3 to 4 feet several times. 

The boat-dock operator called up and 

said the lake was acting funny-calm 

in the middle but whirling in circles 

near the shore. 

LOUISIANA 

A total of 37 hydroseisms was 

reported from Louisiana wells 

with double amplitudes ranging 

from 0.04 foot to greater than 5 

feet. One record (EB-90) is from 

a \vell 2,120 feet deep cased to 

2,025 feet; this is the deepest well 

in the Nation from which a hydroseism was reported. Eight identifiable aftershocks were recorded in 

1 well ( SJB-17) . In no other 

well in the State are aftershocks 

known to have been recorded. 

Seismic seiches along the gulf 

coast and in the bayous were large 

enough to cause destruction. The 

New Orleans States-Item (Mar. 

28, 1964) reported: 

Boats were sunk and some roads in 

c-ommunities close to the Gulf of Mexico 

were flooded by a wave that rolled in, 

then subsided. Other boats were torn 

from their moorings. At Golden Meadow on Bayou Lafourche a big oyster vessel was thrown against a store building 

on the bayou. For a brief instant a 
C28 

foot and a half of water covered roads 

on both sides of the bayou at Golden 

Meadow and neighboring Galiano. 

Grand Isle, located right on the Gulf, 

apparently didn't get a ripple from the 

strange wave· action. At Delacroix 

Island, where several boats were washed 

from their moorings, one man crawled 

along his dock to land on hands and 

knees to keep from getting washed away 

by the tide. 

Between midnight and 01 :00 c.s.t. on 

March 28, 1964, in the midst of a TV 

bulletin giving the first news of the 

Alaska earthquake, a special bulletin 

announced that a tidal wave had struck 

the Louisiana coast, sunk small boats in 

Chef Menteur pass, and is now entering Lake Pontchartrain. 

A large barge-mounted drilling 

rig on location in Lake Ponchartrain at lat 30°09.6' N. and long 

89°56.8' W. experienced a seismic 

wave also. The barge was lifted 

approximately 2 feet as tanks were 

being flooded to sink it to the bottom. Only one wave was noted. 

Tugs in the Industrial Canal~ 

which with the Gulf Seaway connects Lakes Pontchartrain and 

Borgne~ reported they experienced 

momentary tides of 6 feet or more 

(Rex Meyer, written commun., 

June 12~ 1964) . 

Almost all the gages throughout 

Louisiana recorded seismic seiches 

from the Alaska earthquake. The 

largest was 0.90 foot in double amplitude. Many others were of 

large size, but none showed a coda 

portion lasting more than an hour. 

MAINE 

One hydroseism of 0.19 foot was 

recorded in a well at Brunswick, 

Maine. This is one of the few 

hydroseisms recorded in the New 

England States. No surface->vater gages in the State showed any 

effect of the quake. 

MARYLAND 

The earthquake was recorded in 

four wells in Maryland. Although the four all bottom in sand 

aquifers~ the response of one was 

markedly different from the other 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

three which showed normal hydroseisms. In the fourth well (DorCd 40) the water-level dropped 

0.20 foot during a 25-minute period, but this drop is coincident 

with a decline due to earth tide, 

and it is impossible to separate 

visually the effect of each. 

The earthquake was also recorded at three gages on streams, 

but the maximum fluctuation was 

only 0.04 foot. 

MASSACHUSETTS 

The earthquake was recorded in 

one well in western Massachusetts. 

The well, which penetrates Stockbridge Limestone, registered a 

fluctuation of 0.62 foot. 

MICHIGAN 

The State of Michigan reported 

48 hydroseisms in wells-second 

only to Florida in the number reported; however, only two wells 

recorded aftershocks. A well in 

Genessee County, which recorded 

three aftershocks, is unusual in 

that it bottoms in an old waterfilled coal mine. This type of 

construction may possibly be favorable for recording hydroseisms 

because many have been reported 

from this well over the years. 

Two partly buried reservoirs 

owned by the city of Lansing and 

equipped with recording gages 

showed seismic seiches. In one 

reservoir, having a capacity of 7 

million gallons, a fluctuation of 

1.84 feet was recorded; in the 

other, having a capacity of 10 million gallons, a 1.25-foot fluctuation 

was recorded. The time of occurrence at Lansing was 03.55 G.c.t. 

onMarch28. 

The 16 seiches recorded at 

gaging stations were all small; the 

largest was 0.06 foot in double amplitude. Lasting changes in stage 

were recorded at two gages: a 0.01-

foot drop on the Cedar River at 

East Lansing and a 0.01-foot rise 

on the Cass River on the northern 

peninsula of Michigan. 

MINNESOTA 

Although some of the 15 hydroseisms reported from Minne.sota 

were rather la.rge, no aftershocks 

were recorded. In each of two 

wells in Hennepin County, the water level declined 2 feet in 40 hours 

following the earthquake. This 

decline may have been caused by 

local pumping, but the similarity 

of record and the timing suggest 

that the response may represent 

some local effect induced by seismic 

waves from the earthquake. In 

another well, the water level 

changed so rapidly that the ink o:f 

the pen did not flow fast enough to 

give a complete record. 

Only one seiche was reported 

from surface-water gages in Minnesota. It had a double amplitude 

of 0.03 foot and was recorded on 

the Roseau River at Ross. 

MISSISSIPPI 

The instruments on observation wells in Mississippi recorded 

11 hydroseisms. Of these, five 

were on or near the Tatum salt 

dome. The response was somewhat anomalous in that the water 

level declined instantaneously and 

then took several hours to rise to 

the preearthquake level. 

Of the 22 hydroseisms reported 

from surface-water gages in Mississippi, all were recorded as seismic seiches, and 10 had double 

amplitudes of 0.10 foot or greater 

The largest seiche, 0.90 foot, was 

recorded on the Pearl River gage 

at Monticello. 

MISSOURI 

Of the 28 hydroseisms in wells 

reported from Missouri, some were 

quite large and others were quite 

unusual. One well in Greene 

County had a fluctuation greater 

than 10 feet and, following the 
earthquake, the water level rose 50 

feet between March 28 and June 2, 

1964. The same reaction but on a 

smaller scale occurred in Madison 

County where well 33N/7E-20bcd 

had a water-level rise of 5.55 feet 

in the first 40 hours after the earthquake and an additional 1.65 feet 

of rise in the next 98 hours. In 

Polk County well 33N /Z1 W -5adc 

the water level fell 1.1 feet in 1¥2 

hours after the quake. 

The largest seiche of 0.87 foot 

was recorded by the Black River 

gage at Poplar Bluff, but no coda 

portion was recorded. 

Several stations in Missouri 

equipped with bubbler gages recorded the earthquake, but waterlevel change was recorded either as 

an upward or downward motion, 

never as both up and down, evidently because of the relative unresponsiveness of this type of instrument. 

According to Fellows ( 1965), 

many home wells and the municipal wells at Rogersfield and Mansville, in southwestern Missouri, 

yielded turbid water, some of it 

reportedly "blood red," for a few 

hours to a few days following the 

earthquake. 

Fellows (1965, p. 3, 4) reports 

fnrther that: 

Within two months after the quake, 

static water levels in two deep wells in 

Springfield rose by several tens of feet. 

Unfortunately, these wells were not 

equipped with automatic depth recorders and static water levels were 

not determined at regular intervals. 

Fishermen at Table Rock Lake in 

Taney County, Mo., observed mysterious 

waves on the lake the night of the quake. 

MONTANA 

Hydroseisms were recorded in 

only three wells in Montana. In 

one of these wells (Gallatin County 

well A l-4-25dc) the response was 

greater than 1 foot for the main 

quake, and seven of the major aftershocks were recorded. Therecorder on this well in alluvium at 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

Bozeman has been maintained for 

many years by Dean C. C. Bradley 

of Montana State College and has 

registered many other earthquakes. 

The Billings Gazette (Mar. 30, 

1964) reported that a "small wave 

developed on Hauser Lake northwest of Helena a few minutes after 

the Alaska quake and tore a boat 

dock from its moorings." 

Of the 21 hydroseisms from 

stream-gaging stations in Montana, the largest double amplitude 

was 0.16 foot. Practically all the 

records came from the mountainous part of the State, and none 

were recorded on the main stem of 

the Missouri River. Gages on the 

North Fork of Milk River and 

Sage Creek, both on the international boundary, showed a rise in 

water level of 0.01 or 0.02 foot at 

the time the earthquake was recorded at other gages. 

NEBRASKA 

The largest hydroseism in N ebraska for the seven wells reported 

was 4.10 feet, but no aftershocks 

were recorded. This well had a 

fluctuation 18 times as great as that 

which was recorded for the Hebgen Lake, Mont., earthquake of 

August 17, 1959. A we 11 in 

Thayer County (4-1-9bac) had an 

unusual response: The water level 

rose 0.87 foot but at no time declined below the prequake level. 

The 14 hydroseisms from N ebraska stream gages were all recorded as seismic seiches. This 

response was unusual in that 

seiches were sparsely recorded 

elsewhere in the northern Great 

Plains. 

NEVADA 

~\ll five of the hydroseisms recorded in Nevada were in Clark 

County wells. The one in \Yell 

S19/60-9bcc caused the recorder 

drum to make a complete rotation, 

and four of the major aftershocks 

C29 

were recorded. This record is to 

be expected because hydroseisms 

have consistently been clearly recorded in this well. 

NEW HAMPSHIRE 

Hydroseisms were not recorded 

in New Hampshire wells, but one 

surface-water gage registered the 

earthquake. 

NEW JERSEY 

A total of 40 hydroseisms was 

reported from wells in New Jersey. 

Of these, only six had fluctuations 

greater than half a foot. The 

maximum fluctuation, 4.37 f~et, 

occurred in Hillside well 4 in 

Union County. One distinct aftershock was recorded by this well, 

which is the one in New Jersey 

most sensitive to earthquake 

shocks. 

Only one somewhat questionable 

hydroseism was recorded by a surface-water gage in New Jersey. 

The large number of wells that 

responded to the quake seem in 

odd contrast to the one questionable record from a stream gage. 

NEW MEXICO 

In New Mexico hydroseisms 

were recorded at 12 observation 

wells. Of these, two had fluctuations of more than 5 feet, but 

neither one showed any aftershocks. The Hot Springs well 6 

in Sierra County had a fluctuation 

of more than 1 foot, and some aftershocks were registered. The 

main shock thus may have caused 

the recorder drum to rotate many 

times, so the actual fluctuation 

must have been considerably 

greater than 5 feet. At another 

well the motion caused the pen to 

pull the paper off the recorder, and 

in another the motion was so rapid 

that the ink could not flow fast 

enough to give a complete record. 

C. V. Theis (written commun., 

Aug. 4, 1964) furnished the following comments: 
C30 

In New Mexico, the Alaska earthquake produced a fluctuation of the 

Greenfield observation well in the Roswell artesian aquifer of about 13 feet. 

This well is comparatively shallow, is 

just below the lip of the confining beds, 

and is in a part of the aquifer with 

transmissibility in the millions. The 

Artesia recorder well, located where 

the aquifer is deeper, with a transmissibility of only 100,000 or so, and 

where the strata are becoming more 

calcareous near the old reef, had a 

fluctuation of only a small fraction of 

a foot. * * * Lea Lake-, east of the 

Pecos and approximately east of Roswell, the largest of the Bottomless 

Lakes, about 300 feet deep, and an acre 

or so in surface area, produced a water 

spout said to be about 15 feet high. 

Maddox [U.S. Geol. Survey, Roswell] 

saw old tires and other objects floating 

on the surface of the lake the next 

day, these having been cast up from 

the bottom. The brine observation 

wells at Malaga Bend near Carlsbad, 

which fluctuated about a foot from the 

Turkish earthquake of about 1939, lost 

the record of the Alaskan quake because 

the pen of the Friez recorder was 

thrown over the cylinder. 

Roy Foreman, who runs a concession at Lea Lake, N. Mex., observed the effects of the Alaska 

quake on the lake and the following is a summary of his observations: 

A'bout 9 :40 p.m., March 27, 1964, 

waves about 10 feet high rose on Lea 

Lake. At this time my wife and I heard 

a loud noise, which sounded like a 

strong wind although it was a calm evening. The water flowed over a 3-foot 

high guardrail which is 54 feet from 

the normal port margin. A SPction of 

the guardrail was washed out by the 

flow of water. 

Before the earthquake a small trickle 

of water flowed from the lake through 

a 12-inch culvert. The morning after 

the quake, the 12-inch culvert was carrying a full capacity of outflow. The 

discharge as of August 1964 was still 

more than the prequake discharge. 

In the Carlsbad area, 6 of 21 

gages on flowing streams recorded 

hydroseisms, but the 6 hydroseisms 

recorded were all of smaii double 

amplitude. Elsewhere m the 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

State, 21 hydroseisms were recorded of which 19 were seismic 

seiches and 2 were minor changes 

in stage. 

NEW YORK 

Nine hydroseisms were recorded 

in New York State wells. These 

did not include Saratoga 529 and 

Queens 64 which previously had 

shown rather outstanding responses to earthquakes. Recorders 

had been removed from both these 

wells before the Alaska earthquake. The Chautauqua 10 well, 

however, had a fluctuation of 2.10 

feet and also recorded one aftershock. It is interesting to note 

that this well had a fluctuation of 

0.22 foot for the Hebgen Lake 

earthquake of August 17, 1959. At 

another well, the recorder pen 

failed during the Alaska quake. 

Only four seiches, each less than 

0.01 foot, ·were recorded at stream 

gages inN ew York State. In addition, one record from the Mahwah 

River near Suffern showed a drop 

in stage of about 0.01 foot. 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Three hydroseisms were reported :from North Carolina wel Is ; 

the largest hydroseism had a double amplitude of 1.85 :feet. 

NORTH DAKOTA 

North Dakota reported three 

hydroseisms :from wells that penetrate glaciofluvial sand and graveL 

The earthquake \Vas also recorded at two surface-water gages 

in the State. The record :from one, 

on the Cheyenne River near Kindred, is questionable in that it 

seemingly was made an hour earlier than it should have although 

this may be due to clock error. 

The record looks like a seiche of 

0.05 :foot double amplitude :followed immediately by a decline in 

stage o:f 0.02 :foot. The other gage, 

on Jamestown Heservoir near 

Jamestown, showed a rise in water 

level o:f 0.07 foot in about 10 minutes, declined 0.05 foot during an 

approximate 20-minute interval, 

and then remained steady for the 

next 9% hours. 

OHIO 

Observation wells in Ohio recorded 32 hydroseisms from the 

Alaska earthquake. The largest 

fluctuation was 5.8 feet in a well in 

Van Wert County. Even with so 

large a fluctuation, the aftershocks 

were not strong enough to be recorded, perhaps because the gagescale gears were 1 :10, and the 

record was so compressed that the 

minor fluctuations were obscured. 

A total of 188 analog recorders 

was in operation in Ohio at the 

time of the Alaska earthquake, but 

only 25 showed any noticeable effects. The seismic seiches probably were obliterated at a few of 

the gaging stations because of normal river surging or fluctuation 

caused by wind action. The maximum double amplitude was 0.25 

foot on a lake gage near Jefferson, 

Ohio. Another gage, 800 feet 

away on Mill Creek, recorded a 

sharp drop in stage o:f 0.04 :foot followed by a rapid rise of 0.03 foot. 

The water level then remained 

steady at this slightly lower level. 

The Mahoning River gage at Alliance, Ohio, showed a drop of 0.01 

foot at the time of the earthquake. 

One other gage, at Atwood Reservoir near New Cumberland, also 

showed a similar reaction. 

OKLAHOMA 

Hydroseisms were noted in wells 

equipped with water-level recorders in the Oklahoma Panhandle, 

central, and eastern parts of the 

State. The fluctuations in water 

levels were more than 1 foot in 

wells in the panhandle, in Grady 

County, and in the Arbuckle 

Mountains; about 0.4 foot in a well 
in Washita County; and about 0.1 

foot in one in the Arkansas Valley. 

Hydroseisms are tabulated £or 

six observation wells (table 7). 

In one well the water movement 

was so rapid that the beaded cable 

slipped on the pulley o£ the recorder. Two wells in sec. 25, T. 

6 N., R. 18 E. provide an interesting contrast. Both penetrate the 

Ogallala Formation to a depth o£ 

99 feet, and both are equipped 

with recorders which show similar 

responses to barometric changes 

and rainfall. However, one 

showed rapid water-level fluctuations due to the earthquake, 

whereas the other showed no 

response. 

At Byrd Mill Spring south o£ 

Ada, a surface-water pool showed 

a drop o£ 0.15 foot in water level 

at the time of the quake, and it 

took about 1% hours to recover to 

the preearthquake level (fig. 22). 

The spring originates along a 

faulted limestone section in the 

Arbuckle Group and seemingly the 

shock wave for a time partly 

closed the opening along which 

water flows to the spring. 

A total of 45 seismic seiches 

caused by the Alaska earthquake 

was recorded in Oklahoma. 0£ 

these, the largest had a 0.44-foot 

double amplitude recorded on 

Lake of the Cherokees at Langley. 

Minor decline in stage seemingly 

caused by the earthquake occurred 

at gages on Little RiYer near 

Wright City, Muddy Boggy Creek 

near Farris, and Verdigris River 

near Inola. A slight rise in stage 

seemingly caused by the earthquake occurred at the gage on Sallisaw Creek near Sallisaw. The 

decline and recovery o£ >vater level 

as described above for Byrd Mill 

Spring Pond was also recorded at 

four other gages, but the maximum decline was only 0.04 foot. 

These £our gages are on Lake 

Texoma near Denison, Tex., 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

o.3~1n 

t;j 

UJ 

"-

~ 

_j 

~ 0.2 ~--===--t---A-=::::::: 

UJ 

_J 

0: 

UJ 

r-

<( 

s: 

~ 0.1 ~ - ----

UJ 

(.9 

z 

<( 

I 

u 

i 1 0.0 I L I ll i Jj_l I I I I I l __ L_l _U_~___i__l_l~ 

z :::; r- :::; z 0 I 0 0 a.: ~ <i 0 z 0 z $ z 0 0 0 0 

<? .:0 :::; '"' <? N 

~ ~ 0 

<? 

N 

~ 

27 28 

MARCH 1964 

22.-Effect of the Alaska earthquake on 

the surface-water pool formed by Byrd 

Mill Spring, Okla. Central standard 

time. 

Glover Creek near Glover, Okla., 

Sand Creek at Okesa, and Verdigris River near Claremore. 

OREGON 

Only one hydroseism o£ 0.055 

foot was recorded in Oregon 

wells; however, only three well re-

~ ~ 

~ < 

~ 

0 

1-

:I: 

1-

~ 0 

25

11 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I 

Alaska earthquake"-... 

26 --

27 -

_j____[__L__j_[__j____[__j__j__j___[_ _ _LL] L I 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 1 2 

MARCH APRIL 

1964 1964 

:!3.-Hydroseism from well Yo 180 in 

York County, Pa. Eastern standard 

time. 

C31 

corders were in operation at the 

time o£ the quake. Inasmuch as 

Oregon is fairly close to Alaska, 

unrecorded water-level fluctuations probably occurred in many 

wells. 

Seismic seiches were recorded by 

eight gages in Oregon. The 

largest ha.d a double amplitude of 

0.14 foot. 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Among the 19 hydroseisms reported £rom Pennsylvania wells 

are some that are unusual. The 

earthquake records in seven wells 

in Dauphin, Luzerne, and York 

Counties all were at the bottom 

of a "low" superimposed on a 

water-level "high." This type o£ 

response may have been caused by 

local barometric changes rather 

than by the earthquake (fig. 23). 

A stream gage on Paxton Creek 

did not record a seiche but it registered a sudden increase in stage 

13 hours after the quake. No rain 

was reported in the basin. This 

rise in stage may represent water 

squeezed £rom an aquifer cropping 

out upstream (fig. 7). 

Only two seismic seiches were 

recorded m Pennsylvania although 102 gaging stations 

equipped with analog recorders 

were in operation at the time. 

The double amplitudes recorded 

were 0.05 and 0.04 foot. 

PUERTO RICO 

0£ the £our hydroseisms reported £rom wells in Puerto Rico, 

one was surprisingly large. The 

fluctuation measured 3.40 feet and 

was recorded so fast that the 

beaded cable slipped on the pulley. 

This well ( J auca 2) is in a graben 

near a fault zone. 

RHODE ISLAND 

No trace o£ the Alaska earthquake was recorded either at observation wells or surface-water 

gages in Rhode Island. 
C32 

SOUTH CAROLINA 

The hydroseisms recorded from 

South Carolina were large. In 

Beaufort County well 304, the recorded fluctuation was 8.98 feet, 

but the beaded cable was thrown 

off the pulley, so the fluctuation 

may have been even larger. Because of this disruption, no aftershocks were recorded; however, 

,Jasper County well 46, which had 

a fluctuation of only 4.72 feet, recorded five aftershocks. 

Seismic seiches ~were recorded 

by eight gages in South Carolina. 

The largest double amplitude was 

0.12 foot. 

SOUTH DAKOTiA 

Only two hydroseisms were reported from South Dakota, but 

one is the largest recorded for this 

quake in any well outside of 

Alaska. This one was recorded 

on a pressure recorder in a test 

well drilled to an artesian aquifer, 

which had an original pressure 

head of 266 feet above land surface. At the time of the quake the 

pressure head was 121 feet above 

land surface, so a pressure recorder 

of 200 feet capacity >vas mounted 

on the well. This unusual situation permitted the full range of the 

Alaska earthquake-pressure effect 

of 23 feet to be recorded in the well. 

The well produces from sandstone 

of the Opeche (Permian) and 

Minnelusa (Pennsylvanian and 

Permian) Formations and is at 

the northwest edge of the Black 

Hills. Because 4lf2 inches on the 

chart represents 200 feet of pressure, it is not surprising that no 

aftershocks appear on the chart. 

