Faults--Offshore of Coal Oil Point, California

Metadata also available as - [Outline] - [Parseable text] - [XML]

Frequently anticipated questions:

What does this data set describe?

Title: Faults--Offshore of Coal Oil Point, California
Abstract:
This part of SIM 3302 presents data for faults for the geologic and geomorphic map (see sheet 10, SIM 3302) of the Offshore of Coal Oil Point map area, California. The vector data file is included in "Faults_OffshoreCoalOilPoint.zip," which is accessible from <https://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/781/OffshoreCoalOilPoint/data_catalog_OffshoreCoalOilPoint.html>.
This map area is in the Ventura Basin, in the southern part of the Western Transverse Ranges geologic province, which is north of the California Continental Borderland (Fisher and others, 2009). Significant clockwise rotation--at least 90 degrees--since the early Miocene has been proposed for the Western Transverse Ranges province (Luyendyk and others, 1980; Hornafius and others, 1986; Nicholson and others, 1994), and this region is presently undergoing north-south shortening (see, for example, Larson and Webb, 1992). In the eastern part of the map area, cross sections suggest that this shortening is, in part, accommodated by offset on the North Channel, Red Mountain, South Ellwood, and More Creek Fault systems (Bartlett, 1998; Heck, 1998; Redin and others, 2005; Leifer and others, 2010). Crustal deformation in the western part of the Offshore of Coal Oil Point map area apparently is less complex than that in the eastern part (Redin, 2005); the western structure is dominated by a large, south-dipping homocline that extends from the south flank of the Santa Ynez Mountains beneath the continental shelf.
References Cited:
Bartlett, W.L., 1998, Ellwood oil field, Santa Barbara County, California, in Kunitomi, D.S., Hopps, T.E., and Galloway, J.M., eds., Structure and petroleum geology, Santa Barbara Channel, California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, and Coast Geological Society, Miscellaneous Publication 46, p. 217-237.
Fisher, M.A., Sorlien, C.C., and Sliter, R.W., 2009, Potential earthquake faults offshore southern California from the eastern Santa Barbara channel to Dana Point, in Lee, H.J., and Normark, W.R., eds., Earth science in the urban ocean--The Southern California Continental Borderland: Geological Society of America Special Paper 454, p. 271-290.
Heck, R.G., 1998, Santa Barbara Channel regional formline map, top Monterey Formation, in Kunitomi, D.S., Hopps, T.E., and Galloway, J.M., eds., Structure and petroleum geology, Santa Barbara Channel, California: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, and Coast Geological Society, Miscellaneous Publication 46, 1 plate.
Hornafius, J.S., Luyendyk, B.P., Terres, R.R., and Kamerling, M.J., 1986, Timing and extent of Neogene rotation in the western Transverse Ranges, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 97, p. 1,476-1,487.
Larson, K.M., and Webb, F.H., 1992, Deformation in the Santa Barbara Channel from GPS measurements 1987-1991: Geophysical News Letters, v. 19, p. 1,491-1,494.
Leifer, I., Kamerling, M., Luyendyk, B.P., and Wilson, D.S., 2010, Geologic control of natural marine hydrocarbon seep emissions, Coal Oil Point seep field, California: Geo-Marine Letters, v. 30, p. 331-338, doi:10.1007/s00367-010-0188-9.
Luyendyk, B.P., Kamerling, M.J., and Terres, R.R., 1980, Geometric model for Neogene crustal rotations in southern California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 91, p. 211-217.
Nicholson, C., Sorlien, C., Atwater, T., Crowell, J.C., and Luyendyk, B.P., 1994, Microplate capture, rotation of the western Transverse Ranges, and initiation of the San Andreas transform as a low-angle fault system: Geology, v. 22, p. 491-495.
Redin, T., 2005, Santa Barbara Channel structure and correlation sections--Correlation Section no. 36, N-S structure and correlation section, western Santa Ynez Mountains across the Santa Barbara Channel to Santa Rosa Island: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, Publication CS 36, 1 sheet.
Redin, T., Kamerling, M., and Forman, J., 2005, Santa Barbara Channel structure and correlation sections--Correlation Section no. 35, North Ellwood-Coal Oil Point area across the Santa Barbara Channel to the north coast of Santa Cruz Island: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Pacific Section, Publication CS 35, 1 sheet.
Supplemental_Information:
Map political location: Santa Barbara County, California Compilation scale: 1:24,000 Base maps used are hillshades generated from IfSAR, LiDAR, and multibeam mapping both onshore and offshore (see sheet 2, SIM 3302, for more information).
  1. How should this data set be cited?

