Tweet
Did anyone can these waves?
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...l/16035798.htm
<qoute>
Waves from quake cause minor damage to Santa Cruz docks
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News
Crescent City on California's north coast got clobbered Wednesday with an unexpectedly potent surge of waves triggered by a major earthquake near Japan. But the event caused little more than a ripple along the Bay Area's coastal regions.
Santa Cruz Harbor officials were most impacted by the earthquake's ocean fallout, as waves caused an estimated $3,000 to $4,000 in damage to local docks. There was little noticeable difference in the waves along the Monterey and San Mateo coasts, according to emergency services officials.
``It was nothing dramatic, but the ocean would rise up,'' said Brian Foss, Santa Cruz's harbor master. ``You would get surges where seals would go by at 15 miles an hour and then go back the other way.''
Most emergency services officials didn't second-guess the National Weather Service's decision to withdraw a tsunami warning hours before a 6-foot surge wave hit Crescent City at about 30 mph. Experts say Crescent City's harbor is particularly vulnerable: A 21-foot-high tsunami generated by an earthquake in Alaska crashed into the town in 1964 and killed 11 people, the only tsunami to take lives in the continental United States.
After the 8.1 magnitude earthquake struck off Japan's coast Wednesday, warnings and tsunami watches were issued in Japan, Russia, Hawaii, Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Northern California, but they were later withdrawn. The waves started to hit Crescent City around mid-afternoon and continued for several hours, consistent with alerts that they would persist until 6 p.m. or a little later along the California coast.
Emergency officials in Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Mateo received those surge alerts throughout the day.
``I was told it was way below the threshold of a tsunami,'' said Lt. John Quinlan, director of San Mateo County's office of emergency services, who said ``rogue waves'' were what hit Crescent City. ``They don't want to soil the system for lesser incidents.''
Kyle Oden, a Monterey County emergency services planner, also said federal officials are understandably reluctant to issue full-blown tsunami warnings because it can induce unnecessary panic. He said Wednesday's warnings were sufficient to put Monterey on notice to prepare for a surge of unusually high waves.
``We were definitely monitoring all day,'' he said Thursday.
The Bay Area overall has not encountered much tsunami damage over the years, aside from a 5-foot wave generated by the 1964 Alaskan quake. That caused $1 million in damage to boats and docks around the region. The 1906 earthquake and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake both produced tiny tsunamis measuring only 4 to 8 inches high.
Crescent City's Harbor District on Wednesday reported about $700,000 in dock damage from what experts called the equivalent of a small tsunami.
``We couldn't see waves,'' said Debbie McAndrews of the harbor district. ``The water looked like you were watching a rolling river.''
At the Eureka office of the National Weather Service, meteorologist Troy Nicolini said the wave height was under-forecast, a product of the complexities of determining how a tsunami will act when it encounters a shoreline.
``Crescent City amplifies the wave height,'' he said.
Surge waves were reported Wednesday as far south as Port San Luis in San Luis Obispo County, according to the National Weather Service.
San Mateo's Quinlan said he had been in direct contact with the weather service while his staff was out conducting an unrelated earthquake emergency exercise. Quinlan described a surge wave as being ``way below a category of a tsunami.
``It was so far below the threshold, there were no warnings given,'' Quinlan said. ``It's a 6-foot surge, which happens all the time. It's a rogue wave.''
He said his biggest worry locally was the ocean's undertow, which may prove dangerous for swimmers and surfers.
``That was our big concern,'' he said. ``They are tremendous life-takers.''
</quote>
<qoute>
Waves from quake cause minor damage to Santa Cruz docks
By Howard Mintz
Mercury News
Crescent City on California's north coast got clobbered Wednesday with an unexpectedly potent surge of waves triggered by a major earthquake near Japan. But the event caused little more than a ripple along the Bay Area's coastal regions.
Santa Cruz Harbor officials were most impacted by the earthquake's ocean fallout, as waves caused an estimated $3,000 to $4,000 in damage to local docks. There was little noticeable difference in the waves along the Monterey and San Mateo coasts, according to emergency services officials.
``It was nothing dramatic, but the ocean would rise up,'' said Brian Foss, Santa Cruz's harbor master. ``You would get surges where seals would go by at 15 miles an hour and then go back the other way.''
Most emergency services officials didn't second-guess the National Weather Service's decision to withdraw a tsunami warning hours before a 6-foot surge wave hit Crescent City at about 30 mph. Experts say Crescent City's harbor is particularly vulnerable: A 21-foot-high tsunami generated by an earthquake in Alaska crashed into the town in 1964 and killed 11 people, the only tsunami to take lives in the continental United States.
After the 8.1 magnitude earthquake struck off Japan's coast Wednesday, warnings and tsunami watches were issued in Japan, Russia, Hawaii, Alaska, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Northern California, but they were later withdrawn. The waves started to hit Crescent City around mid-afternoon and continued for several hours, consistent with alerts that they would persist until 6 p.m. or a little later along the California coast.
Emergency officials in Santa Cruz, Monterey and San Mateo received those surge alerts throughout the day.
``I was told it was way below the threshold of a tsunami,'' said Lt. John Quinlan, director of San Mateo County's office of emergency services, who said ``rogue waves'' were what hit Crescent City. ``They don't want to soil the system for lesser incidents.''
Kyle Oden, a Monterey County emergency services planner, also said federal officials are understandably reluctant to issue full-blown tsunami warnings because it can induce unnecessary panic. He said Wednesday's warnings were sufficient to put Monterey on notice to prepare for a surge of unusually high waves.
``We were definitely monitoring all day,'' he said Thursday.
The Bay Area overall has not encountered much tsunami damage over the years, aside from a 5-foot wave generated by the 1964 Alaskan quake. That caused $1 million in damage to boats and docks around the region. The 1906 earthquake and the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake both produced tiny tsunamis measuring only 4 to 8 inches high.
Crescent City's Harbor District on Wednesday reported about $700,000 in dock damage from what experts called the equivalent of a small tsunami.
``We couldn't see waves,'' said Debbie McAndrews of the harbor district. ``The water looked like you were watching a rolling river.''
At the Eureka office of the National Weather Service, meteorologist Troy Nicolini said the wave height was under-forecast, a product of the complexities of determining how a tsunami will act when it encounters a shoreline.
``Crescent City amplifies the wave height,'' he said.
Surge waves were reported Wednesday as far south as Port San Luis in San Luis Obispo County, according to the National Weather Service.
San Mateo's Quinlan said he had been in direct contact with the weather service while his staff was out conducting an unrelated earthquake emergency exercise. Quinlan described a surge wave as being ``way below a category of a tsunami.
``It was so far below the threshold, there were no warnings given,'' Quinlan said. ``It's a 6-foot surge, which happens all the time. It's a rogue wave.''
He said his biggest worry locally was the ocean's undertow, which may prove dangerous for swimmers and surfers.
``That was our big concern,'' he said. ``They are tremendous life-takers.''
</quote>