Six seismic seiches were recorded by gages in South Dakota. 

The maximum double amplitude 

was 0.14 foot. 

TENNESSEE 

The following information concerning Tennessee wells is extracted with slight modification 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

from a paper by Hassler (1965) : 

Hydroseisms recorded at Geological Survey wells ranged from a 

trace to 3.90 feet. The shock was 

so violent that recorder pens were 

flipped off the charts at Jellico and 

New Johnsonville. Two major 

aftershocks on March 29 and 30 

were also recorded at the Capleville (J-1) well. Only two wells 

(Sloanville, U-1 and U-2) were 

equipped with Stevens A-35 recorders with large time scales (2.4 

in. per day) . Records from these 

instruments indicate the first 

waves arrived at approximately 

10 p.m. c.s.t., and the major fluctuations occurred about 20 minutes 

later. Water levels in both wells 

fluctuated for about 3 hours after 

the major shock. 

Hassler ( 1965) also reported 

that seismic seiches were recorded 

at approximately 20 percent (22 

gages) of the surface-water gaging stations equipped with analog 

recorders. This figure w o u l d 

probably be much higher had not 

many streams been receding from 

fairly high stages at the time the 

quake occurred. The duration of 

the oscillations ranged from about 

5 minutes to 35 minutes. 

The, three largest seiche,s in the 

State were all recorded at gages on 

the Cumberland River: 0.36 foot at 

Carthage, 0.42 foot below Old 

Hickory, and 0.42 foot at Rome. 

The other seiches recorded were 

all much smaller; ranged from 0.10 

to 0.14 foot, and 13 were less than 

0.10 foot. 

In Dickson, Knox, and Montgomery Counties, muddy water 

was reported in many wells tapping the Fort Payne Chert. The 

quake coincided with a period of 

heavy precipitation, so it is not 

known >vhe,ther the heavy rains, 

the earthquake, or a combination 

of both produce,d the muddy water 

in wells. 

TEXAS 

Data on some of the hydroseisms 

from the Alaska earthquake as recorded in Texas wells have already 

been published. Miller and Reddell (1964) list five wells in the 

High Plains area that recorded 

such fluctuations. Montgomery 

(1964) describes three from wells 

in Bexar County. Mills (1964) 

lists 28 recorded in U.S. Geological Survey observation wells in 

Texas; the data from these 28 records are included in table 7. Aftershocks are known to have been 

recorded in only two Bexar County 

'vells-five in one and four in the 

other. Most of the largest hydroseisms occurred in wells penetrating the Edwards Limestone. 

A list of seismic seiches in Texas 

compiled by W. B. Mills (written 

commun., November 1964) shows 

that 69 gages were affected by the 

earthquake. The up and down 

amplitudes were all equal except 

for Lake Winnsboro near Winnsboro where the entire motion was 

down ( 0.03 ft). The largest double amplitude was 0.68 foot recorded at Sabine River near Ruliff. 

The next largest was 0.64 foot recorded on Angelina River near 

Zavalla. The duration of the disturbance at both of these stations 

was 60 minutes. At Lake Houston near Sheldon, the double amplitude was only 0.13 foot, but the 

disturbance continued for 90 

minutes. 

The earthquake was recorded at 

two stations equipped with bubbler gages: one on the Guadalupe 

River at Cuero and the other on 

theN ueces River at Mathis. Both 

gages recorded only a downward 

motion of the water level, 0.29 foot 

at the former and 0.06 foot at the 

latter. The bubbler gages have a 

built-in delay of a few seconds. 

The gages probably responded to 

the first motion to reach them and 
were unable to respond quickly 

enough to the upward surges of the 

seiche. Consequently, the records 

of these gages may be proof that 

the first motion to affect them was 

a decline in water level. 

UTAH 

Fourteen hydroseisms were recorded on observation wells in 

Utah. Of these, two were on pressure recorders, but the 2-foot and 

1.2-foot fluctuations recorded are 

small compared to the 23 feet for 

the pressure recorder in South Dakota. Two wells recorded aftershocks: seven in a Tooele County 

well and one in a Weber County 

well. Both wells were equipped 

with recorders that would measure a maximum fluctuation of 1 

foot-less than the fluctuation for 

the main quake. A well that had 

a measurable fluctuation of 2.50 

feet seemingly recorded one aftershock, so the fluctuation in the 

others probably was more than 2.5 

feet. 

Eight seismic seiches were recorded at gages in Utah. The 

largest was 0.06 foot in double amplitude. The others were minor, 

ranging from 0.01 to 0.03 foot. 

VERMONT 

Two seismic seiches were recorded in Vermont. The larger 

seiche, at the Wrightsville Detention Reservoi-r gage, had a fluctuation of 0.23 foot. The smaller, at 

the East Barre Detention Reservoir gage, had a fluctuation of 0.06 

foot. The general lack of hydroseisms at both wells and stream 

gages in N e'v England makes it 

surprising that these were recorded. The gages were both on 

reservoirs; no seiches were recorded on streams anywhere in 

Ne\Y England. 

VIRGINIA 

One well in Virginia recorded 

the Alaska earthquake. The well 

is at Shenandoah National Park, 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

is 280 feet deep, and penetrates 

metabasalt of the Catoctin Formation of Precambrian ( ? ) age. The 

total fluctuation was 1.60 feet, 

which is divisible into a rise of 0.45 

foot, an upward displacement of 

the water level of 0.55 foot that 

apparently occurred at the time of 

maximum fluctuation, and a dedine of 0.60 foot. 

No surface-water gages in the 

State showed a trace of the earthquake. 

VIRGIN ISLANDS 

The most distant hydroseism to 

be recorded in United States territory was a 0.05-foot fluctuation in a 

well in the Virgin Islands. 

WASHINGTON 

Seven hydroseisms were reported from" Washington, of which 

one had a fluctuation of 3.92 feet 

and \vas followed by six aftershocks. The other hydroseisms 

were all relatively small in amplitude and none wrts followed by 

aftershocks. In one well, which 

had an instantaneous fluctuation 

of only 0.16 foot, the water level 

rose 1.20 feet during a 4-hour 

period immediately after the quake 

and then stayed at this higher 

]eYel. 

The gage on Snohomish River at 

Snohomish showed a strong fluctuation of about 0.45 foot superimposed on a much larger tidal cycle. 

This fluctuation occurred at 03: 50 

G.c.t. on March 27, so it undoubtt;; 12.54 ~--------,---­ w 

LL 

f--

a 12.53 

w 

I 

w 

(!J 

~ 12.52 L_ ______ _L_ __ __j 

27 28 

MARCH 1964 

U.-Seismic seiche and wind seiches at 

l<'ranklin D. Roosevelt Lake at Grand 

Coulee Dam, Wash. Pacific standard 

time. 

C33 

edly was caused by waves from the 

earthquake. 

The gage on Franklin D. Roosevelt Lake at Grand Coulee Dam recorded an interesting seiche (fig. 

24) . Prior to the seismic seiche a 

long train of wind seiches had been 

recorded. Four other smaller but 

typical seismic seiches were recorded elsewhere in the State. 

Several atypical seismically 

caused water changes were recorded at other gages in Washington. At Whitestone Lake near 

Tonasket, the gage recorded a sudden 0.03-foot rise of water level 

followed by the recording of a 

seiche. Slight residual upward 

changes in water level were recorded at two gages, and slight 

temporary changes were recorded 

at three other gages. The gage at 

Lenore Lake near Soap Lake recorded seiches from wind all day 

on March 27, but beginning at 

8 p.m. P.s.t. the Alaska earthquake 

surface waves increased the amplitude of the seiches. 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Only one hydroseism was found 

in West Virginia, and it was recorded in a well at the extreme 

east tip of the State (see table 7). 

This well in Berkeley County penetrates Beekmantown Limestone 

of Ordovician age and had a 0.30-

foot fluctuation. 

WISCONSIN 

Of the 17 hydroseisms recorded 

in ·wisconsin, the most detailed is 

the partial record obtained by E. 

E. Rexin at the well of the NunnBush Shoe Co. in Milwaukee, discussed on page C10. 

In three wells, the water level 

rose and stayed at the higher level. 

In the Nunn-Bush Shoe Co. well 

there was an apparent rise of 

about 12 feet. In another Milwaukee County well the water 

level rose 7.3 feet after the quake. 

In a Monroe County well the 
C34 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

water level rose 1.43 feet and remained at this level. 

Six surface-water gages in Wisconsin recorded small seiches 

caused by the Alaska earthquake. 

The largest seiche was 0.02 foot, 

and the others were barely visible 

on the charts. Both the small size 

and the small number of seiches 

that were recorded at surfacewater gages contrast markedly 

with the large size and the large 

number that were recorded at 

wells. 

WYOMING 

The Alaska earthquake was recorded in two observation wells 

in Wyoming. In one the motion 

was about 2 feet, but no aftershocks were recorded. 

The earthquake was recorded at 

nine stream gages, all in western 

Wyoming. Thus the distribution 

of the records corresponds to the 

distribution in Colorado where effects were recorded only in the 

western part of the State. 

HYHROSEISMS FROM AFTERSHOCKS 

The Alaska earthquake generated literally thousands of aftershocks, but few of the major aftershocks occurred near the epicenter 

of the main shock. Instead, many 

occurred 2°-8° southwest of the 

epicenter, and practically none occurred to the northeast. A magnitude-8.4 earthquake normally 

would have generated a few 

shocks of magnitude 7, but the 

largest magnitude of any of the 

Alaska aftershocks was 6.6. 

Those aftershocks that generated 

a hydroseism in one or more wells 

are listed in table 5. Two other 

earthquakes that occurred during 

the period from March 28 to April 

4, 1964, and that generated hydroseisms are also listed. One occurred on March 31 in the Queen 

Charlotte Islands of British Columbia. The other occurred on 

April 3 off the northwest coast of 

Sumatra. 

The aftershocks were not recorded consistently in wells. For 

example, of the two aftershocks of 

magnitude 6.6, the one on March 

28 at 20: 29 G.c.t. was recorded in 

14 wells, but the one on March 30 

at 02: 18 G.e.t. was recorded in 30 

wells. Some of the aftershocks reported as having been recorded in 

one, two, or three wells may have 

been misidentified. 

The aftershocks were recorded 

in only about 4 percent of the wells 

in which the main shock was recorded. In general, those wells 

that recorded the aftershocks are 

those in which earthquakes are best 

and most frequently recorded. No 

aftershocks were recorded at any 

surface-water gages outside of 

Alaska. The aftershock records 

from the more seismically sensitive 

wells are listed in table 6. 

TABLE 5.-Earthquakes recorded in seismically sensitive observation wells, 

March 27-April 4, 1964 

Epicenter 

nate Epicentral time (0 .c.t.) ~orth 

latitude (0 ) 

March 28 __________ _ 03:36:12.7 --------------- 61.05 

09:01 :00 __ ---- --·----- ··---- 56.5 

09:52: 54 ___ ----------------- 59.7 

10:35: 39 __ ---------- ----- 57.2 11 :08:26 ____ ---------------- eo. I 

12:20:49 __ --- ----------- 56.5 

14:47-14:49.----- 60.4 20:29:06_ ------------------- 59.8 March 29 ____ _ 06:04:43 _____ --------------- 56.2 16:40:59_ ------- ----------- 59.8 March 30 ____ _ 02:18:06_ --- --------------- 56.6 

07:09:34 ___ ------------------ 59.8 13:03:35_ 56.5 1o:09:27_ 56.6 March 3L ___ _ April2_ 

ApriJ3 __ _ 

09:01 :33_ 50.8 

01:11: 56 __ ::::::::::::------- 6.1 22:33:39 ____ 61.7 ApriJ4 _____ _ 17:46:08. 56.3 22:16:57_ 59.5 

1 Earthquake in Queen Charlotte Islands, British Columbia. 2 East. 

3 Earthquake off northwest coast of Sumatra. 

West longitude (

0 ) 

147. 5 152.0 

144.6 

152.4 

148. 5 154.1 146. 5-147.1 148.9 

154.2 

146.9 

153.0 

145.9 

!52. 7 152.2 

130.1 

2 95.4 

147. 7 !54. 5 145. 0 

Number of Magnitude wells in measured at which Pasadena recorded 

----

8.4 713 6.2 3 6.2 5 

6. 3 5 6.2 I 

6. 5 24 6. 3-6. 5 16 6.6 14 

5. 8 4 

5. 8 5 6.6 30 

6. 2 19 

5. 3 1 5. 5 1 

6 I 20 

7 3 3 

6 2 

6~~ 11 

Not 1 

reported 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

TABLE 6.-Seismic fluctuations in sensitive wells, March 28-April 4, 1964 

[Greenwich civil time] 

Fluctuations, in feet 

March 28 March 29 March 30 

035 

Mar 31 Apr 2 Apr 3 April4 

State, county, and well ---,-----,---,---,--------,----,------;--l---,-----l------,-----,---l--- -----------,-----

14:47 03:36 09:01 09:52 10:35 11:08 12:20 and 20:29 06:04 16:40 02:18 07:09 13:03 16:09 09:01 01:11 22:33 17:46 22:16 14:49 

------------1--------------------------------- ------------------

Arizona: 

Ynma, (c-11-24)23bcb ___ >1 Florida Taylor, 35 _______________ '17 

Georgia: Dawson, 12-3 ____________ >1 Dougherty, 13L4 ________ >5 Mitchell, 10G313 _________ >5 Hawaii: 

Oahu, 83__ _ _____________ 1. 85 

Idaho: 

Cassia, 35-21E-18bbL___ 1. 44 Latah. 39N-4W-7 ________ >5 

Illinois: 

DuPage, ANL-10_______ 7. 70 Indiana: 

Marion, Ma-32 ___________ >1 Pulaski, Pu-6 ___________ >1 

Louisiana: 

St. John The Baptist, SBJ-17 ________________ >1 

Michigan: 

Genesee, 7N-7E-17-L ___ >2 Kent6N-12W-34-L _____ >5 Missouri: 

Barton, 32N/30W-30cd ___ >5 Franklin, 44N/1W-27 ____ >3.90 Montana: Gallatin, A1-4-25dc _____ >1 Nevada: 

Clark, S19/60-9bccL ___ >1 New Jersey: 

Union, Hillside 4___ 4. 37 New Mexico: 

Sierra, Hot Springs 6 ____ >1 New York: 

Chatauqua, Cu-10_______ 2.10 Pennsylvania: 

Luzerne, Dennison St. borehole _______________ > 2 

South Carolina: 

Jasper, 46________________ 4. 72 

Tennessee: 

0. 042 0. 018 0. 014 -------

.05 

0. 025 

. 15 

. 020 

. 065 

. 05 

. 05 

. 04 

.10 

Tr.? 

0. 20 

. 014 

. 035 

. 046 

0. 05 

Tr.? _____________ _ 

. 054 ------- 0. 02 . 034 ------- -------

. 005 ------- 0. 008 -------

. 05 .14 Tr. . 05 

. 025 

. 021 . 020 . 021 0. 027 . 052 . 034 . 040 . 008 . 005 

. 009? -------

. 076 

. 07 

.04 

. 002 

. 03 

Tr. 

. 012 ------- . 005 ------- . 04 

.06 

. 03 

. 032 ------- ------- -------

. 05 

. 02 

(3) 

(3) 

. 04 

. 035 

. 04 (2) 

. 014 ------- -------

. 024 ------- -------

. 015 ------- -

Shelby, Sh:J-L_________ 2. 27? ___________________________ _ 

Texas: Bexar, F-172 ____________ >5 J-17 ______________ >3. 80 

Jackson, PP-80-03-lOL __ '5. 8 Utah: 

Tooele, (C-3-2)14bad-L_ >1 Weber, (B-6-1) 30cca-L_ >1 Washington: 

Pierce, 20/3-18cL________ 3. 92 

Wisconsin: 

Milwaukee, M1-120 __ 

1 Estimated. 2 Pen ran out of ink? 

. 007 

.016 .045 --

.06 

. 014 

. 012 

. 03 

. 037 

.01 

Tr. 

. 004 

3 Masked by water-level change. 

Tr.? _____________ _ 

Tr. 

. 005 

. 03 

Tr . Tr. 

. 02 

0. 014 

.10 

. 02 

. 054 

. 072 

. 006 

Tr . .10 

. 07 

. 21 

.03 

. 058 

. 08 

. 02 

.04 

. 026 

. 022 

.06 

.166 

.04 

. 076 

. 03 

. 034 

. 05 

. 02 

.04 

. 032 

. 022 

. 08 

. 062 

0. 005 

.04 

. 005 

. 016 

. 042 

.06 

.044 

. 02 

. 012 

0. 003 

.06 

Tr.? 

.03 

. 036 

.04 

. 14 

.03 

. 011 

.008 

0. 02 

. 05 0. 04 

. 018 

0. 01? 

.12 

. 012 

.048 

. 05 

. 05 

0. 016 

. 066 -------

. 010 

------- ------- ------- . 02 ------- ------- . 072 . 012 ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- ------- -------

. 024 ------- ------- . 05 

. 02 

. 020 

. 025 

.01 

Tr. 

. 007 

. 03 

. 016 

.06 

. 022 

.01 

. 02 

. 025 

.018 

. 07 

. 006 -------

. 04 

. 02 ------- ------- -------

o. oo2 o. oo22 ____________ T_ 

---------'----

. 048 
C36 

This report is the first in which 

hydrologic effects of a major earthquake have been gathered from 

throughout the world. Little attempt has been made at interpretation because the major effort so 

far has been concentrated on assembly of the data. Interpretive 

studies will possibly show that the 

areal distribution of effects has 

some significance. Several interpretive studies are in progress but 

are not ready. 

The theory of "The response of 

well-aquifer systems to seismic 

waves" as developed by Cooper and 

others (1965) goes far toward explaining seismic fluctuations in 

wells, but no theory as yet explains 

adequately the lasting change in 

water level that 'vas observed in 

many wells. Similarly no theory 

accounts for the asymmetry of 

water-level response in wells. The 

theory of Cooper and others assumes seismic waves to be sinusoiAndersen, L. J., 1965, Korttidsvariationer i grundvandstanden i relation til jordskaelv og barometerstand: Vand Teknik, v. 33, June, p. 

38-42; August, p. 53-55. 

Austin, C. R., 1960, Earthquake fluctuations in wells in New Jersey: 

New Jersey Div. Water Policy and 

Supply, Watt>r Resources Circ. 5, 

13 p. 

Blanchard, F. B., and Byerly, Perry, 

1935, A study of a well gage as a 

seismograph : Seismol. Soc. Ameriea 

Bull., v. 25, no. 4, p. 313-321. 

--1936, The effect of distant earthquakes on water level in wells : 

Am. Geophys. Union Trans., 17th 

Ann. Mtg., pt. 2, p. 405-406. 

Bredehoeft, J. D., Cooper, H. H., Jr., 

Papadopoulos, I. S., and Bennett, 

R. R., 1965, Seismic fluctuations in 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 1 9 6 4 

CONCLUSION 

dal, whereas some well records 

show only a brief rise or fall from 

static level. 

Theory as yet explains adequately neither the "draining" of 

a piezometric high nor the observ.ed "recharging" of a cone of 

depression, phenomena that were 

both observed in the weeks immediately following the Alaska 

earthquake. Thus there is still a 

gulf between theory and observation. 

Similarly, the rigorous mathematical interpretation of seismic 

seiches by McGarr ( 1965) goes far 

toward explaining the many 

seiches that were recorded. However, one of the two major factors 

which he states (p. 853) "help to 

convert the energy of large-magnitude earthquakes efficiently to produce seiches at large distances from 

the epicenter" is "a very thick layer 

of soft sediments." According to 

McGarr (1965), this layer serves 

REFERENCES CITED 

an open artesian water well: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 525-C, p. 

C51-C57. 

Byerly, Perry, and Blanchard, F. B., 

1935, Well gages as seismographs: 

Nature, v. 135, no. 3408, p. 303-304. 

Carragan, William, Katz, Samuel, and 

Michalko, Frank, 1963, Shallow and 

deep wells in earthquake and explosion detection : Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. Dept. Geology, Semiann. Tech. Rept. 4, Contr. AF 19 

( 604) -8376, 18 p., 18 figs. 

Carragan, William, Michalko, Frank, 

and Katz, Samuel, 1964, Water 

wells in earthquake and explosion 

detection : Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Inst. Dept. Geology, Final Rept., 

Contr. AF 19(604)-8376, 44 p., 

40 figs. 

to amplify the seismic motion and 

especially the horizontal ground 

acceleration. This factor seemingly is minimal in importance or 

nonoperative in Colorado, Wyoming, and Vermont. In the western half of both Colorado and 

'"' yoming many seiches were recorded, and two were recorded in 

Vermont, places where sedimentary deposits are thin to absent, but 

in eastern Colorado, eastern W yoming, and through the northern 

Great Plains, no seiches were recorded although this area is underlain by a sizable thickness of such 

deposits. Thus, there is also a gulf 

between theory and observations 

concerning seismic effects on surface-water bodies. 

It is hoped that the data presented in this report will encourage 

further studies so that the discrepancies that exist between theory 

and observation can be narrowed 

and ultimately bridged. 

Coble, R. W., 1967, The Alaskan earthquake of March 27, 1964, and its 

effect on ground-water levels in 

Iowa : Iowa Acad. Sci. Proc., 1965, 

v. 72. (In pres•s. ) 

Cooper, H. H., Jr., Bredehoeft, J. D., 

Papadopoulos, I. S., and Bennett, 

R. R., 1965, The response of wellaquifer systems to seismic waves: 

.Jour. Geophys. R~:>search, v. 70, no. 

16, p. 3915-3926. 

Costa, J. A. da., 1964, Effect of Hebgen 

Lake earthquake on water levels 

in wells in the "Cnited States: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 435-0, p. 

167-178. 

