Is there a fault lines map for New Zealand?

Forums › Off topic › Is there a fault lines map for New Zealand?

cws82us

788 posts

Ultimate Geek

#67746 8-Sep-2010 09:48

Where can I find a map where all the fault lines are is there any on Hamilton if so where if not am I safe from an earthquake ?

join Quic and get free sign up when you click my link https://account.quic.nz/refer/250676

1 | 2

785 posts

Ultimate Geek

#377799 8-Sep-2010 11:01

I don't know if there is any really "safe" place in NZ but living outside of the "ring of fire" is your safest bet e.g Australia. for more info visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ring_of_Fire.

edge

423 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#377804 8-Sep-2010 11:14

If you want general info on quakes, the best site is www.geonet.org.nz - this shows individual quake drums (seismographs) at various locations around NZ and also provides details on the significant quakes (and lots of other stuff).

In terms of specific active faults, try the main GNS website - they have an active faults database that can be viewed at:
http://maps.gns.cri.nz/website/af/viewer.htm

Be aware that just because there is not a fault showing, doesn't mean there may not be one there (look at the Chch example). Also damage in a large earthquake isn't necessarily confined to an area very close to the site of the earthquake.

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#377831 8-Sep-2010 12:03

Shoes2468: e.g Australia.

Aussie gets some very nasty bush fires though..

turnin

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#377845 8-Sep-2010 12:38

Google earth have an earthquake tickbox, I think it's probably the same data, have a look at the area around the kermadec islands. You'll see the quakes and where on the plate intersections they tend to strike.

Safest place in New Zealand would probably be Canterbury or far north but quakes don't happen exactly on fault lines. The Christchurch quakes were very very shallow, you really want to live somewhere where there is a lot of land mass on top of the plate, away from rivers/lakes and volcanoes. Aussie has had a couple of earthquakes but they have snakes, spiders and politicians there also

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek

#377852 8-Sep-2010 13:07

Actually, Canterbury isn't that 'safe'. I remember seeing a quake risk map of the country in the aftermath of the Canterbury quake & basically, the lower/east south island is a medium risk, Dunedin is 'low risk' the west cost through wellington and up to gisbourne (including the Taupo Volcanic Zone) is high risk, and Hamilton up towards the Far North is of lower risk.

That said, 'low' is relative, there is nowhere in NZ that is 'safe' from Earthquakes.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#377867 8-Sep-2010 13:49

cws82us: Where can I find a map where all the fault lines are is there any on Hamilton if so where if not am I safe from an earthquake ?

I think in Hamilton you are way way way more at risk from flooding or Mt Ruapehu dust clouds, apart from that my family in law up there hasn't felt one!(not saying that there will be one or not in the future however, we never know)

Seeing the Waikato river last when it peaked at 16m was insane, unable to walk under the bridges or on the path, so close to the retirement village in Flagstaff, just opposite Braithworth park!!!

These are the current "busy faultlines" but this needs to have Chch fault added to it, as you can see, the two major ones with high chance of extreme damage(greater than an 8 on the ritcher) are the Alpine and Ohariu fault(both thick ones). lets just hope they don't rupture in our lifetime, if they both went, NZ could split in half. I don't really want another river running down the back of my house!!

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#377872 8-Sep-2010 13:54

k1wi: Actually, Canterbury isn't that 'safe'. I remember seeing a quake risk map of the country in the aftermath of the Canterbury quake & basically, the lower/east south island is a medium risk, Dunedin is 'low risk' the west cost through wellington and up to gisbourne (including the Taupo Volcanic Zone) is high risk, and Hamilton up towards the Far North is of lower risk.

That said, 'low' is relative, there is nowhere in NZ that is 'safe' from Earthquakes.

yeah, i know the one, the building code one, where structures are built to higher/more strict standards the higher the risk, is it this one below?

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#377874 8-Sep-2010 13:57

Shoes2468: I don't know if there is any really "safe" place in NZ but living outside of the "ring of fire" is your safest bet e.g Australia. for more info visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ring_of_Fire.

hehe, replace earthquakes with bush fires, snakes, spiders, floods, cyclones and drought and it's not a bad place to live :)

imo, there is no "Safe place" to live anywhere in the world, just best to enjoy life and live it, if something happens it'll happen, anywhere you are, in most cases you won't see it coming

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#377890 8-Sep-2010 14:29

vinnieg:
Shoes2468: I don't know if there is any really "safe" place in NZ but living outside of the "ring of fire" is your safest bet e.g Australia. for more info visit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pacific_Ring_of_Fire.

imo, there is no "Safe place"

Tibet?

