Lessons learned in the field: Collecting seismic data in Walker Lane

Heather A. Ford, Roby Douilly, Ashley Stroup, Joseph Byrnes, & Delton A. Samuel

Submitted September 7, 2025, SCEC Contribution #14559, 2025 SCEC Annual Meeting Poster #TBD

The collection of geophysical data requires significant planning and thoughtful execution. Logistical challenges can make even theoretically simple deployments difficult to complete and often require years of preparation. Despite this, the increasing use of relatively inexpensive and easy-to-deploy instruments, including nodal seismometers, means that number of sensors that can be deployed during an experiment has significantly increased in recent years. Additionally, the use of passive source methods to image crustal structure over short durations (<30 days) means that these experiments can be conducted more frequently and in regions that may not have been the focus of earlier studies. As part of our efforts to better understand seismic hazard of the Walker-Lane Eastern California Shear Zone, we have recently begun work in two geographic locations – Owens Valley (California) and Las Vegas (Nevada). The two study areas provide an interesting comparison and contrast. Both belong to the same tectonic domain (Walker Lane), and are located within fault bounded basins, underlain by deep deposits of sediments. The depth, basin geometry, and location of subsurface faults, are poorly quantified in both regions. The regions diverge in terms of seismic hazard characterization. While Owens Valley is categorized as a region of high seismic hazard, the Las Vegas region is not, since it is thought to have been most active 13-6 Ma. However, the presence of faults capable of generating a M6.9 earthquake, combined with Las Vegas’ basin setting and large population, greatly increases the risk of loss related to seismic hazard, even for a modestly sized earthquake.

An important first step in ameliorating deficiencies in subsurface structure characterization and seismic hazard is to collect seismic data. To do so, seismic instruments must be placed in the region of interest. In our poster we provide a brief introduction to our twin studies- outlining the motivation, progress and challenges associated with both deployments. We highlight geospatial tools that we have found useful in siting and deploying instruments in several types of environments – ranging from sparsely populated desert to densely populated urban areas- and ultimately hope to provide a roadmap for other researchers conducting similar experiments elsewhere.

Key Words
Walker Lane, Owens Valley, Las Vegas Valley, Seismometers, Seismic Experiment

Citation
Ford, H. A., Douilly, R., Stroup, A., Byrnes, J., & Samuel, D. A. (2025, 09). Lessons learned in the field: Collecting seismic data in Walker Lane. Poster Presentation at 2025 SCEC Annual Meeting.

Related Projects & Working Groups
Seismology