Cross Section, The, 1964, Alaskan earthquake damages water wells : Lubboek, Tex., v. 10, no. 11, p. 1. 
Davis, G. H., Worts, G. F., Jr., and 

·wilson, H. D., Jr., 1955, Waterlevel fluctuations in wells, in Earthquakes in Kern County, Calif., 

during 1952: California Div. Mines 

Bull. 171, p. 99--106. 

Donn., ·w. L., 1964, Alaskan earthquake 

of 27 March 1964-remote seiche 

~timulation: Science. v. 145, no. 

3629, p. 261-262. 

Eaton, .J. P., and Takasaki, K. J., 1959, 

Seismological interpretation of 

earthquake-induced water-level 

fluctuations in wells [Hawaii] : 

Seismol. Soc. America Bull.. v. 49, 

no. 3, p. 227-245. 

Fellows, L. D., 1965, Effects of the Good 

Friday Alaskan earthquake in 

southwestern Missouri: Missouri 

Geol. Survey and Water Resources, 

Mineral Industry News, v. 5, no. 

1, p. 2-4. 

Forel, F. A., 1895, Le Leman-monographie limnoiogique. v. 2, Mecanique, Chimie, Thermique, Optique, 

Acoustique: Lausanne, F. Rouge, 

651 p. 

Fuller, D. L., 1964, Wa-ter wells in Missouri disturbed by -the Alaskan 

earthquake : Mis,souri Goo!. Survey and ·water Res~mrces, Mineral 

Industry News, v. 4, no. 5, p. 3. 

Gabert, G. M., 1965, Groundwater-level 

tluctu'ations in Albel'ta, Canada, 

caused by the Prince William 

Sound, Ala,ska, earthquak·e of 

March 1964 : Canadian J·our. IDarth 

Sci., v. 2, no. 2, p. 131-139. 

Hassler, Milburn, 1965, Hydmlogic effects in Tennessee of Alaskan 

earthquake, March 27, 1964: U.S. 

Geol. Survey open-file report. 

Hopkins, W. B., and Simpson, T. A., 

1960, Montana OOI'thquakes noted in 

Pennsylvania mine-water pools: 

Am. Geophy8. Union Trans., v. 41, 

no. 2, p. 435-436. 

Katz, Samuel, 1961, Shallow and deep 

wells in eal'thquake and explosion 

detection : Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Inst. Dept. Geology, Semiann. Tech. 

Rept. 1, Con:tr. AI<' 19(604)-8376, 

14 p. 

---1962, Use of water-level detectors in shaHow and deep wells, in 

Vesiac spedal report deep-borehole 

seismic research: :\1ichigan Univ. 

Inst. Sci. and T'Pchnology Acoustics 

and Seismics JJab., p. 78-82. 

---1963, Shallow and deep wells in 

Parthquake and explosion detection : Rensselaer Polytechnic Ins,t. 

Dept. Geology, Se-miann. Tech. 

Rept. 5, Contr. AI<' 19(604)--8376, 

4p. 

HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 

Katz, Samuel, Oarmgan, William, and 

Michalko, Frank, 1962a, Shallow 

and deep wells in eal'thquake and 

explosion detection : Rensselaer 

Polytechnic Inst. Dept. Geology, 

Semiann. Tech. Rept. 2, Gontr. AI<' 

19(604)-8376, 22 p. 

---1962b, Shallow and deep wells 

in earthquake and explosion detection: Rensselaer Polytechnic 

Inst. Dept. Geology, Semiann. Tech. 

Rept. 3. Contr. AF 19(104)-8376, 

16 p. 

Kvale, Andprs, 1955, Seismic seiches in 

Xorway and England during the 

Assam earthquake of August 15, 

1[)50: SPismol. Soc. America Bull., 

v. 45, no. 2, p. 93-112. 

LaMoreaux, P. E., 1953, ·water-level 

fluctuations in observation wells in 

Alabama caused by the Kamchatka 

earthquake on November 4, 1952: 

Alabama Acad. Sci. .Jour., v. 25, p. 

37-39. 

LaRocque, G. A., Jr., 1941, I<'luctuations 

of water level in wells in the Los 

Angeles Basin, California, during 

five strong earthquakes, 1933-1940: 

Am. Geophys. Union Trans., v. 22, 

p. 374-386. 

LPggette, R. M., and 'l'aylor, G. H., 

193fi, Earthquake instrumentally 

recorded in artPsian wells : Seismol. 

Soc. America Bull., v. 25, no. 2, p. 

169-175. 

McGarr, Arthur, 1965, Excitation of 

seiehes in channels by seismic 

waves: .Jour. Geophys. Research, v. 

70, no. 4, p. 847-854. 

Miller, W. D., and Reddell, D. L., 1964, 

Alaskan earthquake damages Texas 

high plains water wells: Am. 

GeophyR. Vnion TranR., v. 45, no. 4, 

11· 659-663. 

:\Iontgomery, Porter. 1964, Effects of 

Alaskan earthquake on water levels 

in the Edwards undPrgrrmnd resPrvoir in Bexar County : South Texas 

Geol. Soc. Bull., v. 4, no. 8, p. 6-10. 

Parker, G. G., and Stringfield, V. T .. 

1950, Effects of earthquakes, trains, 

tides, winds, and atmospheric pressure changes on water in the geologic formations of southern Florida : I<Jcon. Grology, ,._ 4i'i. no. fi, p. 

441-460. 

Peterson, G. T., 1964, l<'luctuations in 

well water levels, in Prince '\ViiHam Sound, Alaskan earthquakes, 

March-April 1964: U.S. Coast and 

Geod. Survey, Seismology Div. Prelim. Rept., p. 56-57. 

Piper, A. l\1., 1933, Fluctuations of 

\Yater surface in obsPrvation wells 

037 

and at stream-gaging stations in 

the Mokelumne area, California, 

during the earthquake of December 20, 1932: Am. Geophys. Union 

Trans., 14th Ann. Mtg., p. 471-475. 

Piper, A. M., Thomas, H. E., and Robinson, T. '\V., 1939, Fluctuations related to earthquakes, in Geology 

and ground-water hydrology of the 

Mokelumne area, California: U.S. 

Geol. Survey Water-Supply Paper 

780, p. 131-132. 

Rexin, E. E., 1952, A water well oscillation seismograph : Earthquake 

Notes, v. 23, no. 2, p. 14-16. 

---1960, A well water sei.smometer: 

Earth Sci., v. 13, no. 1, p. 15-18, 29. 

---1963, Sensitive wells take earthquake's pulse: Plant Eng., v. 18, 

p. 122-123. 

---1964a, Seismic sea waves as 

recorded from a remote phreatic 

seismometer: Earthquake Notes, 

v. 35, nos. 3-4, p. 45, 54. 

---1964b, Alaskan earthquake excites Nunn-Bush well : Earth Sci., 

v. 17, no. 4, p.152-156. 

RPxin, E. E., Oliver, Jack, and Prentiss, 

David, 1962, Seismically inducPd 

fluctuations of the water level in 

the Nunn-Bush well in Milwaukee: 

Seismol. Soc. America Bull., v. 52, 

110. 1, p. 17-25. 

Richter, C. F., 1958, Elementary seismology : San Francisco, Calif.. 

W. H. I<'rPeman and Co., 768 p. 

Scobt, J. S., and Render, F. W., 196G. 

Effect of an Alaskan eal'thquake on 

water levels in' wells at '\Vinnipeg 

and Ottawa. Canada: Jour. Hydrology, v. :!, no. 3, p. 262-268. 

StParns, H. T., 1928, Record of earthquake made by automatic recorders 

on wells in California : Seismol. 

Hoc. America Bull.. v. 18, no. 1, 

p. 9-15. 

Stearns, H. T., Robinson, T. '\V., and 

Taylor, G. H., 1930, Geology and 

water resources of the Mokelumne 

area, California: U.S. Geol. Survey 

Water-Supply Paper 619, 402 p. 

StermHz, Frank, 1964, Effects of •the 

Hebgen LakE> earthquake on surface 

water: U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. 

Paper 435-L, p. 139-150. 

StPwart, J. '\V .. ln58, The pffects of 

parthquakPs on water levels in 

wells in Georgia : Georgia Geol. 

Survpy :\lineral :\Tewsletter, v. 11, 

no. 4, p. 129-131. 

StrilaPff, P. W., 1964, Effect of Alaska 

Parthquake on recorder charts : 

Cauada Dept. Northern Affairs and 
C38 

Xfi'tl. ResourrPs, ·water \Vays, no. 

4, p. 13-16. 

Thomas, H. E., 1940, l<'luctua,tion of 

ground-water levels during the 

earthquakes of November 10, 1938, 

and .January 24, 1939: Sei;;;mol. 

Soc. AmPrira Bull.. v. 30, no. 2, p. 

!)3--97. 

l'.S. Coast aud Geodetic Sun-ey, 1945-

196;), UnitPd StatE'~ earthquakes, 

1943-100.'3. 

\'orhi,;, R. C., 1955, Interpretation of 

hydrologic data resulting from 

earthquakes: Geol. Rundschau, v. 

43, no. 1, p. 47-52. 

--- 1964a, Earthquake-induced water-lPVPl fluctuations from a well 

in Dawson County, Georgia: Seismol. Soc. Arnerica Bull., v. 54, no. 4, 

p. 1023-1033. 

ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

Vorhis, R. C., 1964b, Ground-water data 

from the Prince William Sound 

earthquake: Earthquake Notes, v. 

3G, nos. 3-4, p. 47. 

---1965a, Earthquake magnitudes 

from hydroseismic data: Ground 

Water, v. 3, no. 1, p. 12-20. 

---196Gb, Ground-water data from 

the Priurt> \Villiam Sound ea-rth-

<JUakP: Georgia Mineral Newsletter, 

\". 17, p. 46. 

Waller, R. M., 1966a, :B"Jffects of the 

:\Iareh 1964 Alaska earthquakE' on 

tlw hydrology of south-central 

,\Iaska: l'.S. Gt>ol. Survt>y Prof. 

Paper ri44-A, 28 p. 

---1966b, Effects of the March 1964 

.Uaska earthquake on the bydrologJ" of the Anchorage area, Alaska : 

r.s. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 

544-B, 18 p. 

Waller, R. :\I., 'l'homas, H. E., and Vorhis, R. C., 196il, Effects of the Good 

Friday earthquake ·on water supplit>s: Am. Water \Yorks Assoc. 

.Tour., v. 57, no. 2, p. 123-131. 

\\"igt>n, S. 0., and \Vhite, W. R. H., 

1964a, Tsunami of March 27-29, 

Hl64, west eoaHt of Canada [abs.] : 

Am. Geophys. eni·on Trans., v. 45, 

no. 4, p. 634. 

--1964b, Tsunami of March 27-29, 

Hl64, west coast of Canada : Canada 

Dept. Mines and Tech. Surveys, 

12 Jl. 

Wilson, .T. :\I., 19fH, Effect of the 

Ala~kan earthquake of March 27, 

1964, on groundwater levels in Tennessee: Tennesst>e Acad. Sci. Jour., 

v. 39, no. 3, p. 92-94. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C39 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake 

Depth to water: Depth in feet below land surface unless otherwise indicated; a pre- Water-level fluctuation: E, estimated. 

ceding plus sign indicates height of the piezometric level above land surface; a preceding plus or minus sign in parentheses indicates depth to water above ( +) or below (-)sealevel. LSD, land surface datum. Figure in parentheses following 

depth to water is rise (if plus) or fall (if negative) from the preearthquake to postearthquake water level; this change where reported is not due to water-level trend 

but is either change in stress on the aquifer caused by the earthquake waves or excessive friction in the recorder installation. 

Remarks: Because aftershocks can be expected to record only in wells with the largest 

hydroseisms, failure to record aftershocks is mentioned only for those wells in which 

aftershocks might have been recorded. Recorder character as to inches of chart per day and gage-height ratio are given only for wells whose charts were examined 

by the compiler. T, transmissibility; S, coefficient of storage. Other data are as reported. 

First num- ber, depth Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

of well; 

second, From preearthquake 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level Remarks 

tude, N. tude, w, casing to (feet) screen, per~ Double 

fora ted amplitude casing, or Upward Down- open hole ward 

(feet) 

Alabama 

Baldwin, Bal-L ____________ 30"24' 87°42' Sand ____________ 134/134 24.6 0.03 0.02 0. 05 Calhoun, Cal-L _____________ 33°42' 85°49' Conasauga Formation _____ 213/124 9.2 1.5 1.6 3.1 Coffee, Cof-L _______________ 31°19' 85°51' Sand of Lisbon Formation_ 179 0 47 .28 0 75 

Colbert, Coi-L _____ 34°46' 87°38' Fort Payne Chert _________ 265 7. 5 2. 9 3.1 6. 0 No aftershocks recorded; 

10.35(-.30) 

0.3 in. per day, 1:12. Col-2 _______________ 34°41' 87°41' Tuscumbia Limestone _____ 171 1. 60 1.85 3. 45 0.3 in. per day, 1: 1. 

Franklin, Fra-L ----------- 34°31' 87°44' Tuscaloosa Group and 210/146 27. 87(-. 06) --- ----------- >1 Drum rotated many Bangor Limestone. times. Jefferson, Jef-1_ _____________ 33°26' 86°53' Bangor Limestone ______ c_ 140/68 27. 1 ---------- ----------- >10 No aftershocks recorded; 

Henry, OW-5 ______________ 31°37' 85°04' Clayton Limestone ________ 80? 18.85 . 55 . 41 0 96 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

First quake ever recorded 

in well. Lawrence, Law-2 ___________ 34°40' 87°21' Fort Payne Chert _________ 200/55 15. 0 2.4 1.5 3.9 Cable thrown off pulley; 

0.3 in. per day, 1:12. 

Limestone, Ct-2 ____________ 34°48' 86°58' _____ do _____________________ 132/50 11.1 4. 4 3. 1 7. 5 No aftershocks recorded; 

Ct-81. ____________ 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

Madison, 34°38' 86°34' Tuscumbia Limestone ____ 188/36 22.30(-.10) .10 0 17 0 27 Mad-L ___________ 34°44' 86°35' Fort Payne Chert _________ 140/69 51.65 0 07 0 05 .12 N-48 _______ 34°45' 86°35' Tuscumbia Limestone ____ 104/61 25.7 1. 32 l. 31 2.63 P-29 _______ 34°40' 86°43' Fort Payne Chert _________ 119/21 22. 53(-. 04) ---------- ----------- >1 Another quake(?) on Mar. 29, but no aftershocks 

recorded; 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

Q-174 _____ ----- ---- 34°42' 86°35' Tuscumbia Limestone ____ 65/60 16.3 .11 .15 0 26 

Marshall, Mal-2 __ 34°20' 86°19' Fort Payne Chert. ________ 130/124 14.1 1.6 1.5 3.1 

Monroe, Mon-3 ____ 31°31' 87°20' Sand, gravel, and lime- 128/88 62.28 >.50 >.50 >1 No aftershocks recorded; stone. 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

St. Clair, St. C-L ____ 33°35' 86°16' Floyd Shale, Fort Payne 209 . 2 1.0 1.6 2.6 

Chert, Maury Forma- tion. Talladega, Tal-2 ____________ 33°10' 86°15' Marble ------------------- 202/68 15.1(-. 2) . 7 .9 1.6 

Tuscaloosa, Tus-2 ___________ 33°11' 87°36' GraveL ___ ----------- 90/72 17.93 41 . 27 .68 

Arizona 

Maricopa, (C-1-4) 6bba ______ 33°23' 112°42' Alluvium ____ 1,694 83.86(-. 24) 0.20 0.22 0. 42 Pima, (D-11>-11) 5ccc ________ 32°09' 111°15' _____ do _____________________ 712 324.65 . 36 .36 .72 

Yuma, (6S/23E-32R1) ______ 33°31' 114°44' Sand, gravel, and silt ______ 560 88. 48(-.12) 0 07 0 25 . 32 0.3in. per day, 1:2. 

(B-2-9) 7abb _______ 33°32' 113°13' Alluvium _________________ 1, 692 297. 35(-. 51) .00 0 51 . 51 No rise; drop in level only . (B-6-21) 20ddd ____ 33°50' 114°26' Sand, silt, and gravel__ ___ 584/120 11.70 .28 . 25 .53 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

(C-4-6) 18dad _______ 33°03' 112°53' Alluvium _____ 600 35. 68(+. 08) -- >1 No aftershocks recorded. 

(C-4-10) 22abb ______ 33°04' 113°17' _____ do _____________________ 274 131. 45(-. 035) .102 . 135 . 237 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

(C-9--22) 4dbc2 ____ 32°26' 114°30' Sand, gravel, and silt _____ 240 ------------ l. 14 Clock stopped 3 days before quake; 0.3 in. per 

(C-9--25) 35bab ______ 32°36' day, 1:2. 

114°48' _ ____ do ________ 1, 190 17. 14 .13 . 17 . 30 0.3 in. per day, 1: 2. 

(C-1Q--24) 15cdd ____ 32°33' 114°43' _ ____ do _______ 202 ------- ------- . 73 Clock stopped 5 days before quake; 0.3 in. per 

(C-1Q--25) 31bbb _____ day, 1:2. 

32°31' 114°40' SandandgraveL .. ____ 286 80.31 . 10 . 13 .23 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

(C-11-24) 23bcb _____ 32°27' 114°42' Silt, sand, and graveL ____ I,038 77.98 ----- ----------- >I Aftershocks recorded 

(see table 6); 0.3 in. per day 1:1. 

---·--------- ' ----------- ----- -~------

Arkansas ------------·------

Craighead, I3N-2E-35daaL _ 35°42' 90°50' Quaternary sand ____ 120 55.97 0. 72 0. 77 l. 49 No aftershocks recorded; 

Dallas, JOS-13W-34aca _______ 33°48' 92°25' Sparta Sand ____________ 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

888/836 114. 10 l. 70 I. 60 3. 30 Do. Desha, llS-2W-3ccaL ______ 33°46' 9I 0 17' Cockfield Formation 754 21.86 -------- --------- - >1 No aftershocks recorded; 

Drew, 158-4W-12ddaL ______ 33°24' 91°28' Sparta Sand _____ - 2.4 in. per day, 1: 1.2. 

760 32.32 ->I Do. Lincoln, 7S-5W-I7ccc!_ ______ 34°06' 91°37' Quaternary sand ____ 120/110 I7. 56 . 95 1.15 2. 10 No aftershocks recorded; 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 
C40 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 1 9 6 4 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First number, de~th of we l; 

second, 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) screen, per- !orated 

casing, or open hole (feet) 

California 

Fresno, 15S/16E-20RL ______ 36°36' 120°14' Alluvium: upper aquifer 1, 250/490 71.10 zone. 17S/17E-21N2. ------ 36°26' 120°08' Alluvium: upper and 1, 005/404 313.75 

198/17E-35NL ______ 36°13~' 

lower aquifer zones. 120°26' Alluvium _________________ 2, 030/608 494. 08(-. 09) 

Imperial, 8 (14S/11E-32R) ___ 32°54' 115°52' Alluvial silt, sand, and 560 120.02 

32°35' gravel. 11 (15S/18E-15M) __ 115°05' ____ _do _____________________ 383 25. 30(-. 21) 

12 (16S/19E-11D) __ 32°30' 114°59' Deltaic alluvial deposits.-- 630 13.04 2 (16S/19E-32Gl) __ 32°28' 115°01~' Alluvium _________________ 252 34.00 

Kern, 25S/26E-1A2 __________ 35°47' 119°07' _____ do _____________________ 875/200 352.56 32S/28E-20Q L. _______ 35°07' 118°59' ---------------------------- 950 212.10(-. 50) Los Angeles, 11N/9W-13LL. 35°03' 117°47' Tertiary basalt .. ________ -- 462 161.5 8N/10W-8R3 ... 34°48' 117°57' Alluvium _________________ 230 ? 6N/10W-20PL _ 34°35' 117°58' _ ____ do _____________________ 260 232.57 1S/9W-3BL ___ 34°07' 117°49' _____ do _____________________ 408 103.92 2S/11W-5LL __ 34°01' 118°03' ____ _do _____________________ 101 20. 50(-.10) 

2S/12W-lOQL. 34°00' 118°07' ---------------------------- 552 109. 30(-. 06) 

Orange, 3S/9W-33Q2 _________ 33°52' 117°50' Alluvium _________________ 135 218.48 3S/9W-31J4. ______ 33°52' 117°51' Alluvium (La Habra 400 158.06 

4S/10W-1CL. ______ 33°51' 117°53' Formation). 

Pleistocene sand and 514 102.05 

4S/9W-30EL_ _______ 33°48' 117°52' gravel. _____ do _____________________ 235 64.35 5S/11W-16D2__ ______ 33°45' 118°02' Alluvium _________________ 400 (-)2.60 6S/11W-1Q9 _________ 33°40' 117°59' Pleistocene sand and 168/68 ? 