    Conrad, J.E., Ritchie, A.C., Johnson, S.Y., Greene, H.G., and Dartnell, P., 2014, Faults--Offshore of Coal Oil Point, California:.

    This is part of the following larger work.

    Johnson, Samuel Y., Dartnell, Peter, Cochrane, Guy R., Golden, Nadine E., Phillips, Eleyne L., Ritchie, Andrew C., Kvitek, Rikk G., Dieter, Bryan E., Conrad, James E., Lorenson, Thomas D., Krigsman, Lisa M., Greene, H. Gary, Endris, Charles A., Seitz, Gordon G., Finlayson, David P., Sliter, Ray W., Wong, Florence L., Erdey, Mercedes D., Gutierrez, Carlos I., Leifer, Ira, Yoklavich, Mary M., Draut, Amy E., Hart, Patrick E., Hostettler, Frances D., Peters, Kenneth E., Kvenvolden, Keith A, Rosenbauer, Robert J., Fong, Grace, and Cochran, Susan A., 2014, California State Waters Map Series--Offshore of Coal Oil Point, California: Scientific Investigations Map SIM 3302, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.

    Online Links:

  2. What geographic area does the data set cover?

    West_Bounding_Coordinate: -120.007
    East_Bounding_Coordinate: -119.807
    North_Bounding_Coordinate: 34.4973
    South_Bounding_Coordinate: 34.3408

  3. What does it look like?

  4. Does the data set describe conditions during a particular time period?

    Calendar_Date: 2014
    Currentness_Reference: Publication Date

  5. What is the general form of this data set?

    Geospatial_Data_Presentation_Form: vector digital data

  6. How does the data set represent geographic features?

    1. How are geographic features stored in the data set?

      This is a Vector data set. It contains the following vector data types (SDTS terminology):

      • String (17)

    2. What coordinate system is used to represent geographic features?

      The map projection used is WGS 1984 UTM Zone 11N.

      Projection parameters:
      Scale_Factor_at_Central_Meridian: 0.9996
      Longitude_of_Central_Meridian: -117.0
      Latitude_of_Projection_Origin: 0.0
      False_Easting: 500000.0
      False_Northing: 0.0

      Planar coordinates are encoded using coordinate pair
      Abscissae (x-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 0.0001
      Ordinates (y-coordinates) are specified to the nearest 0.0001
      Planar coordinates are specified in Meter

      The horizontal datum used is D WGS 1984.
      The ellipsoid used is WGS 1984.
      The semi-major axis of the ellipsoid used is 6378137.0.
      The flattening of the ellipsoid used is 1/298.257223563.

  7. How does the data set describe geographic features?

    Faults
    lines representing mapped faults (Source: This report)

    OBJECTID
    Internal feature number. (Source: ESRI)

    Sequential unique whole numbers that are automatically generated.

    Shape
    Feature geometry. (Source: ESRI)

    Coordinates defining the features.

    Label
    feature label (Source: This report)

    text field containing feature names if they are named

    RuleID
    Representation rule identifier (Source: This report)

    This field contains the representation rule in the ArcGIS file geodatabase that applied dashed or solid lines to faults. The line is dashed if faults are mapped in sediment and solid if they are mapped over rock or a visible scarp.

    Shape_Length
    Length of feature in internal units. (Source: ESRI)

    Positive real numbers that are automatically generated.

Who produced the data set?

  1. Who are the originators of the data set? (may include formal authors, digital compilers, and editors)

  2. Who also contributed to the data set?

  3. To whom should users address questions about the data?

    USGS Pacific Coastal & Marine Science Center
    Attn: Stephen Hartwell
    Geologist
    400 Natural Bridges Drive
    Santa Cruz, CA 95060
    USA

    (831) 460-7814 (voice)
    (831) 427-4748 (FAX)
    shartwell@usgs.gov

Why was the data set created?

