Advertisement

Natural Hazards

, Volume 70, Issue 2, pp 1031–1053 | Cite as

Changes in population evacuation potential for tsunami hazards in Seward, Alaska, since the 1964 Good Friday earthquake

  • Nathan J. Wood
  • Mathew C. Schmidtlein
  • Jeff Peters
Original Paper

Abstract

Pedestrian evacuation modeling for tsunami hazards typically focuses on current land-cover conditions and population distributions. To examine how post-disaster redevelopment may influence the evacuation potential of at-risk populations to future threats, we modeled pedestrian travel times to safety in Seward, Alaska, based on conditions before the 1964 Good Friday earthquake and tsunami disaster and on modern conditions. Anisotropic, path distance modeling is conducted to estimate travel times to safety during the 1964 event and in modern Seward, and results are merged with various population data, including the location and number of residents, employees, public venues, and dependent care facilities. Results suggest that modeled travel time estimates conform well to the fatality patterns of the 1964 event and that evacuation travel times have increased in modern Seward due to the relocation and expansion of port and harbor facilities after the disaster. The majority of individuals threatened by tsunamis today in Seward are employee, customer, and tourist populations, rather than residents in their homes. Modern evacuation travel times to safety for the majority of the region are less than wave arrival times for future tectonic tsunamis but greater than arrival times for landslide-related tsunamis. Evacuation travel times will likely be higher in the winter time, when the presence of snow may constrain evacuations to roads.

Keywords

Good Friday earthquake Tsunami Evacuation Disaster Modeling 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) National Geospatial Program and the USGS Land Change Science Program. Mara Tongue, Susan Benjamin, and Keith Kirk of the USGS, John Schelling of the State of Washington Military Department, and three anonymous reviewers gave insightful reviews of the manuscript. Any use of trade, product, or firm names is for descriptive purposes only and does not imply endorsement by the US Government.

References

  1. Anderson W (1970) Disaster and organizational change in Anchorage. In: Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the National Research Council (ed) The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—human ecology. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 96–115 Google Scholar
  2. Arno N, McKinney L (1973) Harbor and waterfront facilities. In: Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the National Research Council (ed) The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—engineering. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 526–643Google Scholar
  3. Barry M (1995) Seward, Alaska—a history of the gateway city. Vol 3: growth, tragedy, recovery, adaptation, 1924–1993. Anchorage, Alaska: MJP BarryGoogle Scholar
  4. Eckel E, Schaem W (1970) The work of the scientific and engineering task force. In: Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the National Research Council (ed) The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—human ecology. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 168–182Google Scholar
  5. Johnstone W, Lence B (2012) Use of flood, loss, and evacuation models to assess exposure and improve a community tsunami response plan—Vancouver Island. Nat Hazards Rev 13(2):162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Jonkmann S, Vrijling J, Vrouwenvelder A (2008) Methods for the estimation of loss of life due to floods: a literature review and a proposal for a new method. Nat Hazards 46:353–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kenai Peninsula Borough GIS Division (2013) Geographic information systems downloads. Available via http://www2.borough.kenai.ak.us/GISDept/Downloads.html. Accessed 7 Jan 2013
  8. Lander J (1996) Tsunamis affecting Alaska 1737–1996. NCGC Key to Geophysical Research Documentation No 31. National Geophysical Data Center, Boulder, COGoogle Scholar
  9. Lemke R (1967) Effects of the earthquake of March 27, 1964, at Seward, Alaska. Geological Survey Professional Paper 542-E. United States Government Printing Office: Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. MarathonGuide.com (2011) Boston marathon race results 2010, Available at http://www.marathonguide.com/results/browse.cfm?MIDD=15100419. Accessed 8 Mar 2011
  11. NOAA National Geophysical Data Center/World Data Center (2013) Global Historical Tsunami Database. Available at http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/tsu_db.shtml. Accessed 28 Jan 2013
  12. Norton F, Haas J (1970) The cities and towns—Anchorage, Kodiak, Whittier, Seward, Seldovia, Cordova, Valdez. In: Committee on the Alaska Earthquake of the National Research Council (ed) The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—human ecology. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 248–356Google Scholar
  13. Port of Alaska (2013) History. Available via http://www.portofalaska.com/about/history.html. Accessed 10 May 2013
  14. Rogers G (1970a) Economic effects of the earthquake. In: The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—human ecology, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 58–76Google Scholar
  15. Rogers G (1970b) Appendix C—basic population and employment statistics, South Central Alaska, 1960–1967. In: The great Alaska earthquake of 1964—human ecology, National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 441–448Google Scholar
  16. Seward Chamber of Commerce (2013) 2013 Cruise ship schedule. Available at http://www.sewardchamber.org/wp-content/uploads/2013-Cruise-Ship-Schedule.pdf. Accessed 14 Aug 2013
  17. Seward Historic Preservation Commission (2012) Community history and character. Available via http://www.cityofseward.net/hpc/seward_history/index.html. Accessed 18 Aug 2012
  18. Soule R, Goldman R (1972) Terrain coefficients for energy cost prediction. J Appl Physiol 32:706–708Google Scholar
  19. Sturman G (1973) The Alaska railroad. In: The Great Alaska Earthquake of 1964—engineering. National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, pp 958–986Google Scholar
  20. Suleimani E, Nicolsky D, West D, Combellick R, Hansen R (2010) Tsunami inundation maps of Seward and Northern Resurrection Bay, Alaska. Report of Investigations 2010–1, Alaska Division of Geological & Geophysical SurveysGoogle Scholar
  21. Tobler W (1993) Three presentations on geographical analysis and modeling—non-isotropic geographic modeling. Speculations on the geometry of geography; and global spatial analysis. UCSB. National Center for Geographic Information and Analysis Technical Report 93–1. Available at http://www.ncgia.ucsb.edu/Publications/Tech_Reports/93/93-1.PDF. Accessed 19 July 2010
  22. United States Census Bureau (1963) U.S. Census of population—1960. In: Characteristics of the population, vol 1, part 3, Alaska. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  23. United States Census Bureau (2012) American factfinder. Available at http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml. Accessed 27 Oct 2012
  24. United States Department of Transportation (2009) Manual on uniform traffic control devices for streets and highways. Federal Highway AdministrationGoogle Scholar
  25. United States Geological Survey (2012) Earthquake “Top 10” Lists & Maps. Available via http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/. Accessed 26 Oct 2012
  26. Wood N, Schmidtlein M (2012) Anisotropic path modeling to assess pedestrian-evacuation potential from Cascadia-related tsunamis in the U.S. Pacific Northwest. Nat Hazards 62(2):275–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wood N, Schmidtlein MC (2013) Community variations in population exposure to near-field tsunami hazards as a function of pedestrian travel time to safety. Nat Hazards 65(3):1603–1628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Yeh H, Fiez T, Karon J (2009) A comprehensive tsunami simulator for Long Beach Peninsula phase-1—framework development final report. State of Washington Military Department Emergency Management DivisionGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© US Government 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathan J. Wood
    • 1
  • Mathew C. Schmidtlein
    • 2
  • Jeff Peters
    • 3
  1. 1.Western Geographic Science CenterUS Geological SurveyPortlandUSA
  2. 2.Department of GeographySacramento State UniversitySacramentoUSA
  3. 3.Western Geographic Science CenterUS Geological SurveyMenlo ParkUSA

Personalised recommendations