6S/11W-12GL ______ 33°40' 117°59' gravel. _____ do _____ ------------- 200 2. 73 

6S/10W-7E2 _________ 33°40' 117°58' _____ do _____________________ 330/300 6S/10W-7E4 _________ 33°40' 117°58' _____ do _______________ 120/90 4. 70 

6S/11W-1Q4 _________ 33°40' 117°59' _____ do _____________________ 170/70 ------------------- 6S/11W-1Q6 _________ 33°40' 117°59' _____ do _____________________ 360/300 ----------------- ~- 6S/11W-1Q3 _________ 33°40' 117°59' _____ do ________ ----------- 174/56 -----------

6S/11W-1Q9. ________ 33°40' 117°59' _____ do _____________ ?/68 (+)3.8 

Riverside, 7S/22E-17P ______ 33°34' 114°43' GraveL ___________________ 265 6. 00(-. 05) San Bernardino,11/26E-31Cl. 35°00' 114°38' Alluvium _________________ 143 6. 50 Santa Barbara, 6/32-11 G3. __ 34°37' 120°14' _____ do _______________ 28/25 7.349 7/3&-22N2 ___ 34°40' 120°34' Sandy graveL ___ 194 7. 24(-. 02) 7/3&-28RL __ 34°39}-2' 120°33)2' Careaga Sand __________ ::: 551 60. 328(-. 005) 7/3&-33RL .. 34°38~' 120°34' Gravel of Careaga Sand._ 420 112. 157 (-. 004) 

10/33-7RL .. 34°57' 120°23' Alluvium ___ 210 113. 21 

Santa Clara, 7S/1E-9D2_ 37°20~' 121°52~' _____ do _____ 600 135.47 7S/1E-16C5 ____ 37°19~' 121°52' _____ do _______ 917 164. 36(-. 15) Solano, 8N/1W-33Al _________ -35- 55-~-, --ll9°"17-,--

_____ do _______ ------------- 200/20 94.2 Tulare, 23S/25E-16N3 _______ _____ do ___________ 430 173.99 23S/25E-16N4. ____ . _ 35°55W 119°17' _____ do ______ 250 95.88 23S/25E-17Q3 ________ 35°55~' 119°17~' _____ do _____ ------------ 355 100.19 Yolo, 8N/1E-17FL _________ _____ do ___________ 200/20 67.23 

Colorado 

Prowers, C23--42-13cdab _____ l38°03' 1102°06' I Alluvium___ ~~----~--~ 7. 45 

Bay, 006--536--423 _____________ 1 

012-55Q--33L_ __ - ------- 012-541-213 _____ : __ -----

30°06' 

30°12' 

30°12' 

85°36' 

85°50' 

85°41' 

Connecticut 

No wells recorded the quake. 

Delaware 

No report received. 

Florida 

I 

Limestone of Floridan ~------------~ aquifer. ____ do ________________________________ _ _____ do ________________________________ _ 

40.10 

25.60 

6.13 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Upward 

0. 71 

. 07 

. 07 

. 12 

. 03 

. 46 

.08 

. 07 

.03 

.38 

. 075 

.09 

.06 

.20 

. 50 

.08 

. 21 

.31 

.53 

. 26 

.02 

.05 

. 22 

.05 

.02 

.02 

.10 

.02 

. 07 

. 60 

. 002 

.1R 

. 017 

.08 

.06 

1. 07 

.63 

.20 

.23 

. 027 

.32 

.54 

1 0.12 

0.40 

. 75 

. 85 

Downward 

0. 60 

. 07 

.24 

.12 

. 27 

. 44 

.12 

.04 

.64 

. 37 

.075 

.08 

. 02 

. 22 

. 42 

.07 

. 17 

. 24 

.36 

.20 

.38 

.63 

.12 

. 37 

. 25 

. 21 

. 35 

.38 

.12 

.64 

. 010 

. 31 

. 018 

.068 

. 07 

1. 32 1. 05 

.24 

.18 

. 022 

.36 

.43 

1 o. 15 

0.38 

.82 

. 73 

Remarks 

Double 

amplitude 

1. 31 

.14 

. 31 

. 24 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

.30 Took 2 weeks for water level to recover to stage indicated by prequake trend. .90 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. .20 Water-level trend reversed coincidentally at time of quake; 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. .11 

. 67 

. 75 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. .15 

.17 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

.08 1.0 in. per day, 1:1. . 42 1.0 in. per day, 1:5. 

. 92 Do. . 15 2.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

.38 

. 55 Do. 

.89 Do. .46 1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

. 40 

. 68 Pressure recorder; 51° per day, 1:7. .34 } Pressure records from two .42 depths in adjacent 

piezometers; 51° per day, 1:12. 

. 27 } Do. . 23 

. 45 Pressure recorder; 51° per day, 1:28. 

.40 Pressure recorder; 51° per day, 1:14. .19 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

1. 24 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. . 012 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. .49 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. . 035 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. .148 Do. .13 T=2X10'; S=O.l&-0.30; 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

2.39 

1.68 

.44 2.4 in. per day, 1:12. 

. 41 

. 049 

.68 

. 97 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

I 0. 27 12.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

"----~ 

0. 78 

1. 57 

1.58 1

1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C41 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First num- Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

ber, depth 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water- tude, N. tude, W. 

of well; 

second, From preearthquake 

bearing formation depth of Depth to water level Remarks casing to (feet) screen, per- Double fora ted amplitude 

casing, or Upward Down- open hole ward 

(feet) 

"---~ ----

Florida-Continued 

Broward, F291_ _____________ 26°00' 80°08' Limestone of Biscayne 107 (+)1.17 2. 04 2. 47 4. 51 0.3 in. ~er day, 1:2; 

aquifer. float ung after quake. G56l__ ____________ 26°05' 80°08' ____ _do _____________________ ----- (+).54 .03 .03 . 06 0.3 in. per day, 1:5 . 0617 ______________ 26°05' 80°20' _ ____ do _________ ----------- ------------ (+)3.6 .12 .11 0 23 Do. 0820 ______________ 26°11' 80°09' _____ do ___________ 215 (-).88 2.87 2. 89 5. 76 Tape thrown off pulley. 

01222__ ____ ------- 26°18' 80°05' _____ do _____________________ ------------ (+)3.34(-.01) .03 0 01 .04 8329 _______________ 26°06' 80°12' _____ do _____________________ 70 (+).17 1. 91 1. 91 3. 82 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Clay, 948-202-8 ______________ 29°48' 82°02' _____ do _________________ 56. 61 ---------- ----------- >5 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. No aftershocks; water level declined at time of quake and continued as if agwfer was being dramed to a level 4 ft lower. 

Collier, C131_ _______________ 2602.5' 81°16' Tamiami Formation ______ 54/52 23.98 1.30 1.28 2.58 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. C380 ________________ 25°581 81°15' Nonartesian _______________ 60/9 (+)4.30 0 50 0 56 1.06 Do. C38L _______________ 26°06' 81°41' _____ do _____________________ 60/12 (+)5. 00(-. 39) . 19 .44 .63 Do . C382 ________________ 26°10' 81°42' _____ do _____________________ 60/12 (+)7.96 .82 .93 1. 75 Do. Columbia, 9 _________________ 30° 82° Limestone of Floridan 836/680 91.82 0 42 .32 0 74 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

aquifer. Dade, 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. F45 ___________________ 25°49' 80°12' ____ _do _____________________ -------- (+)1.60 1. 24 1.47 2. 71 F179 __________________ 25°43' 80°20' _____ do _____________________ ----- (+)1.35 1.16 1.32 2.48 0.3 in. per day, 1:6. F240 __________________ 25°50' 80°15' _____ do _____________________ 53 (+)1.51 1. 51 1. 66 3.17 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. F358 __________________ 25°28' 80°28' Limestone of Biscayne 54 (+).93 0. 17 0.15 0. 32 aquifer. 072 __________________ 25°57' 80°25' Oolitic limestone of 4. 6 (+)4.25 0 33 .36 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 0 69 

0476 _________________ 25°36' 80°18' Biscayne aquifer. Limestone of Biscayne 24/19 <+)1.13 0 48 0 39 .87 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

aquifer. 0553 _________________ 25°39' 80°20' Do. _____ do _____________________ 91/36 (+)2. 21 1. 10 1.19 2. 29 

0595_---------------- 25°42' 80°02' _____ do _____________________ 14/11 (-).60 0 02 .02 .04 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 0613 _________________ 25°24' 80°32' _____ do _____________________ 21/18 (+).33 .08 0 15 .23 Do. 

0614_ ---------------- 25°32' 80°26' _____ do _____________________ 20/18 (+)2.02(-.01) .04 .07 .11 0.3 in per day, 1:2. 0617 __________________ 26°05' 80°20' _____ do _____________________ (+)3.60 0 63 .54 1.17 0618 _________________ 25°45' 80°36' _____ do ________ 20/11 (+)6.12(-. 01) 0 31 .35 .66 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 0619 _________________ 25°45' 80°46' _____ do ___________ 13/7 (+)6.64 . 36 .42 0 78 0.3 in. per day, 1:2 . 0620 _________________ 25°40' 80°46' _____ do _____________________ 16/6 (+)4.80 .38 0 50 .88 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 0858 _________________ 25°39' 80°24' _____ do _____________________ ------------· <+)3. 08(-. 02) 0 05 0 13 .18 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 0860 _________________ 25°37' 80°19' _____ do _____________________ ------------ (+)1.38 .09 .10 .19 Do. 0861_ ________________ 25°38' 80034' _____ do _____________________ ------------ (+)3. 68(-. 03) .10 0 21 .31 Do. 0863 _________________ 25°33' 80°34' _____ do _____________________ ------------ (+)2.45 .06 .08 .14 0864 _________________ 25°26' 80°30' _____ do __________ -- ------------ (+). 74(-. 02) 0 22 0 24 .46 Do. 0968 _________________ 25°56' 80°26' _____ do _____________________ 50 (+)4. 70 .19 .18 . 37 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 0973 _________________ 25°52' 80°24' _____ do _____________________ -- (+)2.60 .06 . 07 .13 Do. 

0974_ ---------------- 25°51' 80°24' _____ do _____________________ 15/10 (+)3. 85(-. 01) . 20 .00 .20 1.2 in. per day, 1: 12. 0975 _________________ 25°52' 80°27' _____ do _____________________ 15/10 (+)5. 60(-. 02) 0 06 0 08 .14 Do. 0976 _________________ 25°49' 80°25' _____ do _____________________ 15/10 (+)4.80 0 49 .00 .49 Do. 

0 1183_--- ------------ 25°291 80°23' _____ do _____________________ ------------ (+). 75 0 35 .33 .68 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. NP44 _________________ 25°24' 80°42' _____ do _____________________ 33 (+).66(+.04) 1.22 .07 1.29 1.2 in. per day, 1:3. NP46 _________________ 25°19' 80°47' _____ do _____________________ 25 (-).47 . 40 .47 . 87 Do. NP57 _________________ 25°19' 80°31' ____ _do _____________________ 54/8 (+). 07(-. 02) . 51 .43 .94 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. NP62 _________________ 25°241 80°45' _____ do _____________________ 20 6. 13 0 13 .14 . 27 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. NP67__ _______________ 25°19' 80°39' _ ____ do __________ 20 (+)0.68 ---------- ----------- >2 0.3 in. per day, 1:2; tape 

thrown off pulley. NP72 _________________ 25°23' 80°42' _____ do _____________________ 20 4. 56(-. 01) .06 0 10 .16 Do. 818 ___________________ 25°55' 80°46' _____ do _____________________ 52 <+)1.98 .35 .23 0 58 819 __________________ 25°48' 80°17' _____ do _____________________ 95/91 (-).20 2.40 2. 89 5. 29 No aftershocks recorded; 

0.3in. per day, 1:5. 868 ___________________ 25°48' 80°17' _____ do _____________________ 64/51 (-)1. 93(-. 04) 1. 47 1. 07 2. 54 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 8182 ______ ----------- 25°35' 80°21' _____ do ________ 51 (+)1.71 .06 .04 .10 Do. 8196 ______________ ---- 25°30' 80°29' _____ do _____________________ 20 (+)L 23(-. 02) .04 .10 .14 Desoto, 704-147-332 __________ 27°04' 81°47' Limestone of Hawthorn 460/112 ( + )4. 91( +. 33) .90 . 14 1. 04 1.2 in. per day, 1: 12. 

Formation. Duval, 206 __________________ 30°15' 81°45' Floridan aquifer ___________ 1, 700/1, 000 14.85 .15 0 12 . 27 Gulf, 30 (948-518-1) __________ 29°48' 85°18' _____ do _____________________ 563/300 7.18(-. 02) 1.50 1. 50 3. 00 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Hardee, 731-145-L __________ 27°31' 81°45' _____ do _____________________ 450 25. 40(-. 40) 0 18 0 52 0 70 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

734-202-332_-------- 27°34' 82°02' Floridan aquifer (lime- 1, 062/81 65. 38(-. 29) 0 81 1.19 2. 00 stone and dolomite). 

738-151-223_-- Pen dislodged by quake. ------ 27°38' 81°51' ____ _do _____________________ 737/50 43.02 1. 60 1.86 3. 46 Hillsborough, 801-213-213a __ 28°01' 82°13' Limestone of Floridan 417/67 1. 77 ~1.63 ~1. 73 ~3.36 Cable thrown off; lost 

aquifer. float and counterweight; 1.2 in per day, 1:6. 803-234-313 ____ 28°03' 82°34' _____ do ______ 1, 120/700 (+)1. 73 >5 Cable thrown off pulley. 803-238-212 ____ 28°031 82°38' _____ do ________ 807/710 (+)2. 70 . 91 Do. 805-235-113 ____ 28°05' 82°35' _____ do ______ ----------- 1, 200/656 12.53 --- ----------- ----------- Do. 805-236-333 ____ 28°05' 82°36' _____ do ______ 1, 200/697 <+)4.89 ---------- ----------- Do. 805-238-100 ____ 28°05' 82°38' _____ do _____ --------------- 1, 117/605 (+).32 ----- ---------- ----------- Do. 807-23()-133 ____ 28°07' 82°30' _____ do _______ ~ 300/141 ? 4. 45 No aftershocks recorded. 

807-23()-421__ __ 28°07' 82°30' _____ do ________ ----------- 1, 250/720 17.87 >10 Cable thrown off pulley. 13 (807-23()- 28°07' 82°30' ___ do _________________ 362/70 17.81 . 93 . 82 1. 75 433). 809-232-414 ____ 28°09' 82°32' ---~-do _____ Water level declined 0.2 ft ------------ 375/65 14.85 2. 62 2.6E 5. 2E in 3 hrs after quake 

recorded, then rose 2.15 ft during next 63 hrs. 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Lake, 832-154-334 _____ 28°32' 81°54' _ ____ do-----------~--------- 160/63 2.32 1.17 1.13 2. 30 Lee, L-246 __________________ 26°38' 81°49' Tamiami Formation ______ 27/19 (+)16. 43 .18 .20 .38 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. L-414 ___ ------------- 26°38' 81°49' Hawthorn Formation _____ 94/60 (+l15. 23 .60 . 60 1.20 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 
C42 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27; 1964 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

I 

First number, de~th 

of wei; 

second, c ounty, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) screen, per- fora ted 

casing, or open hole 

(feet) 

Florida-Continued 

Leon, 7(027-416-1) ___________ 30°27' 84°16' Limestone of Floridan 314/165 159. 31 

Madison, 18(028-325-1) ______ 30°28' 83°25' 

aquifer. _____ do _____________________ 322/307 22.25 

Pasco, 13 (815-226-1) _________ 28°15' 82°26' _____ do _____________________ 49/43 5. 76 821-217-221_ __ -------- 28°21' 82°17' _____ do ____________ 699/205 108. 52(-.10) 

826-211-214_---------- 28°26' 82°11' _____ do ____________ 227/49 16. 29(-. 04) Pinellas, 561 (750-240-1) _____ 27°50' 8~40' _ ____ do ____________ 188 3.40 665 (758-244-4) _____ 27°58' 82°44' _ ____ do _____________ 299/81 21.10 

246 (758-247-1) _____ 27°58' 82°47' _ ____ do _____________________ 208 26.10 667 (759-243-313)--- 27°59' 82°43' _____ do _____________________ 845 54.32 77 (804-245-1) ______ 280041 82°45' _____ do _____________________ 282 65.58 13 (808-245-1) ______ 28°081 82°45' _____ do _____________________ 141/33 9.48 Polk, 753-158-311 ___________ 27°53' 81°58' ____ _do _____________________ 710/237 26. 41( +· 06) 

810-144-L_ ------------ 28°10' 81 °44' ____ _do _____________________ 425/102 8. 72(-. 08) 

Sarasota, 9(719-225-1) _______ 27°19' 82°25' Limestone of Floridan 

aquifer. 

730/101 3. 92 

Seminole, 125(841-122-1) _____ 28°41' 81°22' _____ do _____ --------------- 158/74 38.50 

Sumter, 821-202-3 _____ 28°21' 82°02' _____ do ________ H3/20 4. 59(-. 04) 

Taylor, 35 (003-330-1) _______ 30°03' 83°30' __ do _____ --------------- 245/189 20. 2(+. 8) 

36 (003-331-1) _______ 30°03' 83°31' Sand ______________ 35 6. 52 

Volusia, 31 (856-105-1) _______ 28°56' 81°05' Floridan aquifer ___________ 113 4. 96 

905-113-3_- --------- 29°05' 8J013' _____ do _____________________ 351/93 . 16 

909-106-4_---------- 29°06' 81°06' _____ do _______ 220/152 5. 74(-. 04) 

910-105-L __ -------- 29°05' 81°05' _____ do _____________ 234/102 H.90 

Georgia 

Chatham, 63 (37Q7) _________ 32°05' 81°06' -~-ocala Limestone __________ 525/120 112.50 99 (37Q16) ________ 32°04' 81°04' :::::~~::::::::::::::::::::: 500/260 79. 25(-. 05) 143A (36Q20) _____ 32°00' 81°50' 386 ------------------- 317 (38Q2) ________ 32°02' 80°54' _____ do _____ 354/110 24.10 382 (36Q8) ________ 32°05' 81°08' _____ do ______ 413/250 101. 34(-. 07) 429 (37Q34) _______ 32°00' 81°05' _____ do ____________________ 327 74. 72(-. 47) Dawson, 12-3 ______ 32°20' 84'05' Crystalline metamorphic 400/79 22.04 

rocks. 

Dougherty, 133-400-4 ____ 31°33' 84°00' Ocala Limestone ___ 243/206 27.95 

135-406-3 ____ ---- 31°36' 84°06' Clayton Formation ___ 760/713 61.25 

Effingham, 7 (34R36) ____ 32°09' 81°23' Ocala Limestone_ 431/273 17. 00(-. 02) Fulton, 26 ____ 33°42' 84°26' Injection complex __ 350 13. 42 

Glynn, E143 ___ 31°10' 81°30' Ocala Limestone and upper part of Claiborne 

950/823 (+)3.0 

J35_ 31°081 81°29" Group. Ocala Limestone __________ 710/611 (+)12. 7 

J36_ 31°07Yz' 81°29' Ocala Limestone and 1, 007/589 (+)15. 3 upper part of Clair bone 

J67 ___ 31°05' Group. 

81°25' Ocala Limestone __________ 755/550 (+)23. 7 

Laurens, 21TL ______ 32°27' 83°04' _____ do _____________________ 113 25. 04(-. 06) Lowndes, 19E2 _____ 30°50' 83°17' Suwannee Limestone ______ 342/200 115. 96( +· 02) 

Miller, 8H2 ______ 31"10' 84°44' Clayton Formation _______ 1,040/776 31. 10( +- 30) 

Mitchell, 10G313 ________ ---1 31°05' 84°26' Ocala Limestone __________ ------------ 43.00 

Water-level finctnation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Double 

amplitud 

Upward Downward 

___ , 

4.6E 4. 57 9.2E 

2.10 2. 58 4.68 

.86 .67 1.53 

---------- ---- --- >5 

1.26 1.02 2.28 . 73 . 85 1.58 

1.18 2. 01 3.19 

1.80 1. 70 3.50 

1.09 1.7E 2.8E . 27 . 26 .53 

1.90 1. 91 3.81 

3.88 3. 70 7.58 

2. 11) 1. 48 3. 63 

. 51 2.30 2. 81 

. 80 . 71 1. 51 

.33 . 16 . 49 

8. 5E 8. 5 1.7E 

1.13 1. 41 2.54 . 78 .65 1.43 

2. 7E 2. 74 5.4E 

2. 7E 2.66 5.4E 

4. 86 4. 36 9.22 

2.88 3.30 6.18 

---- ~------ >10 

---------- ----------- >2 

5. 30 4. 45 9. 75 

--- ----------- >5 ----------- 3. 50 

---------- --- ------- >I 

3.88 7. 76E 

. 20 .15 . 35 

--------- -------- -- >2 . 002 . 021 .023 

------- >5 

3.3 2. 7 6. 0 

3. 6 3.3 6. 9 

3. 0 2.6 5. 6 

.98 . 99 1. 97 . 36 . 16 . 52 

1.48 .00 1.48 

-------- >5 

Remarks 

1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

1.2in. per day,1:6. 6 hours alter quake re- corded, water level 

began to rise and rose 0.94 ft in 12 hrs. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:12. Do. 

Do. Water level began to decline after quake recorded 

and fell1.7 ft over 17 

days. 1.2in. perday,1:6. 

Upward motion blocked 

(?). Water level rose 1. 7 ft during 5 days after 

quake recorded; 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. Water level rose 0.6 ft in 

48 hrs after quake; 1.2 

in. per day, 1:21. Water level began to rise 6 hrs after quake and 1 O•e 0.65 ft in 20 hrs; 1. 2 in. per day, 1:6. 

Only well in Florida to record aftershocks; for 

list, see table 6; 1.2 in. per day, 1:24. 

Water level rose 0.25 ft in 

18 hrs after quake; 1.2 

in. per day, 1:6. Water level rose 0.5 ft in 6 hrs after quake; 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 

No aftershocks recorded. Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 2.!in. per day, 

1:12. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 2.4 in. per day, 

1:6. 

First quake ever recorded 

in well. 

First quake ever recorded 

in this watertable well. 

T=1.4X10'; S=2X10-•; no aftershocks recorded; 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

T=1.6X10'; S=3X10-•. Pressure recorder. 

T=2.7X10'; 8=4X10-•; no aftershocks recorded. Pressure recorder. 

T=lO'; 8=3X10-•; Pressure recorder. 

First quake ever recorded 

in well. Water level rose 1.48 ft 

in 20 min, then declined 

1.18 ft in 1 hr; 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 

1:6. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 043 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

I First num- ber, depth of well; 

second, 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water tude; N. tude, W. casing to (feet) 

Thomas, 14E15______________ 30°50' 

14E20 ______________ 30°51' 

15E12 .... - Tift, 17KL __________ _ 

Wayne, 30L3 _______ _ 

30°47' 

31°27' 

31°37' 

Oahu, 1A ___________________ 21°16' 

286 .. 