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek

#377895 8-Sep-2010 14:39

Well spotted vinnieg, that's the exact map, can't for the life of me remember where I saw it.

The main problem with identifying fautlines is that as Geographers/Geologists, we have to rely on finding 'markers' of fault activity - for example a stream valley where the bottom half has been shunted 5m in one direction (as is evident on the Wairarapa fault).

In the case of Christchurch, the reason the fault was 'unknown' was because it last moved over 16,000 years ago. Since then, the alluvial processes have masked any remnants of the last shift on that fault.

As far as particular faults go, I feel sorry for earthquake scientists, because there is so much they have yet to learn about earthquakes. Indeed, they're expecting that there will be a large (magnitude 8+), on the alpine fault sooner or later, but there is also the worry that the Wellington fault (which runs along the Urban Motorway in wgtn) is overdue for a quake (as in, it moves on average every 600 years, but it has been much longer than this since it last moved. Plus, any of the many many faults within NZ could go at any time, it's even plausible that new faults could be created.

I think the Wellington Fault is the thick one in your map Vinnieg. It appears to be coming out of the harbour, while the Ohariu is closer to the coast. That said, if the 'big one' occurs on any of the 3 main Wellington faults (that is Ohariu, Wellington or Wairarapa), there will be a major impact, they all form the North Island Fault Stem.

When the Wairarapa fault went in 1855, there was over 2m of vertical movement and ~15m of horizontal movement along the fault scarpe.

vinnieg

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#377916 8-Sep-2010 15:52

Yeah I saw the map when wanting to start building a second house, Consumerbuild.org.nz and then I saw it reposted when someone said that NZ had low building standards compared to the US and UK(which it doesn't actually, we have higher ones)

I think I'm on the Ohariu fault, but I can see the Wellington fault to my east, I think you are right about the Wellington Fault being the thicker one, just hope they don't go at the same time!!!

Oh and CgCrew, Tibet looks real good :) apart from a few small landslides here and there, my mates were travelling last month but called it off after this, they ended up flagging it and Nepal and heading straight to Spain:

----
Dharamsala(Gannan Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture), August 12 2010: As of Thursday, the death toll from landslides in Tibet's Amdo Province has reached 1,117, with another 627 people still missing, Chinese state media said.
----

http://www.christchurchquakemap.co.nz/ this is cool too, showing the aftershocks

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

k1wi

484 posts

Ultimate Geek

#377922 8-Sep-2010 15:59

I don't think they'll all go at once :)

There is some debate as to whether one fault going loads or unloads other faults. For example when the Wairarapa fault went, did increase tension on the Wellington Fault of decrease it...

In Wellington the faults generally lift the western side of the fault line and drops the eastern side, hence why the western side of the harbour was lifted out of the water (where the motorway now runs). If the Wellington fault goes, this could end up being pushed down.

Erm isn't Tibet next to the Himalayas? Earthquakes made them there hills...

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#377926 8-Sep-2010 16:05

vinnieg: Ye

Oh and CgCrew, Tibet looks real good :) apart from a few small landslides here and there, my mates were travelling last month but called it off after this, they ended up flagging it and Nepal and heading straight to Spain:

Spain would be awesome but I would definitely be checking out Nepal if I was travelling! :)

The lanslides are a bit of a bummer though...

cgrew

860 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#377941 8-Sep-2010 16:53

k1wi:

Erm isn't Tibet next to the Himalayas? Earthquakes made them there hills...

The Himalayas rise about 5mm every year making them geologically active and the movement of the Indian plate in to the Asian plate also makes this region seismically active, leading to earthquakes from time to time. So yeah I guess Tibet probably wouldn't be the ideal place to live..

But it would definitely be worth a visit!

CADMAX

274 posts

Ultimate Geek

#377947 8-Sep-2010 17:25

vinnieg:
k1wi: Actually, Canterbury isn't that 'safe'. I remember seeing a quake risk map of the country in the aftermath of the Canterbury quake & basically, the lower/east south island is a medium risk, Dunedin is 'low risk' the west cost through wellington and up to gisbourne (including the Taupo Volcanic Zone) is high risk, and Hamilton up towards the Far North is of lower risk.

That said, 'low' is relative, there is nowhere in NZ that is 'safe' from Earthquakes.

yeah, i know the one, the building code one, where structures are built to higher/more strict standards the higher the risk, is it this one below?

i wish that could be over laid in google maps.

In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing.

1 | 2