To expand geologic mapping to the seafloor within California's State Waters, to update coastal geologic mapping, and to contribute to a uniform regional geologic database. Additionally, to provide a geologic map for the public and geoscience community to aid in assessments and mitigation of geologic hazards in the Santa Barbara coastal plain region and to provide sufficient geologic information for land-use and land-management decisions both onshore and offshore.

How was the data set created?

  1. From what previous works were the data drawn?

    Sliter and others, 2008 (source 1 of 1)
    Ray W. Sliter, Peter J. Triezenberg, Patrick E. Hart, Amy E. Draut, William R. Normark, and James E. Conrad, 2008, High-resolution chirp and mini-sparker seismic-reflection data from the southern California continental shelf--Gaviota to Mugu Canyon: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2008-1246, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA.

    Online Links:

    Type_of_Source_Media:
    seismic data files (.sgy files) ASCII lat/long shot point files TIFF images of processed seismic lines
    Source_Contribution:
    Digital seismic data used to interpret subsurface geologic structure

  2. How were the data generated, processed, and modified?

    Date: 2010 (process 1 of 1)
    Faults were mapped onto shot lines based on the latitude and longitude of seismic picks from Sliter and others (2008).

  3. What similar or related data should the user be aware of?

How reliable are the data; what problems remain in the data set?

  1. How well have the observations been checked?

  2. How accurate are the geographic locations?

    Faults were primarily mapped by interpretation of seismic reflection profile data (see sheet 8, SIM 3302).
    Faults lines were digitized by heads-up screen digitization on to shot-point picks from seismic- line navigation data - each shot point has an associated lat/long in the survey data. Error is introduced from layback, as well as from interpretation of oblique features, so horizontal accuracy of fault and fold location is estimated to be on the order of 10 to 20 meters.

  3. How accurate are the heights or depths?

  4. Where are the gaps in the data? What is missing?

    Data are complete: no offshore features that could be accurately identified and represented at the compilation scale of 1:24,000 were eliminated or generalized. The smallest area represented is approximately 100 square meters. All geospatial database elements are attributed.

  5. How consistent are the relationships among the observations, including topology?

    Map elements were visually checked for overshoots, undershoots, duplicate features, and other errors by the lead authors and by the GIS technician(s) who created the digital database. Review drafts of the map were reviewed internally by at least two other geologists for consistency with basic geologic principles and general conformity to USGS mapping standards.

How can someone get a copy of the data set?

Are there legal restrictions on access or use of the data?

Access_Constraints:
If physical samples or materials are available, constraints on their on-site access are described in "WR CMG Sample Distribution Policy" at URL: <http://walrus.wr.usgs.gov/infobank/programs/html/main/sample-dist-policy.html>
Use_Constraints:
This information is not intended for navigational purposes.
Read and fully comprehend the metadata prior to data use. Uses of these data should not violate the spatial resolution of the data. Where these data are used in combination with other data of different resolution, the resolution of the combined output will be limited by the lowest resolution of all the data.
Acknowledge the U.S. Geological Survey in products derived from these data. Share data products developed using these data with the U.S. Geological Survey.
This database has been approved for release and publication by the Director of the USGS. Although this database has been subjected to rigorous review and is substantially complete, the USGS reserves the right to revise the data pursuant to further analysis and review. Furthermore, it is released on condition that neither the USGS nor the United States Government may be held liable for any damages resulting from its authorized or unauthorized use.
Although this Federal Geographic Data Committee-compliant metadata file is intended to document these data in nonproprietary form, as well as in ArcInfo format, this metadata file may include some ArcInfo-specific terminology.

Who wrote the metadata?

Dates:
Last modified: 2013
Metadata author:
U.S. Geological Survey, Coastal and Marine Geology Program
Attn: Stephen R. Hartwell
400 Natural Bridges Drive
Santa Cruz, CA 95060-5792
US

831-460-7814 (voice)
831-427-4748 (FAX)
shartwell@usgs.gov

Metadata standard:
FGDC Content Standard for Digital Geospatial Metadata (FGDC-STD-001-1998)

Generated by mp version 2.9.16 on Thu Jul 03 11:43:58 2014