332 ... . 

333 ....... . 

T-57 ..... . 

T-67 _____ _ 

T-69 ..... . 

T-75 ..... 

T-96 ....... . 

Shaft 4 ___ _ 

Shaft 17 .. 

Waibee Tunnel (1,624 ft long; 24 ft satu- rated and held by dike and bulkhead) 

21°35' 

21°29' 

21°35' 

21°27' 

screen, per· fora ted casing, or open hole (feet) 

Georgia-Continued 

83°58' 

80°57' 

83°51' 

83°31' 

81°55' 

Ocala Limestone .. ____ . 

Suwannee Limestone ...... 

..... do ____________________ _ 

Ocala Limestone ......... . Tampa and Suwannee Limestones. 

157°46' Basalt of Kolau Volcanic Series. 157°48' ..... do ___________ _ 157°51' ..... do __________ _ 

158°11' Basalt of Wainae Volcanic Series. 158°07' Basalt of Koolau Volcanic Series. 158°06' ..... do ____________ _ 

157°53' ..... do _____ ... __ ....... __ -- 158006' ..... do ____________________ _ 

157°55' ..... do ..... ----···· _______ _ 157°56' ..... do ______________ _ 

158°06' Basalt of Koolau Vol- canic Series. 157°57' ..... do ____________ _ 

157°52' ..... do ____ _ 

158°09' Reeflimestone. __ .. __ . 

158"01' Basalt of Koolau Vol- canic Series. !58°05' ..... do _________ _ 

548 

299/147 

183/136 312 

594 

Hawaii 

131/100 

?/100 474/458 

447/447 

225/205 

163/68 

115/66 

60/39 

85/59 

321/170 

33/11 

1, 308/91 

283/233 

250/75 

60/16 

157°51' ..... do ___________________________ _ 

Idaho 

195. 20 

223. 19( +. 04) 

(+.084) 123. 50(-. 40) 65.18 

8. 27 

25.15 

<+J25. 84(+. 06) 

+6.87 

+2.98 

9.14 

21. 95(+.10) 23.28 

19. 12( +. 07) 19.35 

2.03 

4.17 

24. 55(?) 

18. 16(?) 

7.00 

237.60 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Double 

amplitude 

Upward Downward 

1.29 

.20 

1. 15 

-- >5 

1.26 2.55 

- ······----- >1 . 52 . 72 1.22 2.37 

. ··--------- >1 

------···· ------····· >1 --·-----·- ----------- 1. 85 

0.03 

. 28 

.09 

0. 05 

.32 

. 05 

.08 

. 60 

.14 

. 21 . 12 . 33 .10 .17 .27 ? ? . 16 

--------------------->I 

. 75 

. 2 

. 31 

. 35 

.83 

.03 

. 33 

1. 58 

. 05 

. 64 

··--------- >1 

.60 . 95 

Trace 

. 05 . 05 . 10 

4. 60 

Remarks 

Cable thrown off pulley and float stuck. First quake ever recorded in well. 

Do. 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. T=2.5X10'; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. Tidal efficiency=10 

percent. 

Do. 

Tidal efficiency=15 

percent. 2.3 in. per day, I: 1. Tidal efficiency= 4 percent. 2.3 in. per day, 1:1. Do. 

Tidal efficiency= 15 percent. Tidal efficiency=2 per- cent. 

Chart pulled from drum by pen; 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

Rising float stuck between counterweight and cas- ing; 1.2 in per day, 1:1. Tidal efficiency=30 per- cent. 

Maul-type shaft, 608 ft. 

long. 

Pressure change on hori- zon tal discharge line near the bulkhead. 

~~~--- ~~----~-·· -~~--

Bingham, 5S-31E-23abL ... 

Blaine; !S-19E-3cc2 .. 

2S-20E-1ac2. ____ _ 

Butte, 3N-29E-!4adL ..... 

7N-31E-34bdL .. __ _ Canyon, 2N-IW-7bb4 ...... . Cassia, !3S-21E-18bbL ___ . 

Elmore, !S-4E-10dal.. __ . 

Gooding, 8S-!4E-16bcL .. . 

Jefferson, 5N-32E-36adL .. . 7N-36E-22ab4 ... . Jerome, 7S-17E-6acL __ _ Latah, 39N-4W-7 _______ _ 

Lincoln, 5S-17E-26acl.. .. 

Minidoka, 7S-25E-19baL .. . 8S-23E-2baL. ... . 8S-24E-20dbL. _. 8S-24E-31dcL. .. _ 8S-25E-24bdL. _. Power, 5S-33E-35ccl.. _ ... __ 

43°21' 

43°17' 

43°35' 

43°55' 

43°32' 

42°18' 

43°21' 

42°44' 

43°43' 

43°54' 

42°51' 

46°45' 

42°48' 

42°46' 

42°43' 

42°41' 

42°43' 

4Z056' 

112°49' 

114°12' 

114°01' 

112°58' 

112°43' 

116°31' 

114°03' 

112°38' 

112°07' 

114°30' 

117° 

114°24' 

113°35' 

113°44' 

113°40' 

113°42' 

113°29' 

112°34' 

Basalt of Snake River Group. 

Clay, silt, sand, and gravel. 

Basalt of Snake River Group and alluvium. BMalt of Snake River Group. ..... do ____________________ _ 

Basalt of Idaho Group __ .. Paleozoic limestone ______ _ 

Sand and gravel of Idaho Group. 

Basalt of Snake River Group. ..... do ____ _ ..... do _______ _ ..... do ________ ......... .. 

Columbia River Basalt.._ 

Basalt of Snake River Group. ..... do ____________________ _ ..... do ____________________ _ ..... do ____________________ _ ..... do ____________________ _ ..... do ____________________ _ GraveL __________________ _ 

46 

51/51 

208/208 

588 

320 103/96 

850/20 

525/485 

53/50 

406/361 

35/18 

345/322 

255 

284/284 

254/80 

367/25 

213/175 

180/160 60 

24.70 

17.97 

151.24 

459.02 

269.44 

11.28 

430.92 

341.68 

39.55 

330.07 7. 09 314. 53(- 02) 

255.1 

202.20 

244.38(-.02) 

208.65 

154.10 

153. 53(-. 04) 

145.13(-.02) 

25.29 

0. 04 

. 81 

. 56 

2. 27 

. 04 

. 05 

.66 

.04 

0'' 

.71 

.33 

. 02 

. 44 

.82 

.62 

.15 

.09 

.11 

.04 

0. 05 0. 09 

. 75 I. 56 

. 47 I. 03 

1.71 3.98 

. 05 . 09 . 05 .10 . 76 I. 42 

. 06 .10 

. 02 . 04 

. 50 I. 21 . 40 . 73 . 02 . 04 . >5 

. 42 .86 

• 96 1.78 1.14 1. 76 .15 . 30 .16 . 25 .09 . 20 

0.3 in. per day, I: 2. 

Do . 

Do. 

2.4 in per day, 1:6. 

Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

2.4 in. per day, I :6. 

Do . 0. 3 in. per day, 1:1. 0.3 in. per day, 1:2 . Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

Do . Do. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6 . 0.3 in. per day, 1:2 . Do. Float bung on down movement; 0.3 m. per day, 1:1. 
C44 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

County, well 

__ I 

Power, 7S-30E-28bbL ______ 

Teton, 4N--45E-13adL ______ 

Twin Falls, 11S-19E-17aaL _ 

11S-20E-21dcL. 

Champaign, CHM 19N9E8.7h. 

Cook, COK 39N12E-11.7L. 

DeKalb, DEK 40N3E23.8e1. 

DuPage, D UP 39N11E24.2g. DUP 38N10E10.7al. DUP 38N10E27.6h. 

ANL-9 ... --------- ANL-10. __ --------

LaSalle, Wealdon 9 __________ 

Weldon 15 .. --------

Amfahr a ___________ Roulston 3.--------

Fordyce 2 (or 3?) ... 

Scheuer 2 ___________ 

Fehr 2 ______________ 

Peoria, PEO 8N8E-6.1e ..... PEO 8N8E-16.7g ____ PEO 8N8E-17.2c2 ... Tazewell, TAZ 24N5W-3.8a. 

TAZ26N4W-31.2g_ Will, WIL 37N10E-10.6fl_ ___ 

Allen,Al--4 ______ 

Al-5...~ 

Benton, Be-2. ______________ Clinton, Cl--4 _______________ 

~~~~;,~;:ri-=4~====:=:::=:::: Madison, Md-8 ______________ 

Marion, Ma-31. __ Ma-32 _____ 

Marshall, Ml-2 ____ 

Ml--4. -- Miami, Mi-2 _________ Newton, Ne-3 _______ 

Parke, Pa-3 .. __ Porter, Pt-9. ______ 

Posey, Py-2. _________ 

Pulaski, Pu-6(29/4W-4Ll) ___ 

Ripley, Ri--4. 

Spencer, 14 _____________ Starke, Sk-2 ___________ Tippecanoe, Tc-7 _______ :::: 

Vanderburgh, Van-3 ........ 

-------~-----;--------;-------~- ------------- ----~----~ 

Lati- Longitude, N. tude, W. 

42°47' 112°58' 

43°40' 113°05' 

42°29' 114°15' 

42°27' 114°07' 

Water·bearing formation 

First num- ber, depth 

of well; 

second, 

depth of Depth to water casing to (feet) screen, per~ 

fora ted 

casing, or open hole 

(feet) 

Idaho-Continued 

Basalt of Snake River 288 198.29 

Group. Alluvium _________________ 304 201.46 

Basalt of Snake River 860 321.92 

Group. ____ _do _____________________ 280 69.85 

Illinois 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Upward 

0.00 

---------- . 22 

. 24 

Downward 

0.12 

----------- .28 

. 32 

Double 

amplitude 

0.12 

>5 

.50 

. 56 

[Data furnished by the Illinois Water Survey and the Northern Illinois Gas Co.] 

40°07' 88°12' Glacial sand and graveL ___ 163 113.77 0.03 0. 05 0. 08 

41°53' 87°50' Cambrian and Ordovi- 1,640 553.0 ---------- ----------- >10 

clan sandstone. 

41°56' 88°51' _____ do __________________ 1,007 130. 87 ( +. 51) . 51 . 30 . 81 

41°51' 87°55' Silurian dolomite __________ 350 40.90 . 82 1.32 2.14 

41°47' 88°05' _____ do _____________________ 53 13.08 . 01 .00 . 01 

41°45' 88°05' _____ do _____________________ 114 47.20 . 40 .33 . 73 

42° 880 Niagara Dolomite _________ 140/90 96. 09( +. 03) ---------- ----------- >1 42° 880 _____ do _____________________ 199 81.12(+. 21) 4.30 3.40 7. 70 

89° 41° Troy Grove Gas Storage ------------ 89.4 . 45 . 45 .9 

Field. 

89° 410 _____ do _____________________ ------------ 90.36 .00 .00 .00 

85° 41° ____ _do _____________________ ------------ 90.37 .8 .8 1.6 

89° 41° _____ do _____________________ ------------ 80.4 ---------- ----------- -----------

89o 41° Ancona Gas Storage ------------ 144.4 .3 .3 .6 

Field. 

89° 41° Garfield Gas Storage ------------ 164.7 .7? 2. 1? 2.8? 

Field. 

89° 41° ..... do _____________________ --- 142. 4(+. 2) . 2 .2 .4 

40°42' 89°37' Glacial and and gravels ... 163 69.0 .80 . 70 1.50 

40°40' 89°36' ____ .do .... - __ . _______ . __ .. - 53 28. 82(+. 04) .09 . 05 . 14 40°40' 89°36' ..... do _____________________ 53 33.13(+. 02) .02 .02 .04 

40°33' 89°39' _____ do _____________________ 80 37. 25(-. 03) .02 . 13 .15 

40°40' 89°36' _____ do _____________________ 79 3. 28(-. 02) . 17 .08 . 25 

41°43' 88°04' Silurian dolomite __________ 93 73.12 . 30 . 20 . 50 

Indiana 

41°08' 84°53' Limestone. ________ 44 30.48 

1--~--~=- 0.39 0. 71 

41°04' 84°50' _____ do ______________ 100 23. 71(+. 01) - >1 

40°31' 87°23' GraveL ________ 37 12.67 .12 . 07 . 19 

40°17' 86°30' _____ do ____________ 230 17. 58(+. 03) .09 .02 .11 

41°03' 87°01' Limestone. _______ 300 4. 53(-.10) .05 . 22 . 27 

38°46' 85°26' Ordovician rock .. ___ 75 25. 71(-.08) .06 . 08 .14 

40°16' 85°50' Limestone. ___ 415 28. 90(-.10) . 27 .36 .63 

39°51' 86°01' Niagara Dolomite. 347/210 101. 70(+. 7) 3. 65 4. 60 8. 25 

39°52' 86°08' _____ do ___________ 322/60 9. 92(-.14) -- ~--- >1 

41°21' 86°19' GraveL. 127 22.03 .29 . 25 . 54 

41°27' 86°19' Sand _____ 133 46.24 .03 .03 .06 

40°40' 86°08' Limestone. _________ 165/66 44. 28(-.12) 1. 78 1.38 3.16 

40°47' 87°27' Sand and graveL __ 103 36.57 1. 14 .80 1. 94 

39°48' 87°22' _____ do ____________ 124 48.55 . 04 . 04 .08 

41°28' 87°13' Limestone. ____ 379/236 23.14(-1. 92) ----- >1 

38°07' 87°47' Pennsylvanian rock ___ 236 11.60 . 04 . 06 . 10 

40°59' 86°53' Niagara Dolomite ___ 663 15. 93(?) -- >1 

39°14' 85°06' Sand and graveL_ 34 3. 59 .03 . 05 .08 

37°58' 87°08' Sand ______ 56/53 8.46 . 015 . 02 . 035 41°14' 86°37' GraveL ___________________ 83 4. 04 . 21 . 19 . 40 

40°26' 86°55' Sand and graveL _________ 207 168.99 . 17 . 12 .29 

37°59' 87°31' Sand ______________________ 90 24.00 . 035 .04 . 075 

Remarks 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

Do . 

1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 

1:10. 

Quake recorded at bottom 

of water level ulow"; 1.2 

in. per day, 1:10. Water level changed trend 

and rose 1.0 ft in 13 hrs 

after quake; 1.2 in. per 

day, 1:10. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. Water level began dropping when quake hit, fell 

1.4 ft in 2 hrs, then re- versed and rose 3.6 ft in 

60 hrs; 1.2 in. per day, 

1:10. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 

Float hung during quake; 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10 . 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. No aftershocks recorded; 

1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 

1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. No aftershocks recorded; 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 

1:1. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

0.3in. per day, 1:1. Do. 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C45 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

County, well 

Des Moines, 69-3-{)AL ...... 

Lee, 67-4-3JL ............... Linn, 83-7-28HL ........... 

Cairo Dome of Natural Gas Pirelhle Co. of America: omsa, Jones G-L ...... 

Hutchinson !H. 

Madison, 75-26-23AL ... Marion, 74-21-11KL ..... 

Story, 83-24-2QL ....... Washington, 77-924AL ------ Keota Reservoir of Natural Gas Pipeline Co. of America: 

Washington, Anderson L 

E. V. 

Green I. Flynn G-L Woodbury, 89-47-22B2. _____ 

Kearny, 23-28-11db. ___ ----1 

Christian, S-1,502.3-196.8 ... Edmondson, S-1,901.4-311.9 

Elliott, N-2,315.1-210.7 ___ __ 

Graves, S-1,150.7-208.2 ..... S-1,154.15-139.90 ... Jefferson, N -1,540.6-258.6. __ N-1,566.06-275.35_ 

N -1,544. 7-264.0 ... Johnson, S-2,864.6-536.6. 

Letcher, S-2,851.7-329.6. __ . 

S-2,909.1-321.7 ___ . S-2,858.6-299.9_. _. Livingston, S-1,276.1-259.3. 

S-1,276.6-347.9 _ 

Lyon, S-1,298.8-270.2 ______ _ 

Marshall, S-1,246.2-272.0. _. McCracken, S-1,119.6-310.2. 0 hio, S-31,672.6-396. 7 ____ .. Pulaski, S-2,332.3-243,3. _. _ 

Warren, S-1,888.1-265.3_ .... 

Acadia, AC-40 ..... 

Ascension, An-2 

Calcasieu, Cu-77 __ 

Cu-445 ... Cu-446 .. _ 

. 

Lati- Longitude, N. tude, W. 

--------- ----------

--------- ---------- --------- ------

--------- ----------

--------- ------

--------- ---------- --------- ----------

--------- ----------

--------

... ----- ----------

--------- ----------

-------- ~ ----- ~----

38° I 101° I 

36°51' 87°27' 37°11' 86°05' 

38°04' 87°09' 

36°52' 88°39' 

36°40' 88°38' 38°11' 85°51' 38°14' 85°45' 38°12' 85°50' 37°46' 82°45' 

37°12' 82°49' 

37°10' 82°37' 37"06' 82°48' 37°01' '88°14' 37°15' 88°141 

37°03' 88°09' 37°03' 88°20' 

37°08' 88°46' 37°25' 86°52' 36°59' 84°36' 

37°03' 86°08' 

30°18' 92°25' 

30°14' 90°55' 

30°14' 93°16' 

Water-beariiig formation 

St. Peter Sandstone ....... 

Sand and graveL ......... Silurian limestone and dolomite. 

Ordovocian shale and Silurian rock. 

Galena Dolomite .... 

Mississippian limestone ... 

------------------------

Sand and graveL _____ 

------------------------

St. Peter Sandstone _______ 

_____ do _____________________ 

Galena Dolomite_. _______ 

Dakota Sandstone._ .. -... 

Unconsolidated deposits_ -I 

Ste. Geneviev e Limestone. _____ do ...... --

Rocks of Penn sylvanian age. Sand ......... _____ do ..... --

Glacial sand a nd graveL __ Limestone .. __ Glacial sand a nd graveL __ shale of rmation. 

Sandstone and Breathitt Fo .. ... do _____ ---

_____ do ....... . 

..... do _____ --- Warsaw Limes tone ....... Fredonia Lim estone, Member of S te. Gene- tone. 

tone ..... vieve Limes Warsaw Limes Gravel and sa nd .. __ _ ..... do _____ .. __ 

Tradewater F ormation .. __ Limestone of Fort Payne 

Formation. 

St. Louis Lim estone .. __ .. 

Chicot aquifer __ .. ___ 

Older alluvium ....... 

"500-foot" sand, Chicot aquifer. 30°11' 93°19' ..... do ____ 

30°11' 93°19' "7()()..toot" sand, 0-hfCOf ~--

aquifer. 

First num- ber, depth of well; 

second, 

depth of casing to screen, per- forated 

casing, or open hole (feet) 

Iowa 

1, 205/854 

156 420/75 

?/376 

?/571 

1, 058/657 

113/76 

110 110/47 

?/1, 189 

?/1, 219 

?/814 

343 

Kan888 

2961 

Kentucky 

85 

295 

70 

106 

183 

112 

190 

117 

115 

180 

146 

53 

205 

365 

99 

92 

86 

298 

146 

94 

Louisiana 

303 

590/550 

512/450 

540/460 

738/658 

Depth to water (feet) 

182. 75(-1. 75) 

12.00 

67. 7(-.1) 

149.9 

133. 1 

262.45 

44. 30(-. 05) 

53.85 

3. 57 

100. 23(+. 4) 

153.9 

120.0 

22. 65(-. 05) 

219.53 

14.09 

129. 10( +. 13) 

22.60 

16.34 

88.17 

60.37 

49.46 

77.39 

26.96 

17.0 

21.87 

11.18 

46.77 

22.30 

31.84 

26.03 

47.65 

152.46 

81.08 

71. 51 

53. 28(?) 

1. 64 

125.55 

114.40 

83.32 

I 

----·--~---

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Upward Down0.00 

. 1 

. 15 

.00 

2.1(+?) 

. 55 

. 025? 

. 075 

.11 

. 75 

. 18 

. 25 

. 61 

0.18 

0. 06 1.0 

. 06 

.06 

.23 

.09 

. 141 

. 12 

.53 

. 07 

.04 

. 20 

.10 

.10 

.01 

. 30 

. 01 

.09 

. 09 

1. 07 

.20 

. 78 

. 95 

I 

ward 

1. 75 

.1 

.15 

.16 

2. 6 

. 55 

. 025? 

. 075 

. 10 

. 41 

.18 

. 46 

. 55 

0.19 

0. 07 

.8 

. 06 

.04 

. 18 

.09 

. 165 

.10 

.60 

. 05 

.03 

. 20 

.11 

.10 

.01 

. 26 

. 02 

.04 

.09 

0. 94 

.20 

.80 

1. 05 

-----

I 

Double 

amplitude 

1. 75 

. 2 

.3 

. 16 

4. 7(+?) 

1. 10 

. 05? 

.15 

. 21 

1.16 

. 36 

.71 

1. 16 

0. 37 I 

0.13 

1.8 

.12 

.10 

.41 

.18 

. 306 

. 22 >1 

1. 13 

. 12 

. 07 

.40 

. 21 

. 20 

.02 

. 56 

.03 

.13 

. 18 

Remarks 

Water level dropped at time of quake. No other water-level move- ment; 2.4 in. per day, 4:5. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 2.4 in. per day, 1:12. 

Water-level decline only; 1.2 in. per day, 1: 10. Cable slipped on pulley at time of quake; 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 2.4 in. per day, 1:3. Recorder made a jerkytype record; 2.4 ln. per day, 1:6. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 0.3 in. per day, 1:6. 

Float seemingly hung for 7).jj hrs after quake; water level then betan to rise (1.82 ft in 40 rs); 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. 

Do. 2.4 in. per day, 1:12. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

Do. 

Do. 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Do. 

No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

Do. 

-.. -------------

2. 01 

>2 

. 40 

1. 58 2. 00 

Float hung after fluctua- tion; 2.4 in. per day, 1:12. 

No aftershocks recorded; pen hung; 0.3 in. per day,1:2. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. Do. 
C46 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 1 9 6 4 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First num- ber, depth Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

of well; 

second, From preearthq uake County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) screen, per- Double fora ted amplitude casing, or Upward Down- open hole ward (feet) 

Louisiana-Continued 

Calcasieu, Cu-583 ___________ 30°13' 93°17' "700-foot" sand Chicot 670/570 170. 70(-. 05) 0.24 0.24 0.48 aquifer. ' East Baton Rouge, EB-78. _ 30°30' 91 on• "400-foot" sand.----------- 423/332 ns. 34(+.05) >.33 .29 >.62 EB-90 __ 30°28' 91°09' "2,000-foot" sand __________ 2,120/2,025 145.22(-.27) >.23 .34 >.57 EB-123. 30°26' 91°10' "6()()..foot" sand ____________ 729/630 90. 26(+.03) .03 .35 .38 EB-127 _ 30°26' 91 on' "400-foot" sand ____________ 330/229 29.16 .04 .00 . 04 EB-128 _ 30°26' 91 °10' 14800-foot" sand ___________ 970/840 102. 00(-.14) ------------- >5 

EB-155. 30°29' 91 OJO' "400-foot" sand _________ 412/3n 103. 50(+.06) . 40 .50 .90 EB-293. 30°30' 91 on• "600-foot" sand ___________ 600/540 129.50 I. 07 1.10 2.17 EB-652 _ 30°32' 91 °08' "1,500-foot" sand __________ 1,345/1,264 64.83 2. 77 >1.14 >3.91 East Feliciana, Ef-L .. ______ 30°52' 91 °01' Quaternary upland ________ 143 7. 45( + .008) .06 .06 .12 Iberville, Ib-2.. _____________ 30°17' 9J 0 J4' Alluvium _____ ----------- 280/260 5. 30 -- >5 

IB-92_ ------------ 30°07' 91 °15' _____ do _________________ 200/160 +!.20 1.10 > .20 >1.30 Jackson, Ja-49 _______________ 32°1 7' 92°46' Sparta Sand ___________ 570 158.35 .62 I. 41 2.03 

Jefferson, Jf-120 _____________ 29°59' 90°09' "700..foot" sand _______ 780/705 78.70 2.24 >1.30 >3.54 Jefferson Davis, JD-485 _____ 30°13' 92°59' Chicot aquifer _____________ 250/240 45.50 .10 . 75 .85 Morehouse, Mo-5 ___________ 32°46' 91°55' Sparta Sand _______________ 860 198 1.15 I. 70 2.85 Orleans, Or-42 ______________ 29°57' 90°02' "700-foot" sand ___________ 757/664 106. 27(-.08) 3.10 >.20 >3.30 

Or-47 -------------- 30°02' 90°04' _____ do _______________ 610/527 100.10 1.53 I. 52 3.05 St. Oharles, SC-9 ___________ 30°00' 90°24' _____ do _____________________ 777 32.13 .14 .12 .26 SC-14 __________ 30°00' 90°24' "400-foot" sand _______ 404/324 69.00 .88 . 77 I. 65 St. John The Baptist, 30°03' 90°27' _____ do _________________ 310 31. 95(+.07) ----------- >I SJB-17. 

SJB-86 _____ 30°04' 90°29' _____ do _____________ 368/324 31. 38(+.04) .20 1.43 I. 63 SJB-145 ____ 30°02' 90°39' Pleistocene ________________ 320/305 n. 74(-. 005) ------------- >I Union, Un-26 _______________ 32°44' 92o09' Sparta Sand _______________ 745/670 159. 07(-.04) >I Vermilion, Ve-6 _____________ 29°58' 92o08' Chicot aquifer _____________ 214/125 15.50 . 68 . 58 I. 26 Ve-60L _________ 29°46' 92°20' _____ do ____________________ 249/167 4.20(+.02) .17 . 21 . 38 Vernon, V-104. _____________ 31 °04' 93°13' Miocene ___ --------------- 855'825 206.25 . 12 . OJ . 13 Washington, Wa-7_____ __ 30°47' 89°51' Pliocene(?) ________________ 600/525 11.47 .27 . 25 . 52 Webster, Wb-27 ____________ 32°58' 93°27' Sparta Sand. ______________ 312/231 nJ. 43 .08 .08 . 61 West Baton Rouge, WBR-5 __ 30°28' 9J 0 J2' "1,200-foot" sand __________ I, 338 93.30 .68 2.20 2. 86 WBR-43. 30°25' 9J 0 J3' Alluvium. ____________ 185/170 18.16 - >5 

West Feliciana. WF-57 _____ 30°47' 91 °23' Zone 1 Tertiary ___________ 351/3n 93.22 . 23 . 44 . 67 

Maine 

Cumberland, C-26 _______ 43°54' 70°01' Glacial sand and graveL __ 101/81 32.37 0. 08 0.11 0.19 

Maryland 

Charles, Ch-Cb7 ____ ------- 38°34' 77°12' Sand of Patapsco Forma- 400/154 68.54 0. 07 0. 07 0.14 

tion. Dorchester, Dor-Cd40 ___ 38°34' 76°06' Sand of Piney Point 401/369 (-.20) .00 . 20 .20 Formation. Prince Georges, PG-Cf6 .. -- 38°57' 76°44' Sand of Magothy Forma- 207/? +53. 49(-.03) .10 . 14 . 24 

tion. 

--1 PG-Fd39 ___ 38°44' 76°50' _____ do _____ --------- 456/436 +39. 25 . 13 . 15 .28 

Massachusetts 

Berkshire, Lee-44 _____ -----1 42°19' I 73°14' I Stockbridge Limestone __ _ 9. 13 1 o. 31 1 o. 31 1 o. 62 

Bay, 17N 4E 22-L ____ _ Calhoun, 18 7W 32-3 __ _ 2S 8W 2-L _______ _ 

Clinton, 5N 2W 31-L ______ _ 

Delta, 39N 23W 28-3 __ ------

Eaton, 3N 3W 2-L---------- 4N 4W li-L--------- 4N 4W 2-L---------- 4N 3W 12-L--------- Genesee, 7N 7E 17-L _____ _ 

43°51' 

42°20' 

42°19' 

42°46' 

45°45' 

42°40' 

42°451 

42°45' 

42°44' 

43°00' 

83°59' 

85°091 

85°12' 

84°36' 

87°09' 

84°38' 

84°45' 

84°45' 

84°37' 

83°40' 

Michigan 

:---------------------

Saginaw Formation ______ _ Marshall Formation ______ _ _____ do __________________ _ 

Saginaw Formation ______ _ Munising Sandstone. ____ _ 

Glacial drift.------------- Saginaw Formation ______ _ _____ do ___________________ _ _____ do ___________________ _ 

Saginaw Formation. Well bottoms in old coal mine. 

110/60 

95/40 

92/45 

195 

530 

66/66 

350 376/23 

381/140 222 

---------

5.35 

25.00(+. I) 15.25 

61.22 

2. 94 

4.04 251 

29.77 

81.88 

25.68 

0. 18 0. 18 0. 36 I. 27 I. OJ 2. 28 .71 .56 1.27 . 16 .19 . 35 I. 12 I. 10 2. 22 .21 .15 .36 .16 .n .27 . 005 . OJ • 015 .42 .46 .88 

--------------------- >2 

Remarks 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. Do. 

Do. No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:5 . 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 2.4 in. per day, 1:30. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 2.4 ln. per day, 1: 1.2. Reversed on both sides of 1:5 chart; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 2.41n. per day, 1:6. Record unusual but difli- cult to interpret because of reversal; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 2. 4 in. per day, 1:6. 2.4 in. per day, 1:12. 2.4 in. per day, 1:30. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. Do. 0.3 in. per day, I: 5. Do. Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 0.3 in. per day, I :I. 

Do. 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1: 5. 0.3 in. per day, I :2. 

Well drilled to bedrock. Barometric efficiency= 20 percent; 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

0.3 in per day, 1:5. 

2.4 in. per day, I: 6. 

0.3 in. per day, 1: I. 

2.4 in. per day, I :6. 

I 0.3 in. per day, I :2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day, 

1:2. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA 047 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First num- ber, depth of well; 

second, 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-b earing formation depth of Depth to water 

Gogebic, 48N 47W 34-2 ...... 48N 47W 34-3. _____ 48N 47W 31-L .... _ Ingham, 4N 2W 24-L _______ 4N lW 27-L _______ 

4N IE 21-L ....... 3N 2W 23-2. _ ------ 2N lW 5--2.-------- Ionia, 7N 7W 25--1. .......... Jackson, 3S IW 2-L ......... 3S IW IQ--1_ ________ 

3S IW-11-3 ......... Kalamazoo, 2S llW 2Q--1L ... 3S 12W 11-L_ ___ 

Kent, 6N 12W 27-1. ... 6N 12W 34-L ... 

6N 9W 3-L----------- 5N 12W 4-7 ___________ 5N 12W 4-3 ___________ 

Livingston, 2N 4E 3-L .. ___ Mackinac, 42N 2W 7-L ...... Manistee, 21W 17N 14-L .... Marquette, 47N 28W 1-L ... 47N 28W3-L. ... Oakland, 3N 9E 36-L ....... 3N IOE 13-2 .... 3N IOE 31-L. ..... 3N 10E 32-L. ..... 3N liE 4-l__ ______ 

Presque Isle, 33N 6E 15-L __ Schoolcraft, 47N 16W 3Q--L .. Van Buren, 4S 16W 22-L ... Washtenaw, 3S 6E 16-3 ...... 3S 7E 5--L. ..... 3S 7E 9--3.. ..... 3S 7E 24-6 ______ Wayne, IS 8E 17-L _________ 

Wexford, 21N 9W 4-L.---

Dodge, 1 07.17.34dccL ______ 

Grant, 1 Hennepi 

29.42.9cccL _________ 

n, 29.23.19cddL.. ___ 117.21.16cca __ ---

117.22.5abd2 ____ 

117.22.8dbd2 ---- 117.23.llbbdl ---

117.23.34daa2. ____ Itasca, 5 5.25.17acdL ____ Mower, 1 Nobles, 

St. Louis 

---- 02.18.2bddL.. ----- 102.40.27ccdL _____ , 57.20.5dadL ___ 57.20.3ldbcl 

58.18.12ccc1 

Yellow M edicine, 114.45.4 dedi. 

~----

--

------

tude, N. tude, W. 

46°31' 90°09' 

46°31' gooogt 

46°31' 90°13' 42°43' 84°29' 42°42' 84°25' 42°43' 84°20' 42°38' 84°30' 42°35' 84°26' 42°58' 85°05' 42°14' 84°23' 42°13' 84°25' 

42°14' 84°23' 42°17' 85°37' 42°13' 85°41' 42°53' 85°43' 42°52' 85°42' 

42°56' 85°22' 42°50' 85°44' 

42°50' 85°44' 42°36' 83°581 

46°03' 84°36' 44°14' 86°20' 46°30' 87°45' 46°30' 87°47' 42°38' 83°20' 42°40' 83°13' 42°38' 83°12' 42°38' 83°11' 42°42' 83°10' 45°15' 83°41' 46°26' 86°21' 

42°06' 86°09' 42°13' 83°44' 42°15' 83°38' 42°14' 83°38' 

42°12' 83°34' 42°24' 83°31' 44°22' 85°24' 

44°01' 92°50' 

45°59' 95°58' 44°58' 93°13' 44°56' 93°21' 44°58' 93°29' 

44°57' 93°29' 

44°57' 93°33' 

44°53' 93°33' 47°14' 93°32' 43°40' 92°58' 43°36' 95°37' 47°26' 92°53' 47°22' 92°55' 

47°31' 92°34' 

44°42' 96°17' 

-------

Forrest. ____ 31°19' 89°15' 

31°11' 89o11' Grenada. _______ 33°50' 89°47' 

Lamar, HT16 .. 31°09' 89°33' 

IIT2A_ 31 °07' 89°34 1 

HT5. 31°08' 89°34' 

E7 ____ 31°08' 89°34' 

E9 __________________ 31°08' 89°34' Lowndes ____________________ 33°23' 88°26' 

casing to (feet) screen, per- fora ted casing, or open hole 

I (feet) 

Michigan-continued 

Glacial drift.------------- 35/35 0. 71(+. 02) ____ .do .. ------------------ 22/22 3.04 __ ... do ... ----------------- 115/115 22.40 Saginaw Formation _______ 453/80 65.10 _____ do _____________ 278/77 6.85 ..... do ........... _________ 265 21.525 _____ do .. ------------------ 268/50 7.33 ..... do .......... __________ 210/37 22.50 Glacial drift.------------- 23 16.92 Marshall Formation. __ .. _ 221 38.50 Saginaw and Marshall 323/55 31.65 Formations. 

Glacial drift .. ____________ 36/33 12.00 ..... do._._---------------- 81 17.20 _____ do .. __ ---------------- 248 (+)0.365 Marshall Formation. ______ 265/207 52.65 ..... do. __ ----------------- 300/150 68.21 

Glacial drift..------------ 70 17.55 

..... do ... ----------------- 227/182 8.63 ..... do. ___________________ 86 11. 77(-. 04) Saginaw Formation. ______ 148 12. 75 Manistique Dolomite .. _. _ 102 25.70 

---------------------------- 212 33.06 Glacial drift. _____________ 216 19. 09(-. 01) .. ... do .. __________________ 75 ------------------- ..... do .. __________________ 134 96.78 .. _ .. do. __ ----------------- 183/173 86.80 ..... do ... _________________ 173/153 78.85 ..... do. ___________________ 160/7 79.90 __ ... do. ___ ._ ..... _._ .. _____ 73 28.60 Traverse Group ___________ 31/22 6. 90 Prairie du Chien Group .. 57/40 15.45 Glacial drift. _______ 134/l19 27.46 __ ... do .. ------------------ 55/36 12.50 _____ do .. ------------------ 69 3. 34 __ .. .do.------------------- 94/90 66.34 _____ do .. ----------------- 75/70 33.51 ..... do ... __________ l14 53:90 ..... do .. ________________ 277 25.995 

Minnesota 

St. Peter Sandstone._ ---- 500/l18 88.95 

Glacial drift__ _____________ 214/200 77.02 Hinckley Sandstone _______ 1, 016/925 180.13 Jordan Sandstone _________ 421/280 76. 5(-. 2) 

Sandstone and limestone .. 483/201 45.7 

Jordan Sandstone ... _._. __ 503/228 22.26 __ do ___________________ 437/270 18. 48(+. 32) 

Sandstone and limestone __ 468/199 58.30 Glacial sand and gravel. __ 147/143 32.80 Limestone. _______________ 244 19. 05(+2. 35) 

Glacial sand and graveL __ 34/18 11.33 Biwabik Iron-formation ___ 430/315 65. 68(+. 40) 

Glacial outwash sand and 92/82 11.26 

gravel. 

__ do _____________________ 97/76 17. 24( -. 05) 

_____ do ________ 62/44 8. 71 

- ·--

Mississippi 

------------

Terrace sand and graveL_ 108/88 12.90 

Hattiesbnrg Formation ___ 416/392 127. 89( -. 03) Tallahatta Formation _____ 282/227 8. 66 Pascagonla and Hatties- burg Formations. 

889/838 101.50 

Hattiesburg Formation ___ 1, 080/935 132.53 Catahoula(?) Sandstone ... 680/579 104. 24 

Limestone caprock of salt dome. 

1, 386/945 94. 10( +- 25) 

_____ do _____________________ 1,450 84. 96(+.1) 

Sand of Gordo Formation. 500/400 .85(-.06) 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level Remarks 

Double 

amplitude 

Upward Downward 

0.00 1.35 1.35 .88 . 74 1.62 . 60 .58 1.18 . 92 .82 1. 74 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

----------- >1 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. . 055 . 055 .11 

---------- ----------- >I Do. .19 .185 .375 . 015 .00 . 015 1. 67 2.06 3. 73 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. . 73 .84 1. 57 

.04 .04 .08 Do. .03 .03 .06 . 12 .08 . 20 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. . 40 . 40 .80 0.3 in. per day, 1:2 . 

---------- ----------- >5 Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. . 02 .02 .04 .19 . 22 . 41 .43 .35 . 78 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 2. 27 2. 27 4.54 2. 20 2.60 4.80 .13 .175 .305 Do. . 30 . 45 . 75 

---------- ----------· . 70 .03 .03 .06 1. 05 1. 05 2. 10 .35 .45 .80 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. . 80 1.10 1.90 Do . . 25 . 25 .50 . 45 . 45 .90 . 07 .08 .15 . 005 .005 . 01 . 35 .35 . 70 . 06 . 05 .11 . 05 . 07 .12 . 31 . 86 1.17 .58 . 59 1. 17 .18 .105 . 285 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

>O. 5 >0.5 >I Drum rotated more than once but no aftershocks recorded. .06 . 05 .11 . 39 .12 . 51 . 5 .5 1 >1 >1 >2 Drum rotated more than once; water level decline d 2 ft in 40 hrs after quake >. 79 >.44 2':1. 23(?) Do. >I >I >2 Drum rotated more than once. 

>1 >1 >2 Do. . 52 .39 .91 2. 35 2. 05 4. 40 No aftershocks recorded. 

.09 .09 .18 . 62 .00 .62 . 02 .02 .04 

>.26 >.36 >.62 Ink flowed too slowly to record fluctuation. . 19 . 20 . 39 

-

~------

0. 7 0. 6 1.3 On bank of Leaf River; 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. .16 .13 .29 

. 20 .20 . 40 . 5 . 5 1 Riovi syncline, Tatum salt dome. . 5 .5 Do. .5 .5 On top of Tatum salt dome. 2. 25 .09 2. 34 Do. 

. 60 . 70 1.30 Do. 

1.15 1. 15 2.30 
C48 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United Stales caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued --

First num- Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

ber, de~th 

of we I; 

second, From preearthquake 

County, well Lati- Long!- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level Remarks tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) screen, per- Double fora ted amplitude casing, or Upward Down- open hole ward 

(feet) 

Mississippi-Continued 

Rankin _________ 

- --------1 32°18' 

I 

89°47' I Cockfield Formation ______ ~ 594/M51 104.07 .20 .20 .40 Washington _____ ----------- 33°02' 90°59' Alluvium of Mississippi 105/80 11. 59 .18 . 22 .40 Valley. 

Missouri 

[Data furnished by the Missouri Geological Survey and Water Resources] 

Barton, 32N/30W-30cd _______ 37°29' 94°16' Dolomite __________________ 971/553 223. 83(+. 4) >2.85 >2.15 >5 Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Bollinger, 28N /9E-32dca _____ 37°03' 90°05' Quaternary alluvium ______ 115/70 7.15 .02 .04 .06 

Butler, 26N/5E-34ca _________ 36°52' 90°31' Gasconade Dolomite ______ 631 139. 27(+. 65) 2.45 >.23 >2.68 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Callaway, 44N/11W-15bab __ 38°36' 92°10' Quaternary sand __________ 99/91 32.07 . 1 ----------- .1 Cape Girardeau, 29N/12E- 37°11' 89°45' Quaternary alluvium ______ 75/70 18.1 . 02 .20 . 22 8db. 

Dunklin, 22N /10E-34cdc. ___ 36°30' 89°58' Wilcox(?) Group __________ 130/104 14.9 . 55 >1.1 >1.65 .Franklin, 42N/1W-26dd _____ 38°21' 90°59' Dolomite ________ 255 67.8 . 05 .12 .17 44N/1W-27cbbc ... 38°32' 91°01' _____ do _________ ----------- 1,360 75.0 >1.0 2.9 >3.9 Aftershocks recorded (see 

table6); 1.2in.perday,l.6. Greene, 29N/22W-13bcc _____ 37°13' 93°17' ____ .do _____________________ I, 346 393.9 >9.9 >.1 >10 Between Mar. 28 and June 2, water level rose 50ft; 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. Howell, 24N/8W-21ca ________ 36°44' 91°51' _____ do _____________________ I, 305/800 308.45 6.45 >1.55 >8 26N/10W-16 _________ 36°M' 92°03' _____ do ________________ 780/650 212.5 1. 55 . 5 2. 05 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Howell (West Plains), 32N/ 36°45' 91°45' _____ do _________________ :::: ------------ 148.4(+. 24) 6. 5 >1.6 >8.1 1.2 in. per day, 1:12. 30W-31. Jasper, 27N/32W-lbac _______ --------- ---------- --------------- 1, 747/375 42.7 1. 95 . 85 2.80 McDonald, 21N/33W-22aa ... 36°32' 94°29' Dolomite _______ 850/99 86.5 2. 2 2. 9 5.1 23N/30W-18aad .. 36°40' 94°14' Limestone .. ____________ 346/44 123.35 .I .05 . 15 Madison, 33N/7E-20bcd. 37°32' 90°18' Dolomite, sandstone, and 590/187 103. 55 1.10 >1.10 Water level rose 5.55 ft in 40 arkose. hrs after quake and 1.65 ft more in next 98 hrs. 

Marion, 58N/5W-10ab _______ 39°51' 91°261 Alluvium _________________ 129/81 23.98 .05 . 12 . 17 Mississippi, 25N /16E-29ccb __ 36°47' 89°21' _____ do _____________________ 130/113 8.15 .06 .06 .12 Pemiscot, 17N/11E-36ab ..... 36°04' 89°49' ___ do _____________________ 195/126 15.9 .15 .15 .30 Perry, 34N/8E-34c __________ 37°36' 90°08' ----- ------------ 177.3(+. 60) 1. 65 1. 05 2. 70 Phelps, 34N/9W-18 __________ 37°39' 91°58' Dolomite.~---- 450/273 189. 0(-.3) 2.3 >1.5 >3.8 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Polk, 33N /21 W -5adc. ___ 37°37' 93°15' ..... do _____ 200/42 67. 66( -1. 1) ------- -------- Water level fell1.1 ft in H> hrs after quake. Ripley, 22N/4E-3dd _________ 36°35' 90°37' Alluvium and dolomite. __ 65/61 13.65 . 04 .04 .08 St. Clair, 38N/26W-22adc ____ 38°02' 93°46' Dolomite __________________ 875/20 109.4 .15 . 15 .30 St. Louis, 44N/3E-34cdba. _. 38°30' 90°40' St. Peter(?) Sandstone. 150 77.55 . 05 . 05 .10 47N/8E-18 ________ 38°48' 90°09' Quaternary alluvium. ____ 125/100 35.18 . 05 . 10 .15 Scott, 26N /14E-21bab 36°53' 89°33' ..... do __________ 145/142 8. 25 . 2.1 . 25 .50 Shannon __ ----- ---------- Upper aquifer ____ (-.55) --- >5.00 

-- 9-io53-,-- Lower aquifer __ (-.55) 2. 95 

Taney, 24N/18W-13d __ 36°45' Dolomite ____ 598/206 250, 67( +L 17) L 17 ,1 L 27 Texas, 30N/11W-17dda. _ 37°18' 92°10' _____ do ______ 481/50 272. 57 . 13 . 13 . 26 

---·----· 

Montana 

-----------

Gallatin, Al-4-25dc_ 45°48' 111°10' Alluvium_ 101 16. 49( +- 02) -->I Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day. 1:1. Flathead, 29-2D-29bd ___ 48°14' 114°11' Valley filL !.52 26.52 0. 385 0. 22 0.605 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Missoula, 13-19-8cb. ____ 46°54' 114°03' _____ do ____ --------------· 112 51.47 1. 43 1. 45 2. 88 No aftershocks recorded; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

--~--------

Nebraska ---------------------·-

Adams, 7-10-23ah_ 40°34' 98°24' Pleistocene sand and !55 109 0.10 0.10 0. 20 gravel. Hamilton, 1o-&-26hc ____ 40°48' 97°58' _____ do ______ 130 87. 5( -. 05) . 13 . 13 . 26 Kearney, 5-15-3ba. _____ .. 40°26' 99°00' ___ .. do ________________ 122 96 .09 .03 .12 Lancaster, A10-6-36cdd _ 40°47' 96°41' Dakota Sandstone. __ 170 62.60 2. 05 2. 05 4. 10 No aftershocks recorded. 

Merrick, 12-8-36hc ____ 40°58' 98°11' Pleistocene sand and 8 3. 45 . 025 . 025 . 05 

Polk, 14-2-21db ____ gravel. 41°10' 97°33' Water level declined 0.20 ft -------------·------ 180 81.45 8 hrs after quake. 

Saline, A8-3-19ad __ 40°38' 97°07' Pleistocene sand and !51 97. 37( -0. 07) ,06 .14 .20 

Thayer, 4-1-9bac ___ 40°20' 97°26' 

gravel. ___ .. do _________ 95 89 . 87 .00 . 87 No fall below prequake 

level. 

York, 9-4-{idd ___ 40°53' 97°35' _____ do _________ 102 86 1. 18 1. 16 2.34 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C49 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells m the Umted States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First num- ber, depth Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

of well; 

second, From preearthquake 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level Remarks tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) - screen, per- Double !orated amplitude casing, or Upward Down- open hole ward (feet) 

Nevada 

Clark, S 19/53-32aaaL _______ 36°15' 116°02' Alluvium _____________ 300 27. 11 ( +- 004) o. 015 o. 01 0.025 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. S 19/60-9bccL. _______ 36°19' 115°19' _____ do _______ 830/140 106. 02( -. 14) ------------- >1 Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 1.2in. per day, 1:1. S 21/54-10aacL ______ 36°21' 115°53' _____ do ________ 800/472 71. 69(-. 02) . 51 1. 22 1. 73 Pen moved faster than ink could flow. 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. s 21/54-28bdl__ _______ 36°06' 115°55' _____ do _____________ 140 22.72 .03 .03 . 06 0.3in. per day, 1:1. S 22/61-4bccL. _______ 36°04' 115°10' _____ do _____________ 355 109. 85( -. 28) . 18 .29 . 47 1.2 in. per day, 1: 1. 

New Hampshire 

No wells recorded the quake. 

New Jersey 

Atlantic, Pleasantville ______ 39°24' 74°30' Kirkwood Formation (800-ft sand). 680 (-)34.39 0.06 0. 03 0.09 

AmatoL __________ 39°35' 74°41' Cohansey(?) Sand _________ 137 5.11 .03 . 03 . 06 Wharton 2-G ______ 39°40' 74°40' Cohansey Sand ___________ 76 (+)92. 95 .09 .09 . 18 Jobs Point _________ 39°18' 74°37' Kirkwood Formation _____ 680/670 (-)28.74(-.04) .24 .09 .33 Oceanville _________ 39°27' 74°27' _____ do _____________________ 570/560 (-)21.11(-.03) .01 . 12 . 13 Burlington, Medford _________ 39°55' 74°50' Englishtown Formation __ 265/253 ( +)45. 84( -. 01) .10 .13 .23 

----------------- 39°55' 74°50' Raritan Formation ________ 410/400 (-)14.90(-.02) . 08 .10 .18 Lebanon 18-V __ 39°54' 74°28' Cohansey Sand ___________ 99 (+)128.85(-. 03) . 06 .12 . 18 Sawmill L ______ 39°52' 74°31' _____ do _____________________ 79 (+)114.92(-.02) . 01 . 05 .06 Sawmill 2 _______ 39°52' 74°31' _____ do _____________________ 81/76 10.80 .03 . 04 . 07 Camden, Egbert_ _____ 39°52' 75°04' Raritan and Magothy 454 (-)39.63 . 04 .13 . 17 Formations. Elm Tree 3. ______ 39°49' 74°56' Englishtown Formation __ 717/706 (-)25.92(-.07) . 01 . 14 .15 Esterbrook ________ 39°56' 75°07' Raritan Formation ________ 300 (-)5.04(-.18) .26 .53 . 79 Oaklyn ____________ 39°53' 75°04' Raritan and Magothy 112 (-)34. 20 .11 .11 . 22 Formations. N.Y. Ship ________ 39°54' 75°07' Raritan Formation ________ 104 (-)21.47(+.02) . 10 .06 . 16 New Brooklyn L _ 39°42' 74°56' _____ do _____________________ 1, 495 (-)12.33(-.04) . 06 .11 .17 New Brooklyn 2. _ 39°42' 74°56' Raritan and Magothy 848 (-)24.23(-.01) . 06 .01 . 07 Formations. Cape May, CanaL __________ 38°57' 74°55' Cohansey Sand ______ 252/242 (-)13.39 . 06 . 05 .11 County Park ____ 39°06' 74°48' Cohansey Sand ___________ 232/217 <+)6. 25(-. 01) .08 .12 .20 Higbee Beach ___ 38°57' 74°57' _____ do _____________________ 252/242 (-)11.80 . 20 . 21 . 41 Essex, East Orange W,W ____ 40°44' 74°20' Wisconsin terminal 64 (+)131.31(-.10) .00 .10 .10 

moraine. Ballantine .. _________ 40°43' 74°08' Brunswick Shale __________ 875 (-)80.14 .13 . 07 . 20 Gloucester, Shells. _________ 39°49' 75°13' Raritan and Magothy For- 327 31.63 .13 .13 . 26 

mations. Shell7 __________ 39°49' 75°13' _____ do _____________________ 322 31.18 . 14 .09 .23 Texaco 3. _______ 39°52' 75°09' _____ do _____________________ 298/225 -)48. 42 . 22 .14 .36 Hercules 39°49' 75°16' Raritan Formation ________ 100 (-)2.68 '07 .06 .13 (Gibbstown) 

Middlesex, Forsgate 3 ____ 40°20' 74°27' Raritan and Magothy 138/128 (+)70. 65 .OS .08 .13 Formations. Duhernal !_ _____ 40°24' 74°21' Old Bridge Sand Member 67 (+)4.57 . 015 . 005 . 02 of Raritan Formation. Morris, International Pipe __ 40°52' 74°26' Wisconsin drift ____________ 155 (+)295. 42(+. 04) 1.30 1. 57 2.87 Randolph Township 39°40' 74°33' Byram Granite Gneiss ____ 218 5.32 . 18 . 23 . 41 

~~JfJo~nL::::::::: 40°49' 74°23' Wisconsin glacial outwash. 170 (+)174.18 .11 . 14 . 25 40°45' 74°23' Wisconsin drift. ___________ 100 (+)173. 45(+.10) . 24 .33 . 57 Ocean, Colliers Mills!_ ______ 40°04' 74°27' Englishtown Formation ___ 427/417 54.50 .02 . 03 . 05 Colliers Mills 3 _______ 40°04' 74°27' Mount Laurel Sand _______ 267/257 18. 68(-. 01) . 01 .04 .05 Garden State 2. ____ 39°47' 74°14' Kirkwood Formation _____ 317 <+)37.18 . 02 .00 . 02 Union, Hillside 4. __________ 40°41' 74°13' Brunswick Shale __________ 400 (+)24. 40 2. 14 2. 23 4. 37 Only one distinct after- shock recorded (see table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 1:5. White 2 _____________ 40°40' 74°16' _____ do _____________________ 250 (+)56.16 1.13 1. 21 2.34 White 4. ____________ 40°40' 74°16' _____ do _____________________ 350 <+)51.18(+. 05) .15 .10 . 25 County Park ________ 40°41' 74°17' _____ do _____ 290 (+)59. 03 .24 .22 . 46 Hatfield. ____________ 40°37' 74°16' _____ do _____ --------------- ? <+)17. 37(+. 08) . 40 .49 .89 

New Mexico 

Chaves, Berrendo 33°27' 104°31' San Andres Limestone ____ 258 56.15 0. 95 0.99 1. 94 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. (10.24.9.333) Berrendo-Smith 33°26' 104°31' _____ do _____________________ 324 53.55 >3.5 >1.5 >5 Pen moved faster than (10.24.21.212) ink could flow. No aftershocks recorded; 

11.23.3.342_---- 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 33°22' 104°36' _____ do _____________________ 595 188 .38 >.14 . 76E 2.4 in. per day, 1: 1.2. Eddy, 18.26.6.442 _________ 32°46' 104°24' _____ do _____________________ 1, 008 148.03 >3 >2 >5 Aftershocks(?). 
C50 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 2 7, 19 6 4 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

County, well Latitude, N. 

Eddy, 22.26.36.111a __________ 32°21' 

21.26.36.22L ... ______ 32°26' 

Grant, 18.15.11.323. _________ 32°45' 

Lea, 17.33.13.341. ____________ 32°49' 

16.36.5 Lotz .. ---------- 32°57' 

Roosevelt, 1N .33.36.400C. _ .. 34°15' 

1.34.25.211. - . ---- 34°12' 

Sierra, Hot Springs 6 ________ 33°07' 

Chautauqua, Cn-10(208-

912-16) 

42°08' 

Erie, 255-812-2 _. ______ ----- 42° 

Genesee, 259-809-3 _. ________ 43° 

Nassau, N-7161. ____________ 40°39' 

N-3867 ------------- 40°30' 

Niagara, 306-902-L _________ 43°06' 

Onondaga, 253-614-L _______ 42°53' 

Rensselaer, 235-342-10. ______ 42°35' 

St. Lawrence, 452-459-2. ____ 44°52' 

Chowan, CHO-L. _________ 36°14' 

New Hanover-Kure Beach 34°00' 

Onslow------------------- 34°45' 

Burleigh, 138-77-22aad .•..•• ----

138-8-15cdd. _ Ward Test Hole 2216, 48° 

155-82-19dbd. 

Auglaize, Au-2. 40°32' 

Belmont__ 40°02' 

Carroll, C-L _______ 40°37' 

Champaign, Ch-2 __ 40°06' Clark, Cl-L _____ 39°58' Cl-2 _________ 39°55' Cl-8 _________ 39°58' 

Delaware, Dl-3 ____ 40°21' 

Fulton, Fn-L ______ 41 °35' 

Geauga, Ge-3a .. ___ 41'25' 

Hamilton, H-L _____________ 39°11' H-2 ______________ 39°17' H-9 ______________ 39°13' H-1Q _____________ 39°12' Holmes, Ho-L ______________ 40°35' 

Lucas, Lu-L ________________ 41 °37' Marion, Mn-L .. ___________ 40'34' Miami, Mi-L ... ____________ 40'02' 

First num- Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

her, de~th 

of wei; 

second, From preearthquake Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level 

tude, W. casing to (feet) - screen, per- Double 

!orated amplitude casing, or Upward Downopen hole ward 

(feet) 

I 

New Mexico-Continued 

104°15' Alluvium ... __________ 

104°14' Capitan Limestone ________ 

108°22' Conglomerate. ____________ 

103°37' Ogallala Formation _______ 

103°22' _____ do .. ___________________ 

103°25' Valley filL ____________ 

103°19' -... .do .•... ---------------- 107°15' Magdalena Group _________ 

79°12' Sand and graveL _________ 

78° Glacial sand and graveL •. 

78° _____ do. ____________________ 

73°39' Magothy Formation. _____ 

73°43' _____ do _____________________ 

79°02' Lockport Dolomite ________ 

76°14' Hamilton Group __________ 

73°42' Coarse sand and graveL . _ 74°59' Beekmantown Dolomite .. 

76°39' ----------------------------

77°55' Castle Hayne Limestone .. 77°25' ----------------------------

Glaciofluvial sand and 

gravel. ______ do _________ 

101 °30' _____ do __________ 

84°23' GraveL.------------------

80°44' Alluvial sand and graveL. 

81 °05' Sandstone _____ ._. _________ 

83°45' GraveL _________________ .-

83°43' Glacial outwash graveL ___ 83°51' GraveL_----·-------·----- 83°48' Limestone ________________ 

83°04' Columbus Limestone. ____ 84°00' GraveL_-----------------· 8]022' Sandstone of Cuyahoga 

Formation. 

84'47' GraveL ___________________ 

84°39' ____ _do _____________________ 

84°27' _____ do _____________________ 

84°28' _____ :io _____________________ 

81°54' San·istone of Logan Formation. 

83°36' Limestone ________________ 

83°23' _____ do ____________________ 

84°12' GraveL-------------------

260 ?(+. 07?) 0. 05 0. 048 or 0.10(+?) . 07 

327 21.61 ---------- ----------- >1 

580 . 02 . 02 .04 

252 158.87 .033 .04 . 073 

97 58.13 . 005 . 010 .015 

43 18.52 .03 ? ? 

101 

105 

73. O(+. 01) . 02 . 02 . 04 

.10(-.38) ---------- ----------- >1 

New York 

232 30.06 1. 20 0.90 2.10 

81/81 4. 93(-. 03) .00 . 04 . 04 

54/51 21.04 . 30 . 38 . 68 

671/661 (+)5. 75 . 1 . 1 .2 

517/506 (+)3.35 . 48 . 55 1. 03 

36 18.35 . 02 .02 . 04 

160/43 41.5 ? ? 1. 70 

96 27.79 . 21 . 22 .43 

180/54 13.12 . 22 . 24 . 46 

North Carolina 

320 9. 21 0.17 0. 00 0.17 

158 17.30 . 92 .93 1.85 

240 9. 07 1.00 . 78 1. 78 

North Dakota 

126/118 12 ---------- ----------- 1.9 

168/140 36 ---------- ----------- . 32 

107 40.80 0. 60 0.29 .89 

Ohio 

100 6. 68(-. 08) 0. 08 0.13 0. 21 

59 24.37 .14 .13 . 27 

60 23. 51(-. 07) . 16 .16 .32 

29 19.63 . 05 . 05 .10 

57 4. 6 . 52 . 68 1. 20 

74 5.80 .20 .20 . 40 

75 21. 90(+. 06) .39 .33 .72 

135 29. 92( +· 48) . 79(?) .77 1. 56? 

130 61.11 .08 . 04 .12 

120 40. 28(+. 08) . 50 .20 .70 

124 25.36 . 06 .06 .12 

89 12.50 .36 .36 .72 

168 104.10 .22 .19 . 41 

170 92.35 .30 . 27 . 57 

43 3.58 .58 . 46 1.04 

250 95.26 .10 .10 .20 

100 9. 05 . 25 .28 . 53 

49 9.04 .13 .12 .25 

Remarks 

Entire fluctuation was above prequake water level; 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

Chart pulled from drum 

by pen. 1.2 in. per day, 

1:1. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:12 . A water-table well; 1.2 in . per day, 1:1. 

1.8 in. per day, 1:2.4 . A water-table well in 

which water level rose 0.03 ft then declined to normal over 4 hrs time; 

1.8 in. per day, 1:2.4. 

1.8 in. per day, 1:2.4. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 1.8 in. per day, 

1:10. 

One aftershock recorded 

(see table 6); 1.2 ln. per day, 1:10. 

Water level rose 0.23 ft in 

22 hrs after quake; 0.3 

in. per day, 1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1: 1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Pen quit recording during quake; 0.3 in. per day, 

1:1. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Water level rose quickly 

0.17 ft then declined to prequake level in 20 min. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Do. 

? in. per day, 1:12. 

? in. per day, 1:6. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Coda lasted 40 min. First 

detectable motion 15 min 

before L max; 9.6 in. per 

day,1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

Do. 

Do. 

Do. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C51 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued ----· 

County, well Latitude, N. 

Montgomery, Mt-6 _________ 39°45' 

Mt-49 ________ 39°40' 

Pickaway, Pk-2 _____________ 39°42' 

Portage, Po-3 _______________ 41°10' Po-4 _______________ 41°10' Ross, Ro-6 __________________ 39°15' 

Seneca, Se-2 _________________ 41°08' Stark, St-5a _________________ 40°49' 

Trumbull, T-2 ______________ 41°16' Tuscarawas, Tu-L__________ 40°36' Tu-2___________ 40°36' Tu-3 .... __ __ __ _ 40°32' Tu-4___________ 40°36' Van Wert, Vw-L___________ 40°52' 

Grady, 4N-8W-33 ... 

Pontotoc, 1N-6E-4 .. 

1N-5E-27.. 

Texas, 1N -12E-35 .. __ 

Wagoner, 19N-16E-26 .. Washita, 10N-19W-10 ... 

----

34°46' 

34°34' 

---------

36°30' 

36°05' 

35°21' 

Longitude, W. 

84°11' 

84 16' 82°57' 

81°02' 

81 °06' 

83°09' 

83°09' 

81 °20' 80°51' 

81°32' 

81 °32' 81 °29' 81 °32' 84°33' 

98°03' 

96°40' 

----------

101 °44' 

95°34' 

99°12' 

Water-bearing formation 

GraveL .. ________ __ ..... do ..... ________ __ GraveL __________ .. --. __ __ Sandstone ... _________ _ __ ... do .... _______________ __ 

GraveL. __ Limestone .... __ GraveL __________________ _ 

Sandstone ... _____________ _ GraveL ___________ __ ..... do ..... ____________ __ 

..... do ..... ____ __ ____ .do .... ______ _ Limestone _____ _ 

Rush Springs Sandstone .. 

Arbuckle Limestone .. ____ 

___ .. do .... ______ 

Ogallala Formation .. _ 

Alluvium .. ____________ 

Elk City Member of Quartermaster Forma- tion. 

First num- ber, de~th 

of we 1; 

second, 

depth of Depth to water casing to (feet) screen, per· forated 

casing, or open hole (feet) 

Ohio-Continued 

60 36.05 220 18.69 87 18.2 172 25.60 225 28.72 78 2. 62 250 20.3(-.15) 132 29.25 124 48. 89( +- 09) 23 10. 50(-. 05) 200 48. 89( +- 09) 63 5.35 43 7. 05 340 27.10 

Oklahoma 

254 84.70 

1, 707 128.85 

386 192. 37( -.13) 

31 28.40 55 37.17 

Oregon 

Yamhill, 4W-24JL ... ...... ,45°12' 1123°07' I Alluvium _________________ , 114/941 5.44(+. 01) 

Pennsylvania 

Chester, Ch-152 _____________ 40°08' 75°30' Stockton Formation _______ 750 LSD 

Cumberland, Cu-2 __________ 40°02' 77°18' Ledger Dolomite __________ 37 16. 30(-. 06) Dauphin, 02<Hi46-8 ________ 40°30' 76°46' Martinsburg Shale ________ 400 31. 51(-. 37) 

02(}-646-9-- - 40°20' 76°46' ____ .do .... ____________ . ____ 185 23.96 

02Q-646-10-- - 40°20' 76°46' ..... do ____ .. _______________ 225 18.60 02Q-646-2 .. --- 40°21' 76°46' Limestone. _______________ ----------- ' 6. 29(-.17) Franklin, Fr-2 _________ 39°59' 77°39' Stones River Limestone ... 441/60 28. 0(?) 

Fulton, Fu-L _______________ 40°03' 78°08' Mauch Chunk Formation. 108 3. 45 Lackawanna, Dodge shaft ___ 41°23' 75°41' Coal mine _________________ ------------ 594.78 

Olyphant 41°27' 75°36' _____ do _____________________ ----------- 716. 61 ( +- 03) shalt. 

Storrs 2 shaft __ 41°27' 75°38' ..... do ... _. ________________ ------------ 604.82 Lancaster, Ln-32(Ln-242) ... 40°09' 76°33' New Oxford Formation ... 300 6. 14(?) 

Luzerne, Lu-243 _______ 41°18' 76°15' Catskill Formation ________ 195 51.70 

Dennison St. Bore- 41°19' 75°51' Coal mine _________________ ------ 512 hole. 

Mercer, Mr-1364 .. _________ 41°22' 80°23' Cussewago Formation _____ 235 5.14 Mont,omery, Mg-225 ... 40°08' 75°21' Stockton Formation .... __ 300 38. 20( +- 30) 

York, Yo-180. ------------- 40°03' 76°45' New Oxford Formation ___ 490 21.15(-.10) 

007-637-7 ------------ 40°07' 76°37' ____ .do .... _ 148 6. 33 

005-639-7. 40°05' 76°39' ... do _____ ------------- 222 19.30 

--~--~---__ ______: __ 1 Records atypical, but similar in all three wells. 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

Double 

amplitude 

Upward Downward 

0. 22 0. 23 0. 45 .04 . 03 . 07 

---------- ----------- . 62 . 08 .04 .12 .11 .13 .24 . 46 .44 .90 .15 .15 .30 .37 .30 . 67 .17 .13 .30 .18 . 26 .44 .10 .16 .26 .30 .28 . 58 .30 .30 .60 3.10 2. 70 5.80 

-------- >1 

--- >1 

-- >1 

0. 05 0. 05 .10 .18 .18 . 36 

I 0.045 I 0.01 I o. 055 

Flow at 2. 18 2.18 LSD. 

.00 .08 .08 .10 .71 . 81 .00 .20 .20 .00 .28 .28 

--------- >1 1.10 . 65(+?) 1. 75(+?) 

. 06 .09 .15 . 61 .64 1. 25 . 32 . 28 . 60 

1. 30 .88 2.18 

---------- ----------- >2 

----------- >1 

----------- >2 

. 13 .12 . 25 . 30 . 008 .308 

. 61 . 97 1.48 

.49 . 96 1.45 

. 24 . 53 .77 

Remarks 

0.3 in. per day,1:10. 

0.3 in. per day,1:5. 

0.3 in. per day,1:1. 0.3 in. per day,1:5. Do. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day,1:10. 0.3 in. per day,1:5. No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day,1:10. 

No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Aftershocks recorded(?); 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Beaded cable slipped at time of quake. No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1: 1. 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Do. 

Recorder tends to "hang 

up"; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Flowing well; no after- shocks. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. Do.1 0.3 in. per day, 1:1.1 Do .I 

Do. Tape came off pulley; 0.3 in. per day, 1: 10. 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. Do . 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. Beaded cable came off pulley; 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

No aftershocks recorded; 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. Aftershocks recorded (see table 6); 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

Do. Quake recorded at bottom of "low" in water level; 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. Quake recorded at bottom of 41low" in watEr level; 0.3 in. per day, 1:5. Quake recorded at bottom of 41low" in water level; 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. Quake recorded at bottom of 41low" in water level; 0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 
C52 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

First num- Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

ber, de~th of wei; 

second, From preearthquake 

County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level 

tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) 

screen, per- Double 

fora ted amplitude casing, or Upward Downopen hole ward 

(feet) 

Puerto Rico 

Santa Isabel, Janca 2 ________ 18°01' 66°22' Tuffaceous clastics. _______ 300 82. 50(?) 1. 60 1.80 3.40 

Lajas, La Parguera __________ 17°58' 67°02' Limestone _________________ 92 38.30 .30 .29 . 59 

Bayam6n, Fort Buchanan __ 18°24' 66°08' Sand, limestone, and 242 37.52 .01 . 01 . 02 

clay. 

Vega Alta, Sabana Hoyos. __ 18°26' 66°20' Limestone _________________ 94 +29. 22 .08 . 06 . 14 

Rhode Island 

No wells recorded the earthquake. 

South Carolina 

Beaufort, BFT-101__________ 32°10' 

BFT-304__________ 32°08' 

80°44' Ocala(?) Limestone __________________ _ 15.14(-. 36) ---------- ----------- >2 80°50' _____ do_____________________ 649 7. 4(?) 4. 49 4. 49 8. 98 

Florence, FL0-126 _____________________________ Upper Cretaceous sand __ _ Jasper, J-46 _________________ 32°18' 80°58' Ocala(?) Limestone ______ _ 

gEforit~ho;,tr~r:£:"d_-- Lexington, LEX-79 ___________________________ _ 

Orangeburg, ORB-5 ________ 33° 81° 

schist. 

705 

334 

280 1,839 

22.83 1. 97 2. 75 

ORB-7 ________ 33° 81° 

Richland, RIC-200_________ 34° 81° _____ do_____________________ 1, 969 ------------------- __________ ----------- Crystalline rocks ________________________ ---------------- ---------- -----------

South Dakota 

Beadle, Huron 2 ____________ 440 98o Basal sand of glacial 74 15.27 0.06 0. 06 

drift. 113-63-2bbbb _______ - 44°37' 98°22' Glacial outwash ___________ 155/71 28.52(-.05) . 05 . 07 

11Hl3-15bc2.. _______ 44°25' 98°23' _ ____ do _____________________ 52/2 16. 65( +- 03) .053 ----------- Lawrence, A -7-2-10badc. ___ 44° 103° O~e;;::t~gn~innelusa 1, 306/1, 266 +121 12 11 

Tennessee 

Campbell, Cb: (H) _______ 36°34' 84°07' Rockcastle(?) Sandstone __ 620 74.99 >1 >1 

Crockett, Ck: B-5 _______ 35°42' 89°05' Claiborne Group ("500"- 537 40.16 . 27 . 34 

Dickson, Di: F-19 ___________ foot sand). 

36°04' 87°23' Fort Payne Chert. ________ 387 23. 00(-. 07) . 35 . 65 Fayette, Fa: W-L ___________ 35°22' 89°33' Wilcox Group ("1400"- 1,025 73.98 .03 .15 

foot sand). Fa: W-2 ____________ 35°22' 89°33' Claiborne Group _________ 365 41.36 .02 .04 Franklin, Fr: F-L __________ 35°03' 86°16' Fort Payne Chert _________ 100 30.60 .105 .105 

Humphreys, Hs: H-1_ ______ 36°01' 87°57' _____ do _____________________ 187 86.70 >1 >1 

Madison, Md: N-1: __________ 35°42' 88°37' Ripley Formation _________ 659 128.6 .12 .14 Shelby, Sh: J-L ____________ 35°00' 90°05' Claiborne Group __________ 334 42.17 2. 86 1.04 

Sh: K-75 ___________ 35°05' 89°55' Terrace deposit. __________ 91 44.6 .12 . 09 Sh: L-L ___________ 35°03' 89°51' Claiborne Group __________ 578 93.58 . 005 .00 Sh: L-15 ____________ 35°04' 89°45' __ do _____________________ 220 74. 91( -. 03) .145 . 04 Sh: 0-170 ______ 35°09' 90°01' Wilcox Group ____ 1,387 73.3 . 05 .05 Sh: 0-179 _____ 35°09' 90°02' Claiborne Group __________ 472 117. 5 . 42 .38 

Sh: P-L __ 35°13' 89°54' .do _____________________ 344 101.62 . 79 . 42 

Sh: Q-1__ __ 35°09' 89°48' ___ do .... _ --------------- 384 90.44 . 017 .13 

Sh: Q-24 _______ 35°13' 89°52' _____ do _____________________ 336 69.36 .10 .04 Sh: U-L _______ 35°21' 89°57' Wilcox Group _____________ 1, 558 53.8 . 47 .49 Sh: U-2 _______ 35°21' 89°57' Claiborne Group __________ 440 51.1 .96 ---- Tipton, Tp: E-3 ____ 35°26' 89°47' _____ do _____________________ 496/466 197.49 . 24 .30 

Williamson, Wm: M-1._ 35°55' 86°54' Knox Dolomite ___________ 1,160 85. 3i .00 . 27 

. 22 4. 72 

1.17 

.90 

.30 

. 21 

0.12 

.12 

.053 

23 

>2 

. 61 

1.00 

.18 

.06 

. 21 

>2 

.26 

3. 90 

. 21 

. 005 

. 185 

.10 

. 80 

1. 21 

.147 

.14 

. 96 >LOO .54 

.27 

Remarks 

No aftershocks recorded; 

beaded cable slipped on pulley. Well is in a graben of a fault zone; 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:1. 

Quake recorded at bottom 

of water-level "low"; 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

Another quake(?) re- corded 60 hrs later; 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

Beaded cable thrown off 

pulley. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6). 

0.3 in. per day, 1:5. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Pressure recorder; 51° per day, 1:558, no aftershocks recorded. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Pen thrown off recorder by quake. 0.3 iu. per day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1: 10. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

Do. 

Do. 

0.3 in. per day, 1: 1. Pen thrown off recorder by 

quake. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

One aftershock recorded 

(see table 6); 0.3 in. per 

day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

Do. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:10. Do . 0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Water 

level declined 0.13 ft in 24 

hrs after quake. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

2.4 in. per day, 1 :2.4 . Do. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:2. 

0.3in.perday,1:1. Water 

level declined 0.27 ft in 

16 hrs after quake. 
HYDROLOGIC EFFECTS OUTSIDE ALASKA C53 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in weUs in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued - --~-------------- ---~ ~---

I 

County, well Lati- Long!- Water-bearing formation 

tude, N. tude, W. 

Bexar, D-59 _________________ 29°34' 98°41' Edwards Limestone ______ _ 

F-172 ________________ 29°32' _____ do ___________________ _ 

F-214(169a) ___________ 29°35' 98°30' _____ do ____________________ _ 

J-11------------------ 28°29' 98°26' _____ do ____________________ _ Coma!, G-49 ________________ 29°42' 98°08' _____ do. ___________________ _ H-36________________ 29°35' 98°19' _____ do ____________________ _ H-39 ________________ 29°37' 98°18' _____ do ____________________ _ 

Dallas, C-19 ________________ 32°59' 97°00' Woodbine Sand __________ _ 

El Paso, Q-86(CR-ll.------- 31°56' 106°36W Alluvium ________________ _ Q-176(CR-2)_______ 31 °57' 106°37' Bolson deposits __________ _ Q-18L _____________________________________ do ____________________ _ 

Q-182(CR-4) _______ 31°58' 106°37' Alluvium ________________ _ Q-203(CR-5) _______ 31°56' 106°37' Bolson deposits __________ _ V-42 _______________ 31°47' 106°22' _____ do ____________________ _ Galveston, E-93_____________ 29°23' 95°06' Sand _____________________ _ IMlL ____________ 29°22' 95°04' _____ do ____________________ _ 

Harris, W-109______________ 29°54' 95°08' Beaumont Clay __________ _ 895_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 29°42' 95°16' Gulf Coast aquifer-_- ____ - Jackson, PP-80-03-lOL _____ 28°59' 96°42' _____ do ____________________ _ 

PP-66-60-605. _____ 29°03' 96°31' _____ do. ____________________ 

Medina, C-9--53 _____________ 29°29' 99°08' Edwards Limestone _______ I-2-25a. ___________ 29°27' 99°17' _____ do _____________________ 

J-1-82 ... __ --------- 29°21' 98°53' _____ do _____________________ 

Uvalde, H-2-23 _____________ 29°27' 99°40' Edwards Limestone _______ 

H-2-30. _ --------~-- 290Z2' 99°42' _____ do _____________________ 

H-3-23 _____________ 29°26' 99°30' _____ do _____________________ H-5--L _____________ 29°12' 99°46' _____ do _____________________ 

Val Verde, XV-la ___________ 29°22' 100°48' _____ do _____________________ 

Davis, (B-2-1) 24bad3 _______ 40°53' 111 °54' Alluvium _________________ 

Juab, (D-11-1) 8aadL ______ 40°52' 111 °59' _____ do _________________ 

Millard, (C-16--7) 12dcd _____ 39°24' 112°35' _____ do _______________ 

(C-16--8) 2lbcbL __ 39°25' 112°45' ____ _do _____________________ 

(C-19--5) 4dddL ___ 39°11' 112°24' _____ do _______________ 

Salt Lake, (C-3-1) 32cad2 ___ 40°30' 111 °58' _____ do __________ 

(C-4-1) 23dbdL 40°26' 111°54' _____ do __ 

Tooele, (C-2-6) 36dccL _____ 40°35' 112°28' _____ do .. ------------------ (C-3-2) 14badL 40°33' 112°02' _____ do __ 

(C-7-8)10cbdL 40°13' 112°44' Alluvium ___ 

(C-2-4)33aacL _ 40°36' 112°17' _____ do _____ 

Utah, (D-5--1)8dccL __ c 40°23' 111°51' _____ do _____ 

Weber, (A-6--1)11cabL ______ 41 °16' 111 °48' _____ do _____ 

(B-6--1)30ccaL ______ 41°13' 112°00' _____ do ________________ 

I 

First num- ber, depth 

of well; 

second, 

depth of 

casing to screen, per- fora ted 

casing, or open hole 

(feet) 

Texas 

400 

500 

547/100 

874 

230/27 

292/220 

250 

268/100 

200/100 

1, 072/585 

1, 013/528 

202/102 

700/355 

710/380 

870 

850 

196 

1, 651/1, 027 

590/150 

140 

247 

538 

712 

237 

721 

201 

350 

750 

Utah 

386 

100 

? 

988/118 

521 

218 

152 

176 

1,000 

17~ 

182 

240 

354 

756 

Vermont 

Depth to water (feet) 

279.26 

124.10 

278.45 

76.90 

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

------------------- 21. 54(-.10) 

47.27 

---------------- 13.39 

31. 76 

------------------- 131.37 

114.2 

91. 31(+. 015) 

------------------- 59.13( -. 06) 

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

-------------------

80.2 

C+l29 

12. 24(-. 02) 

<+)21.2 

3.97 

32. 74(-. 06) 

27. 06( -. 06) 

52. 87(?) 

92.36 

324.42 

90.65 

18.50 

14. 7(-. 24) 14. 69( +- 01) 

35.17 

No wells recorded the earthquake. 

Virgin Islands 

St. Thomas _________ -------118°21' I 65°00' I Andesite volcanic breccia 

and tuff. 220 1-------------------1 

Virginia 

Page ______________________ 38° 78° Basalt of Catoctin Forma- tion. 

280 44. 85( +O. 50) 

Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

From preearthquake 

level 

---------

Upward Downward 

--------~--

1. 31 

>2.1 

.11 

>2.90 

.08 

1.14 

.05 

.20 

.11 

. 76 

.45 

. 26 

. 79 

.06 

.05 

. 82 

.24 

.40 

2.9 

.21 

.52 

----------

.24 

.25 

. 55 

.65 

.27 

1.0 

1.30 

.04 

.04 

.22 

.44 

>.58 

.16 

----------

1.48 

.04 ----------

0.02 

1.16 

1. 75 

>2.9 

.18 

>2.10 

.05 

1.17 

.06 

.19 

.21 

.62 

.71 

.29 

>-25 

.00 

. 05 

.38 

.30 

.65 

2.9E 

.17 

.36 

·----------

----------- .35 

.16 

---:w·----

.65 

. 21 

.2 

1.20 

.06 

.15 

.23 

. 58 

>-42 

. 025 

----

1.66 

.024 

-----------

0.03 

0. 45 

Double 

amplitude 

3.06 

>5 

. 29 

>5 

.13 

2.31 

.11 

.39 

. 32 

1.38 

1.16 

. 55 

1.6E 

.06 

.10 

1. 20 

.54 

1. 05 

5.8E 

.38 

.88 

>5 

>2 . 59 

.41 

>5 

1. 05 

1.30 

. 48 

1.2 

2. 50 

.10 

.19 

. 45 

1.02 

>I 

.185 

>I 

3.14 

.064 

>I 

I 0. 05 I 

1. 61 

"~ ·------------

Remarks 

Float hung after major wave. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 2.4 in. per day, 

1:6. 

Do. 

2.4 in. per day,l:6 . Do. 

Do. 

Do . 2.4 in. per day,l:l2. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 2.4 in. per day, 

1:6. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Pressure recorder. 51 o per day, 1:115. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:1. Pressure recorder. 51° per day,l:l29. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. Do. 1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

Float hung at time of 

quake; 0.3 in. per day, 

1:1. 

0.3 in. per day, 1:2. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6); 2.4 in. per day, 

1:1.2. 

Float may not have moved 

freely; 2.4 in. per day, 

1:1.2. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:1. 

1.2 in. per day, 1:6. 

2.4 in. per day, 1:6. 

Aftershocks recorded (see 

table 6). Water level rose 0.08 ft in 8 hrs after 

quake; 1.2 in. per day, 

1:1. 

The aquifer of metamor- phosed basalt is steeply 

dipping; 2.4 in. per day, 

1:12. 
C54 ALASKA EARTHQUAKE, MARCH 27, 1964 

TABLE 7.-Hydroseisms in wells in the United States caused by the Alaska earthquake-Continued 

: ' First hUl11· Water-level fluctuation (feet) 

ber, depth of well; 

second, From preearthq uake County, well Lati- Longi- Water-bearing formation depth of Depth to water level Remarks tude, N. tude, W. casing to (feet) - screen, per~ Double !orated 

I Upward 

amplitude casing, or DownI 

open hole ward (feet) 

Washington 

Grant, 14/25-28EL. _________ 46040' 119°42' Ringold Formation _______ 648/492 472. 83(-. 03) 0.05 0. 07 0.12 15/26-28QL __________ 46°45' 119°41' Yakima Basalt. ___________ 892 307. 80( +- 66) .08 .08 .16 Water rose 1.20 ft within 4 hrs after first shock wave and stayed that way; 2.4 in. per day, 

1:1.2. Pierce, 20/3-1801. .. _________ 47°10' 122°23' Vashon outwash sand and 185/152 101.60 1. 97 1.95 3. 92 Aftershocks recorded (see 

gravel. table 6); 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. Spokane, 25/43-13H!_ ________ 47°40' 117°20' Sand and graveL _________ 71/65 66.53 . 01 . 01 . 02 

26/45-32J2.-- ------ 47°44' 117°10' _____ do _____________________ 155 130.42 . 57 .65 1. 22 2.4 in. per day, 1:6. Thurston, 17/2-19M2 ________ 46°56' 122°36' _____ do ____________ 97 23.87 .03 .03 .06 Yakima, 12/17-8NL _________ 46°32' 120°43' Basalt _____________________ 212 10.79 .12 . 22 .34 

West Virginia 

Berkeley, 2(}-5-7 _____________ 1 39°27' I 77°58' I Beekmantown Limestone.[ 250 1 38.58 0.15 0.15 I 0.30 11.2 in. per day, 1:5. 

Wisconsin 

Dane, Dn-9/11/34-4._ ________ 43°12' 89°10' St. Peter Sandstone _______ 70 51.11(+. 01) 0. 09 0.00 .09 0.3 in. per day, 1: 1. Dn-8/6/26-11.. .. ----- 43°08' 89°44' Pleistocene sand and 59 13.29 .17 .00 . 17 Do. 

Dodge, Dg-11/16/5-4.. _______ 43°27' 88°37' gravel. 

Cambrian and Ordovician 475 119. 04( +- 81) . 81 .19 1.00 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. sandstone Fond du Lac, Fl-15/17/11-12. 43°47' 88°25' _____ do _____________________ 817 67. 97(-.• 2) . 50 . 66 1.16 Do. Kenosha, Ke-2/20/18-19B .... 42°37' 88°11' Sand and graveL. ________ 74 1. 46(+. 02) . 02 .05 .07 Ke-1/22/13-46 ______ 42°32' 87°50' Dolomite __________________ 125 21.33 .13 .05 .18 Marinette, Mt-30/23/19-5 ____ 45°03' 87°44' Cambrian and Ordovician 703 20.35(+3) >3.35 >.17 >3.52 Pen caught at edge of 

sandstone. chart; 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. Milwaukee, Ml-7/22/29-45 ... 43°02' 87°54' Milwaukee Formation. ___ 1, 015 47.70 . 43 . 34 . 77 0.3 in. per day, 1:10. Ml-7/22/17-120 .. 43°04' 87°54' _____ do _______________ ----- 400 (+7.8) -------- --- --- ---- >12E. Aftershocks recorded (see table 6). Ml-6/21/32-148 .. 42°56' 88°01' _____ do _________________ --- 179 35.57 ----------- -- ---- >2 Monroe, Mo-8/2W/29-17 _____ 44°00' 90°39' Cambrian sandstone __ -- 192 5. 26( + 1. 43) 1. 43 ------ ---- 1. 43 Permanent rise of 1.43 ft; 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Portage, Pt-23/8/13-410 ______ 44°28' 89°30' Sand and graveL ____ ---- 90 7. 52(-. 01) .09 .09 .18 1.2 in. per day, 1: I. Sank, Sk-10/6/3-L.. _________ 43°22' 89°46' Cambrian sandstone. _____ 426 81.78 .10 .10 .20 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. Sheboygan, Sb-15/21/28-19 ... 43°44' 87°59' Niagara Dolomite _________ 450 3.18 I. 21 1.29 2. 50 1.2 in. per day, 1:10. Waukesha, Wk-6/19/2-14 ___ 43°00' 88°13' Cambrian and Ordovician 1, 300 351. 45( +- 45) . 45 .00 . 45 0.3 in. per day, I: 10. 

sandstone. Waupaca, Wp-21/11/9-63 .... 44°18' 89°10' Pleistocene sand and 94 21. 49(-. 03) .37 .35 .72 1.2 in. per day, 1:6. gravel. 

Wp-22/14/12-13. __ 44°23' 88°44' ..... do ______ ---- --- ---- 203 11. 25(-. 01) . 08 .03 .11 Do. 

Wyoming 

Laramie, !4-67-18ddc _____ 41 °11' 104°56' Siltstone of Brule Forma- 311 20.26 0. 03 0.03 0.06 tion. Platte, 29-69-24dbc2 ___ ---- 42°28' 105°04' Hartville Formation ______ 840 15.18 1.00 1E. 2E. No aftershocks recorded; 2.4 in. per day. 1:6. 

' 

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1966 0-229-356